Contribution of transfer

This unusual behavior can be explained in two ways. The first one is related to the stabilization effect of the monomer. This may involve special solvation such as 7r-complexation by a monomer s double bond. The second explanation is based on transfer to counterion [253], In the latter case, if the contribution of transfer by j8-H 1 elimination is relatively small, the released protons will continuously reinitiate new chains, and... 

All of the observations above indicate the presence of living systems however, attempts to extend these well-defined systems above a limit of M = 100,000 have been unsuccessful, except at very low temperatures (< -70° C) [270]. Thus, polymers with predetermined polymerization degrees, low polydispersities, and with desired end groups can be obtained only for a sufficiently low molecular weight range. This indicates that contribution of transfer increases with temperature and with chain length [cf. Eq. (2) in Section II.C]. In the presence of transfer and termination polydispersities increase with the chain length and with conversion. 

In solution the hexasaccharide is cleaved by lysozyme relatively cleanly to tetramer and dimer. This is true also in the hydrated powder, at hydrations below 40 wt% water. Between 40 wt% water and the dilute solution the pattern undergoes changes, reflecting the contribution of transfer reactions. The reaction rate at full hydration in the powder (i.e., 0.38 h) is about 10% of the solution rate. 

This expression is quadratic in Rp, and the predicted behavior has indeed been observed in polymerization of styrene at 60° with benzoyl peroxide as the initiator. The first term on the right-hand side of the equation represents the contribution of transfer to the monomer it is constant and independent of the rate of polymerization. The second term corresponds to normal termination (i.e., H V, transfer reactions), while the third term, which represents transfer to the initiator, increases with increasing rates since high rates require high concentrations of initiator. 

Chain breaking reactions do occur in these controlled radical systems [110], fortunately, at typical reaction temperatures, the contribution of transfer is relatively small. For example, in the polymerization of styrene, less than 10% of chains participate in transfer to monomer before reaching = 100,000. However, since the contribution of transfer progressively increases with chain length molecular weights should be limited by the appropriate ratio of monomer to initiator concentrations (for styrene A[M]/[I]o< 1000). 

If is suggested to determine the contribution of transfer and termination reaaions in controlled polymerizations (e g., by working at higher molecular weights or variable temperatures) to distinguish them from living polymerizations. 

Equation (F.l) shows that each stream makes a contribution to total heat transfer area defined only by its duty, position in the composite curves, and its h value. This contribution to area means also a contribution to capital cost. If, for example, a corrosive stream requires special materials of construction, it will have a greater contribution to capital cost than a similar noncorrosive stream. If only one cost law is to be used for a network comprising mixed materials of construction, the area contribution of streams requiring special materials must somehow increase. One way this may be done is by weighting the heat transfer coefficients to reflect the cost of the material the stream requires. 

Here t. is the intrinsic lifetime of tire excitation residing on molecule (i.e. tire fluorescence lifetime one would observe for tire isolated molecule), is tire pairwise energy transfer rate and F. is tire rate of excitation of tire molecule by the external source (tire photon flux multiplied by tire absorjDtion cross section). The master equation system (C3.4.4) allows one to calculate tire complete dynamics of energy migration between all molecules in an ensemble, but tire computation can become quite complicated if tire number of molecules is large. Moreover, it is commonly tire case that tire ensemble contains molecules of two, tliree or more spectral types, and experimentally it is practically impossible to distinguish tire contributions of individual molecules from each spectral pool. 

The variation in total thermal conductivity with density has the same general nature for ah. cellular polymers (143,189). The increase in at low densities is owing to an increased radiant heat transfer the rise at high densities to an increasing contribution of k. ... 

Neglecting flow nonuniformities, the contributions of molecular diffusion and turbulent mixing arising from stream sphtting and recombination around the sorbent particles can be considered additive [Langer et al., Int. ]. Heat and Mass Transfer, 21, 751 (1978)] thus, the axial dispersion coefficient is given by ... 

As described above, quantum restrictions limit tire contribution of tire free electrons in metals to the heat capacity to a vety small effect. These same electrons dominate the thermal conduction of metals acting as efficient energy transfer media in metallic materials. The contribution of free electrons to thermal transport is very closely related to their role in the transport of electric current tlrrough a metal, and this major effect is described through the Wiedemann-Franz ratio which, in the Lorenz modification, states that... 

This is more than one-half of the strength of the continuous-fibre material (eqn. 25.3). Or it is if all the fibres are aligned along the loading direction. That, of course, will not be true in a chopped-fibre composite. In a car body, for instance, the fibres are randomly oriented in the plane of the panel. Then only a fraction of them - about - are aligned so that much tensile force is transferred to them, and the contributions of the fibres to the stiffness and strength are correspondingly reduced. 

The dispersion of a solute band in a packed column was originally treated comprehensively by Van Deemter et al. [4] who postulated that there were four first-order effect, spreading processes that were responsible for peak dispersion. These the authors designated as multi-path dispersion, longitudinal diffusion, resistance to mass transfer in the mobile phase and resistance to mass transfer in the stationary phase. Van Deemter derived an expression for the variance contribution of each dispersion process to the overall variance per unit length of the column. Consequently, as the individual dispersion processes can be assumed to be random and non-interacting, the total variance per unit length of the column was obtained from a sum of the individual variance contributions. 

Another factor that can contribute to the low release force provided by a release material is the presence of a mechanically weak boundary layer at the surface of the release coating [40,41]. Upon peeling the PSA from the release coating, the locus of failure is within this mechanically weak layer, resulting in transfer of material to the adhesive and a subsequent loss in adhesion of the PSA. Although the use of a weak boundary layer may not be the preferred method of achieving low adhesion for PSA release coatings, it can be useful if the amount of transfer is consistent and kept to a minimum [42]. However, in many cases the unintentional or uncontrolled transfer of a weak boundary layer to a PSA results in an undesirable loss in readhesion. 

The description of mass transfer requires a separation of the contributions of convection and mutual diffusion. While convection means macroscopic motion of complete volume elements, mutual diffusion denotes the macroscopically perceptible relative motion of the individual particles due to concentration gradients. Hence, when measuring mutual diffusion coefficients, one has to avoid convection in the system or, at least has to take it into consideration. 

In these experiments, it might be anticipated that, with high concentrations of vapour in the air, the rate of evaporation would no longer be linearly related to the partial pressure difference because of the contribution of bulk flow to the mass transfer process (Section 10.2.3), although there is no evidence of this even at mole fractions of vapour at the surface as high as 0.5. Possibly the experimental measurements were nol sufficiently sensitive to detect this effect. 

---