Talk:Volume fraction

message: Is it a measurable quantity in non-ideal mixtures? It seems that is only calculable by knowing mass or amount fraction and densities of pure components.--188.26.22.131 (talk) 10:47, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think you can obtain the volume fraction once the non-ideal components have been mixed. Therefore, "volume fraction" is quite useless for practical purposes.--RolfSander (talk) 13:56, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Although practically useless, it seems frequently used for instance in beer alcoholic content. What is the real meaning of the alcohol by volume concept? Also what is the real volume of a component in mixture?--188.26.22.131 (talk) 11:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Measurability 

message: Volume percent into volume fraction; Mass percent and Mole fraction already readirect to Mass fraction and Mole fraction, respectively. Fgnievinski (talk) 18:14, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: *Agree with the proposed merge.  Wayne Jayes (talk) 06:58, 16 October 2015 (UTC)

text: *Agree with the proposed merge.  RolfSander (talk) 09:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger 

message: From the NIST Guide to SI, sec. 7.10.2 %, percentage by, fraction:
Because the symbol % represents simply a number, it is not meaningful to attach information to it (see Sec. 7.4). One must therefore avoid using phrases such as “percentage by weight,” “percentage by mass,” “percentage by volume,” or “percentage by amount of substance.” Similarly, one must avoid writing, for example, “% (m/m),” “% (by weight),” “% (V/V),” “% (by volume),” or “% (mol/mol).” The preferred forms are “the mass fraction is 0.10,” or “the mass fraction is 10 %,” or “wB = 0.10,” or “wB =10 %” (wB is the quantity symbol for mass fraction of B—see Sec. 8.6.10); “the volume fraction is 0.35,” or “the volume fraction is 35 %,” or “ φB = 0.35,” or “φB = 35 %” (φB is the quantity symbol for volume fraction of B—see Sec. 8.6.6); and “the amount-of-substance fraction is 0.15,” or “the amount-of-substance fraction is 15 %,” or “xB = 0.15,” or “xB = 15 %.” 
and
sec 7.4 Unacceptability of attaching information to units:
When one gives the value of a quantity, it is incorrect to attach letters or other symbols to the unit in order to provide information about the quantity or its conditions of measurement. Instead, the letters or other symbols should be attached to the quantity.
Example: Vmax = 1000 V but not: V = 1000 Vmax
Note: V is a quantity symbol for potential difference. [and non-italic V is voltage unit.]
I intend to update the article accordingly. Fgnievinski (talk) 18:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding “percentage by weight,” “percentage by mass,” “percentage by volume,” or “percentage by amount of substance”: The articles should still mention these phrases, even while explaining why they are not preferred. As opposed to removing all trace of them. Reason: They are widely used, and Wikipedia covers all important aspects of  a topic, even as it explains what the best practice is. Quercus solaris (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

text: Updating this article to reflect the US NIST recommendation is fine, saying presumably the % by ???? are deprecated. A reference to IUPAC may also be appropriate, at least it gives the article an international flavor. However I agree with user:Quercus solaris that wikipedia should mention both. As a by the by - a fraction is different from a percentage, ask any school kid. NIST and IUPAC logic seems more like nit-picking- % by weight is a dimensionless number derived by dividing one weight by another. Axiosaurus (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's a slippery slope when folks start attaching information to units (as in "fraction = x %vol" instead of "volume fraction = x %"), see, e.g., Decibel#Suffixes and reference values. Fgnievinski (talk) 23:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  %vol 

message: What is the quantitative expression of the relative volume difference associated to the verbal phrase +/_x % deviation (expansion or contraction) from the addivity  of volumes in water ethanol or water salt/sugar solutions?
Could it be a fraction whose numerator include the difference between the volume of the mixture V and the volumes of the two components V1 and V2 and the denominator equals the sum V1+V2:
\%\Delta V_r= \frac{V-(V_1+V_2)}{V_1+V_2} 100?
or \%\Delta V_r= \frac{V-(V_1+V_2)} 100?
Which one of these two variants of this fraction which can be called relative volume difference are more appropiate?--85.121.32.1 (talk) 15:39, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Percent deviation from additivity 

message: The previous section above suggests the approaching of a link to volum apparent molar property in relation to the deviation from additivity.--82.137.11.8 (talk) 13:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to apparent (molar) volume 

message: A section Volume concentration could be added to article, perhaps expanding the info at talk:Volume concentration with details from :de:Volumenkonzentration.--109.166.132.159 (talk) 23:41, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Expansion sounds good. Or maybe even convert :Volume concentration to an actual article? But for expansion, it sounds like the topic is equal to the pre-existing  section. DMacks (talk) 17:54, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: The content of the section Volume percent should be checked for consistency with volume fraction denominator. This section has been added by a doubtful merger of Volume percent proposed in a section above. It is not clear why the volume percent should have a different denominator than volume fraction which has a sum as denominator due to simplicity in calculation. Another source beside Chembuddy must be checked to verify the accuracy of definition of volume percent to see whether it has the same denominator as volume fraction or volume concentration.--109.166.132.159 (talk) 23:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

text: If the denominator of volume percent is the same with that of volume concentration, volume percent should redirect to volume concentration when  it will be a distinct article.--109.166.132.159 (talk) 23:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

text: I added a direct ref for the denominator being the (mixed) solution volume when the term "concentration" is used. DMacks (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section - Volume concentration