Experimental procedure conductivity measurements

A detailed experimental procedure for measuring thermal conductivity is given in the ASTM standard E1952 using MTDSC. Essentially, for determination of thermal conductivity, heat capacity measurements are made under two... 

As described in Section 6.2.1., British Gas performed full-scale tests with LPG BLEVEs similar to those conducted by BASF. The experimenters measured very low overpressures firom the evaporating liquid, followed by a shock that was probably the so-called second shock, and by the pressure wave from the vapor cloud explosion (see Figure 6.6). The pressure wave firom the vapor cloud explosion probably resulted from experimental procedures involving ignition of the release. The liquid was below the superheat limit temperature at time of burst. 

Unfortunately, other experimental factors, such as contact capacitance at the junction of the cell leads and the measurement system, lead capacitance, and capacitance due to the dielectric properties of the thermostatting medium, may contribute substantially to the parallel capacitance. These effects may be minimized by proper choice of cell design and use of oil rather than water in the thermostatting bath. The art of making ac conductance measurements has been refined to a high degree of precision and accuracy, and detailed discussions of the rather elaborate procedures that are often necessary are available [9,10]. 

The experimental procedure is as follows Input a certain amount of tracer, mostly KC1 solution in impulse, into a device filled with process liquid and then immediately measure and record the variations of electro-conductivity at various positions inside the device. The electro-conductivity inside the device gradually approaches uniformity... 

Similar approaches are used for most steady-state measurement techniques developed for mixed ionic-electronic conductors (see -> conductors and -> conducting solids). These include the measurements of concentration-cell - electromotive force, experiments with ion- or electron-blocking electrodes, determination of - electrolytic permeability, and various combined techniques [ii-vii]. In all cases, the results may be affected by electrode polarization this influence should be avoided optimizing experimental procedures and/or taken into account via appropriate modeling. See also -> Wagner equation, -> Hebb-Wagner method, and -> ambipolar conductivity. 

The five main requirements for conduct of a sessile drop experiment relevant to high temperature capillary phenomena are characterisation of the materials, a flat horizontal substrate, a test chamber to provide a controlled and generally inert gaseous environment, a facility that heats the sample to a predetermined temperature and a means of measuring the geometry and size of the sessile drop. Satisfying these requirements demands careful and precise experimental procedures. 

Accurate methods for evaluating Ka based on this equation, involving the use of conductance measurements, have been already described in Chap. V these require a lengthy experimental procedure, but if carried out carefully the results are of high precision. For solvents of high dielectric constant the calculation based on the Onsager equation may be employed (p. 165), but for low dielectric constant media the method of Fuoss and Kraus (p. 167) should be used. 

The polysiloxanes were characterized by Fourier transform-IR (FTIR) spectroscopy, H and Si NMR spectrometry, and by GPC. AC conductivities of the polymer electrolytes were measured under dry helium by using an automatic capacitance bridge (General Radio Corporation). Glass transition (Tg) and melt (TJ temperatures were recorded on a differential scanning calorimeter (Perkin Elmer DSC-4). More detailed experimental procedures are published elsewhere (9, 12). 

Conductivity measurements were made by use of a Fuso 360 linear bridge conductometer at temperatures of STD-intervals from 0 to 50X1. Further details of the experimental procedure... 

It has also long been noted that ultrasonic treatment of electrolyte solutions can produce increases in the measured bulk time-averaged conductivity that can persist for some considerable time. This was seen in both aqueous and nonaqueous systems, with some dependence upon experimental procedure and parameters such as ultrasonic frequency, and a diversity of results were reported. A possible explanation is that sonochemical reactions may create ionic species which alter solution conductivity. The ultrasonic treatment of electrolytic solutions prior to electrolysis remains a useful strategy, particularly in the preparation of battery electrolytes. 

Two experimental procedures were carried out. In the first, a 100 1 (water and dye filtrate) dilution was concentrated to one-tenth its initial volume. Rejection based on color absorbance (HlO nm) and electrical conductivity, flux, pressure, temperature, and crossflow rate were measured at intervals during the concentration experiment. In the second, a slightly diluted dye filtrate (2 3) was used and the hyperfiltration at steady state was evaluated as in the first procedure. The test was repeated at dilutions reaching (100 1), with pH and temperature excursions at a dilution of 3 1. 

When the PEELS measurement was conducted, an abrupt drop in density was observed at the interface between the matrix and the craze bands (Figure 4). In addition, a drop of approximately 50% in density was found at the base of the already unloaded craze band. This observation implies that an extension ratio of at least 2 exists for the craze fibrils. This phenomenon is not uncommon for thermoplastic crazes (5, 10). To ensure that the PEELS method gives reasonable results, the density of the craze band inside a polystyrene tensile specimen was measured (Figure 5) using the same sample-preparation procedures described in the section Experimental Details. The measured density of the craze band in the unloaded polystyrene was found to be about 0.62 g/cm3, which is in good agreement with the number reported in the literature (5,10, 24). 

The recent literature on microwave-assisted chemistry has reported a multitude of different effects in chemical reactions and processes and attributed them to microwave radiation. Some of these published results cannot be reproduced, however, because the household microwave ovens employed often have serious technical shortcomings. Published experimental procedures are often insufficient and do not enable reproduction of the results obtained. Important factors required for qualification and validation, for example exact records, reproducibility, and transparency of reactions/processes, are commonly not reported, which poses a serious drawback in the industrial development of microwave-assisted reactions and processes for synthesis of fine chemicals, intermediates, and pharmaceuticals. Technical microwave devices for synthetic chemistry have been on the market for a while (cf a.m. explanations) and should enable comparative investigations to be conducted under set conditions. These investigations would enable better assessment of the observed effects. It is, furthermore, possible to obtain a better insight into the often discussed (nonthermal) microwave effects from these experiments (Ref. [138] and Chapter 4 of this book). Technical microwave systems are an important first step toward the use of microwave energy for technical synthesis. The actual scale-up of chemical reactions in the microwave is, however, still to be undertaken. Comparisons between microwave systems with different technical specifications should provide a measure for qualification of the systems employed, which in turn is important for validation of reactions and processes performed in such commercial systems. 

For certain boundary and initial conditions analytical solutions to Eq. 4 can be obtained. The majority of diffusivity measurement methods are all based on such. solutions. The experimental conditions arc matched to these mathematical conditions as closely as possible, and the appropriate solution is used to give a value for the diffusivity. The e.xpcri-ment can be repeated at different temperatures in order to obtain the temperature dependence of the diffusivity. This type of experimental procedure has been criticized [43] because if the diffusivity changes with temperature then almost invariably the conductivity is also temperature dependent, and Eq. 3, which would not have given an analytical solution, should have been used instead of Eq, 4, However. Hands and Horsfall [44] have shown that, except near melting transitions, thermocouples. sensitive to 0.002 C would be needed to detect the effect of the conductivity term in Eq. 3. Hence, generally speaking, the simpler equation is adequate for diffusivity measurement and for the majority of heat flow calculations. 

---