Forcing variables

A second flow measurement to be considered during scale-up is the ability of the granulate/powder to fill the dies. This can most efficiently be monitored by punch force variability and individual core weight measurements. Acceptable weight control (<3% RSD) and force (<5% RSD) may be masked at slower compression speeds typically used for development or when a tablet press is not fully tooled. Production operations will tend to run at the high end of any validated range, so flow must be consistent from batch to batch. 

Force Variables, including total force, moment or torque, and. force per unit area, such as pressure, vacuum, and unit stress. 

The forcing variable is the coolant temperature jc2c as in Sincic and Bailey (1977) and more recently in Mankin and Hudson (1984). In eq. (10) jti is a dimensionless reactant concentration while x2 is a dimensionless reactor temperature. These equations hold at the limit of infinite reaction activation energy. All models were thus chosen so that extensive simulation results existed in the literature, and they cover a wide range of lumped reactor types. 

As the amplitude of the forcing term becomes larger, the resonance horns will begin to interact. The instantaneous values of the forcing variable will eventually visit intervals in which the autonomous systems do not have a stable limit cycle at all. In such cases the uniformity of behaviour of all systems... 

A periodically forced system may be considered as an open-loop control system. The intermediate and high amplitude forced responses can be used in model discrimination procedures (Bennett, 1981 Cutlip etal., 1983). Alternate choices of the forcing variable and observations of the relations and lags between various oscillating components of the response will yield information regarding intermediate steps in a reaction mechanism. Even some unstable phase plane components of the unforced system will become apparent through their role in observable effects (such as the codimension two bifurcations described above where they collide and annihilate stable, observable responses). 

Table 2 shows a summary of DOE data for normalized values of P [represented by the down-force variable, and relative velocity V between the platen and carrier (represented by the variables, the platen speed, and the wafer carrier speed)], with the corresponding normalized removal rate for the W CMP process. Fig. 5 shows a good fit between Preston s model for the process and empirical data with normalized polish rate for each of the values shown in Table 2. 

Equation (2.21) also shows how state behaviour depends on the forcing variables, in this case the externally determined setpoint for liquid level, / and the demanded valve travels for inlet valve 1, x i, and inlet valve 2, x i-... 

X is an n-dimensional vector of system states, whose values are known at time t = to, u is an /-dimensional vector of forcing variables, f is a... 

Flynn and Dickens (124) described a TG method in which the magnitude of a rate-forcing variable such as temperature, pressure, gaseous flow rate, gaseous composition, and so on is jumped by discrete steps. This method can be used to determine kinetic relationships between the rate of mass-loss and thejpmped variahlft. The method avoids the disparate effects of separate experimental histories in methods in which two or more experiments are compared and also the necessity for guessing the complex rate versus the extent of reaction relationship. 

In partially saturated materials, most experimental data have shown that the plastic deformation is controlled by two independent force variables the net stress tensor, a =a + bpg, and capillary pressure (Alonso et al. 1990 Fredlund and Rahardjo 1993). However, for hard rocks, plastic deformation due to pure change of capillary pressure can be neglected. Based on experimental data from argillites (Chiarelli 2000), a quadratic function is used to describe plastic yielding surface ... 

Substituting Eqs. (16)-(17), (21)-(22) and (26)-(27) into Eqs. (1) and (2), and expressing the bridge responses, control force variables and the buffeting loads in terms of Fourier-Stieltjes integrals, one obtains the following results... 

There are two common methods of kinetic analysis based on the kinetics equations derived in Figs. 2.8 and 2.9. The first method is the steady-state parameter-jump method. As shown in the diagram at the top of Fig. 7.19, the rate of loss of mass is recorded while jumping between two temperatures and T2- At each jump time, t(, the rate of loss of mass is extrapolated from each direction to t/, so that one obtains two rates at the same reaction time, but at different temperatures. Other reaction-forcing variables, such as atmospheric pressure, could similarly be used for the jump. Taking the ratio of two expressions such as Eqs. (4) and (5) in Fig. 7.14, or Eq. (8) in Fig. 2.9, one arrives at Eq. (9) of Fig. 7.19, which gives an easy experimental value for the activation energy, If should vary with the extent of reaction, this would indicate the presence of other factors in the rate expression, written in Fig. 7.16 as g(T,p). 

Anisotropic attachment Attachment force variable depending on the setal-spatula orientation with respect to the substrate, normal load, and parallel drag. 

---