General dispersion model

General Dispersion Model for Symmetrical Pipe Flow... 

In this model, the effect of the velocity profile is lumped into the dispersion coefficients, as will be discussed later. In comparison, the coefficients calculated from the uniform dispersion model, or the general dispersion model, are more basic in the sense that they do not have two effects combined into one coefficient. 

Fig. 13. Radial dispersion in pipes, general dispersion model (01).

First Moments. For both of the dispersed plug-flow cases Mi = 0. This means that the center of gravity of the solute moves with the mean speed of the flowing fluid. For the uniform and the general dispersion models, however, this is not always true. If the solute concentration is initially uniform over a cross-sectional plane, it can be shown (A6) that... 

This equation enables us to calculate the value of Pl from the velocity profile using mean values of the coefficients of the general dispersion model. The constant radial coefficient used in the dispersed plug-flow model is the same as the mean value of the varying radial coefficient in the general dispersion model. 

Bischoff and Levenspiel (B14) present some calculations using existing experimental data to check the above predictions about the radial coefficients. For turbulent flow in empty tubes, the data of Lynn et al. (L20) were numerically averaged across the tube, and fair agreement found with the data of Fig. 12. The same was done for the packed-bed data of Dorweiler and Fahien (D20) using velocity profile data of Schwartz and Smith (Sll), and then comparing with Fig. 11. Unfortunately, the scatter in the data precluded an accurate check of the predictions. In order to prove the relationships conclusively, more precise experimental work would be needed. Probably the best type of system for this would be one in laminar flow, since the radial and axial coefficients for the general dispersion model are definitely known each is the molecular diffusivity. 

Dl(R) Axial dispersion coefficient, general dispersion model in cylindrical coordinates... 

The Cole equations are descriptive in their nature. Even so, many have tried to use them for explanatory purposes but usually in vain. If a Cole model all the same is to be used not only for descriptive, but also for explanatory purposes, it is necessary to discuss the relevance of the equivalent circuit components with respect the physical reality that is to be modeled. Because the Cole models are in disagreement with relaxation theory, this is not easy. A more general dispersion model, Eq. 9.43, may help circumvent problems occurring when the characteristic frequency is found to vary and DC paths with independent conductance variables cannot be excluded. 

A more general dispersion model can be deduced from the already presented Eq. 9.35 and is found to be (Grimnes and Martinsen, 2005) ... 

More recent modeling mainly follows the approach outlined in Sections 14.2.4 and 14.2.5. Mills and Dudukovic [1983] applied a generalized dispersion model with partially wetted pellets. A review by Gianetto and Specchia [1992] and the text books of Ramachandran and Chaudhari [1983] and of Shah [1979] provide further insight into the modeling of trickle bed reactors. 

The next part of the procedure involves risk assessment. This includes a deterrnination of the accident probabiUty and the consequence of the accident and is done for each of the scenarios identified in the previous step. The probabiUty is deterrnined using a number of statistical models generally used to represent failures. The consequence is deterrnined using mostiy fundamentally based models, called source models, to describe how material is ejected from process equipment. These source models are coupled with a suitable dispersion model and/or an explosion model to estimate the area affected and predict the damage. The consequence is thus determined. 

Estimating the amount of material within flammable limits (usually by dispersion modeling) and multiplying this by the heat of combustion times an efficiency factor (usually higher than the one applied above, generally 5% to 20%). 

Chapters 8 and Section 9.1 gave preferred models for laminar flow and packed-bed reactors. The axial dispersion model can also be used for these reactors but is generally less accurate. Proper roles for the axial dispersion model are the following. 

Dispersion modelling of the emissions concerns how air pollutants disperse in the ambient atmosphere. This step is also called environmental fate analysis, especially when it involves more complex pathways that pass through the food chain. The pollutants dispersed to the atmosphere are in general modelled using dispersion models. 

We can characterize the mixed systems most easily in terms of the longitudinal dispersion model or in terms of the cascade of stirred tank reactors model. The maximum amount of mixing occurs for the cases where Q)L = oo or n = 1. In general, for reaction orders greater than unity, these models place a lower limit on the conversion that will be obtained in an actual reactor. The applications of these models are treated in Sections 11.2.2 and 11.2.3. 

Perform a dispersion model to determine the extent of the cloud. In general, this is done by assuming that equipment and buildings are not present, because of the limitations of dispersion modeling in congested areas. 

Atmospheric Dispersion Models Atmospheric dispersion models generally fall into the categories discussed below. Regardless of the modeling approach, models should be verified that the appropriate physical phenomena are being modeled and validated by comparison with relevant data (at field and laboratory scale). The choice of modeling techniques may be influenced by the expected distance to the level of concern. 

The results of theoretical calculation using both general rate and transport-dispersive models were in good agreement with the overloaded band profiles determined experimentally, therefore, the method has been found to be suitable for the prediction of band profiles [88], Natural pigments were generally used as a complicated mixture of various compounds with chromophore substructure. Their separation by preparative RP-HPLC is not necessary, and the application of preparative RP-HPLC for the purification of one or more pigment fractions is not expected in the near future. 

According to the equilibrium dispersive model and adsorption isotherm models the equilibrium data and isotherm model parameters can be calculated and compared with experimental data. It was found that frontal analysis is an effective technique for the study of multicomponent adsorption equilibria [92], As has been previously mentioned, pure pigments and dyes are generally not necessary, therefore, frontal analysis and preparative RP-HPLC techniques have not been frequently applied in their analysis. 

Despite the technical advances in the past decade, no apparatus for measurement of the odour strength has been developed. Therefore, odour pollution studies cannot be performed without using human noses. In general, the efect of polluting odours can be studied either by direct assessment in the ambient air or by means of a dispersion calculation. The first method requires a number of observers to be placed in the vincinity of the odour source (3,7). The latter a dispersion model and an input value. For reasons of simplicity this method is most frequently used in the Netherlands. 

Gifford and Hanna tested their simple box model for particulate matter and sulfur dioxide predictions for annual or seasonal averages against diffusion-model predictions. Their conclusions are summarized in Table 5-3. The correlation coefficient of observed concentrations versus calculated concentrations is generally higher for the simple model than for the detailed model. Hanna calculated reactions over a 6-h period on September 30, 1%9, with his chemically reactive adaptation of the simple dispersion model. He obtained correlation coefficients of observed and calculated concentrations as follows nitric oxide, 0.97 nitrogen dioxide, 0.05 and rhc, 0.55. He found a correlation coefficient of 0.48 of observed ozone concentration with an ozone predictor derived from a simple model, but he pointed out that the local inverse wind speed had a correlation of 0.66 with ozone concentration. He derived a critical wind speed formula to define a speed below which ozone prediction will be a problem with the simple model. Further performance of the simple box model compared with more detailed models is discussed later. 

---