Saturation Vapour Pressure (Magnus / Alduchov–Eskridge)

Also known as saturation pressure of water vapour · p_ws · e_s · Magnus formula · Tetens equation · saturation vapor pressure · how much water can air hold

pws=610.94exp⁡ ⁣(17.625 tt+243.04)p_{ws} = 610.94 \exp\!\left(\frac{17.625\,t}{t + 243.04}\right)

Worked example: 24 °C → saturation vapour pressure 2.978 kPa — press Try an example to run it live, then adjust anything.

Enter your known values, leave one input blank, and solves for the missing one. Tap a variable’s symbol to see what it means, with a typical value. Try different units for next level excitement!

Here the solver did the work — could you?

Relative Humidity →

Grade 10Grade 10 Science

The saturation curve →

UniversityFluid Mechanics, HVAC & Refrigeration

Test your skills in the Exam Room: new numbers every attempt — free lessons for students, no sign-up, just pure learning. Find 1 more lesson on this formula.

See your Report Card
Compete with your friends
share your results
Learning zone

Saturation Vapour Pressure (Magnus / Alduchov–Eskridge) explained

pwst

Air does not "hold" water the way a sponge holds it, and the sponge picture is the source of most confusion about humidity. Water vapour is a gas sharing a container with nitrogen and oxygen, and it exerts its own partial pressure quite independently of them. What temperature sets is the maximum partial pressure that vapour can sustain before it starts condensing back to liquid faster than it evaporates. That ceiling is the saturation vapour pressure, and it is a property of WATER ALONE. The air is not involved. Water saturating into a vacuum at 24 °C reaches the same pressure it reaches into a room.

The relationship is violently non-linear. From 0 °C to 24 °C the saturation pressure climbs from 0.611 kPa to 2.978 kPa — nearly five times — and it roughly doubles for every 11 °C. That single curve explains an enormous amount: why tropical air carries so much more moisture than arctic air, why a small drop in surface temperature makes a window run with condensation, and why the latent load on a coil in Houston dwarfs the one in Calgary at the same relative humidity.

Clausius and Clapeyron give the exact shape thermodynamically, but their equation has no closed-form solution, so everyone uses a fitted approximation. This page implements Alduchov and Eskridge's 1996 refinement of the Magnus form, pws=610.94exp⁡(17.625t/(t+243.04))p_{ws} = 610.94\exp(17.625t/(t+243.04)), valid from −40 °C to +50 °C with a stated maximum error of 0.384 %.

Expect the third digit to disagree with your reference, and do not treat that as an error. At least four coefficient sets are in wide circulation: the original Magnus/Tetens (6.1078 hPa, 17.27, 237.3), Buck's 1981 set, the WMO/Sonntag set that this catalog's dew-point page uses, and the Alduchov–Eskridge set here. At 24 °C they give roughly 2978 to 2985 Pa. A psychrometric chart drawn from the IAPWS reference formulation will read 2.985 kPa where this page reads 2.978 — a gap of 0.23 %, which is far smaller than the error in reading a sling psychrometer and far smaller than the difference between two thermometers on the same wall. What matters is knowing which fit you are quoting, and this one says so.

One trap worth naming. Below 0 °C this curve is saturation over SUPERCOOLED LIQUID WATER, which is what psychrometric charts tabulate. Saturation over ice is lower — about 4 % lower at −10 °C — and that gap is exactly why frost grows on a cold surface while surrounding droplets stay liquid: the ice is a lower-pressure sink, so vapour migrates to it. If your problem is a freezer coil, a frost line or an outdoor coil in a defrost cycle, you want the sublimation curve and different coefficients, not this one.

Saturation Vapour Pressure (Magnus / Alduchov–Eskridge) formula

pws=610.94exp⁡ ⁣(17.625 tt+243.04)p_{ws} = 610.94 \exp\!\left(\frac{17.625\,t}{t + 243.04}\right)
Where
  • pwsp_{ws}= Saturation vapour pressure (kPa)
  • tt= Temperature (°C)

Missing one of these? Work it out first, then come back