Big Chemical Encyclopedia

Chemical substances, components, reactions, process design ...

Articles Figures Tables About

Mercury experimental

Despite the importance of the magnetic properties of expanded fluid mercury, experimental difficulties related to the high critical pressure have prohibited measurements of the static susceptibility except close to r j. As discussed in Sec. 3.2.2, the Faraday method is not readily adapted to use with internally heated autoclaves and the high critical pressure prevents the use of sealed sample cells. Thus measurement of the static, uniform susceptibility of mercury under conditions close to the critical point remains an open challenge to experimentalists. [Pg.126]

In Fig. III-7 we show a molecular dynamics computation for the density profile and pressure difference P - p across the interface of an argonlike system [66] (see also Refs. 67, 68 and citations therein). Similar calculations have been made of 5 in Eq. III-20 [69, 70]. Monte Carlo calculations of the density profile of the vapor-liquid interface of magnesium how stratification penetrating about three atomic diameters into the liquid [71]. Experimental measurement of the transverse structure of the vapor-liquid interface of mercury and gallium showed structures that were indistinguishable from that of the bulk fluids [72, 73]. [Pg.63]

Equation XVII-70 bears a strong resemblance to the Langmuir equation (see Ref. 4)—to the point that it is doubtful whether the two could always be distinguished experimentally. An equivalent form obtained by Volmer [53] worked well for data on the adsorption of various organic vapors on mercury [54] (see Problem XVII-40). [Pg.623]

Some liquids are practically immiscible e.g., water and mercury), whilst others e.g., water and ethyl alcohol or acetone) mix with one another in all proportions. Many examples are known, however, in which the liquids are partially miscible with one another. If, for example, water be added to ether or if ether be added to water and the mixture shaken, solution will take place up to a certain point beyond this point further addition of water on the one hand, or of ether on the other, will result in the formation of two liquid layers, one consisting of a saturated solution of water in ether and the other a saturated solution of ether in water. Two such mutually saturated solutions in equilibrium at a particular temperature are called conjugate solutions. It must be mentioned that there is no essential theoretical difference between liquids of partial and complete miscibility for, as wdll be shown below, the one may pass into the other with change of experimental conditions, such as temperature and, less frequently, of pressure. [Pg.17]

If preferred, the following alternative procedure may be adopted. The absolute alcohol is placed in a 1 5 or 2 litre three-necked flask equipped with a double surface reflux condenser and a mercury-sealed mechanical stirrqr the third neck is closed with a dry stopper. The sodium is introduced and, when it has reacted completely, the ester is added and the mixture is gently refluxed for 2 hours. The reflux condenser is then rapidly disconnected and arranged for downward distillation with the aid of a short still head or knee tube. The other experimental details are as above except that the mixture is stirred during the distillation bumping is thus reduced to a minimum. [Pg.168]

Pelargonic acid (n-Nonoic acid), CH3(CH2),COOH. Equip a 1-litre, three-necked flask with a reflux condenser, a mercury-sealed stirrer, a dropping funnel and a thermometer. Place 23 g. of sodium, cut in small pieces, in the flask, and add 500 ml. of anhydrous n-butyl alcohol (1) in two or three portions follow the experimental details given in Section 111,152 for the preparation of a solution of sodium ethoxide. When the sodium has reacted completely, allow the solution to cool to 70-80° and add 160 g. (152 ml.) of redistilled ethyl malonate rapidly and with stirring. Heat the solution to 80-90°, and place 182 5 g. (160 ml.) of n-heptyl bromide (compare experimental details in Section 111,37) in the dropping funnel. Add the bromide slowly at first until precipitation of sodium bromide commences, and subsequently at such a rate that the n-butyl alcohol refluxes gently. Reflux the mixture until it is neutral to moist litmus (about 1 hour). [Pg.487]

Mercury porosimetry is generally regarded as the best method available for the routine determination of pore size in the macropore and upper mesopore range. The apparatus is relatively simple in principle (though not inexpensive) and the experimental procedure is less demanding than gas adsorption measurements, in either time or skill. Perhaps on account of the simplicity of the method there is some temptation to overlook the assumptions, often tacit, that are involved, and also the potential sources of error. [Pg.190]

Figure 9,16 Comparison of theory with experiment for rg/a versus K. The solid line is drawn according to the theory for flexible chains in a cylindrical pore. Experimental points show some data, with pore dimensions determined by mercury penetration (circles, a = 21 nm) and gas adsorption (squares, a= 41 nm). [From W. W. Yau and C. P. yidXont, Polym. Prepr. 12 797 (1971), used with permission.]... Figure 9,16 Comparison of theory with experiment for rg/a versus K. The solid line is drawn according to the theory for flexible chains in a cylindrical pore. Experimental points show some data, with pore dimensions determined by mercury penetration (circles, a = 21 nm) and gas adsorption (squares, a= 41 nm). [From W. W. Yau and C. P. yidXont, Polym. Prepr. 12 797 (1971), used with permission.]...
Surface Area and Permeability or Porosity. Gas or solute adsorption is typicaUy used to evaluate surface area (74,75), and mercury porosimetry is used, ia coajuactioa with at least oae other particle-size analysis, eg, electron microscopy, to assess permeabUity (76). Experimental techniques and theoretical models have been developed to elucidate the nature and quantity of pores (74,77). These iaclude the kinetic approach to gas adsorptioa of Bmaauer, Emmett, and TeUer (78), known as the BET method and which is based on Langmuir s adsorption model (79), the potential theory of Polanyi (25,80) for gas adsorption, the experimental aspects of solute adsorption (25,81), and the principles of mercury porosimetry, based on the Young-Duprn expression (24,25). [Pg.395]

Before 1950, it was impossible to examine the true structure of a solid surface, because, even if a surface is cleaned by flash-heating, the atmospheric molecules which constantly bombard a solid surface very quickly re-form an adsorbed monolayer, which is likely to alter the underlying structure. Assuming that all incident molecules of oxygen or nitrogen stick to the surface, a monolayer will be formed in 3 x 10 second at 1 Torr (=1 mm of mercury), that is, at 10 atmosphere a monolayer forms in 3 s at 10 Torr, or 10 atmosphere but a complete monolayer takes about an hour to form at 10 Torr. The problem was that in 1950, a vacuum of 10" Torr was not achievable lO Torr was the limit, and that only provided a few minutes grace before an experimental surface became wholly contaminated. [Pg.404]

A typical example of an ideal polarizable interface is the mercury-solution interface [1,2]. From an experimental point of view it is characterized by its electrocapillary curve describing the variation of the interfacial tension 7 with the potential drop across the interface, 0. Using the thermodynamic relation due to Lippmann, we get the charge of the wall a (-a is the charge on the solution side) from the derivative of the electrocapillary curve ... [Pg.803]

On the other hand, this same amount of electricity will deposit exactly twice as much mercury, 2 x (6.03) = 12.1 grams, from a solution of mercurous perchlorate, Hg2(ClCh)2. If we restate Faraday s experimental finding in terms of the atomic theory, we see that the number of atoms of mercury deposited by a certain quantity of electricity is a constant or a simple multiple of this constant. Apparently this certain quantity of electricity can count atoms. A simple interpretation is that there are packages of electricity. During electrolysis, these packages are parcelled out, one to an atom, or two to an atom, or three. [Pg.237]

Discussion. Potassium may be precipitated with excess of sodium tetraphenyl-borate solution as potassium tetraphenylborate. The excess of reagent is determined by titration with mercury(II) nitrate solution. The indicator consists of a mixture of iron(III) nitrate and dilute sodium thiocyanate solution. The end-point is revealed by the decolorisation of the iron(III)-thiocyanate complex due to the formation of the colourless mercury(II) thiocyanate. The reaction between mercury( II) nitrate and sodium tetraphenylborate under the experimental conditions used is not quite stoichiometric hence it is necessary to determine the volume in mL of Hg(N03)2 solution equivalent to 1 mL of a NaB(C6H5)4 solution. Halides must be absent. [Pg.359]

Determination of mercury as mercury(II) thionalide Discussion. Thionalide C10H7 NH CO CH2 SH may be used for the quantitative precipitation of mercury(II) as Hg(C12H10ONS)2. Sulphate does not interfere. Attention is drawn to the following experimental points. [Pg.461]

An interesting suggestion was made by Levine in 1969. He supposed that the ketene formed photolytically from 1,2-naphthoquinone diazide could react with unreacted 1,2-naphthoquinone diazide to form a spirolactone-type addition product. This suggestion was tested experimentally almost twenty years later by Huang and Gu (1988). They irradiated 1,2-naphthoquinone diazide in dioxane in the presence of pyrene as sensitizer with a high-pressure mercury vapor lamp (Scheme 10-103). They did indeed obtain the spirolactonespiro(naphtho[4,5 2/,l/]furano-2-one)-3 T -inde-... [Pg.285]

Although a pressure gauge is more commonly used to measure the pressure inside a laboratory vessel, a manometer is sometimes used (Fig. 4.5). It consists of a U-shaped tube connected to the experimental system. The other end of the tube may be either open to the atmosphere or sealed. For an open-tube manometer (like that shown in Fig. 4.5a), the pressure in the system is equal to that of the atmosphere when the levels of the liquid in each arm of the U-tube are the same. If the level of mercury on the system side of an open manometer is above that of the atmosphere side, the pressure in the system is lower than the atmospheric pressure. In a closed-tube manometer (like that shown in Fig. 4.5b), one side is connected to a closed flask (the system) and the other side is vacuum. The difference in heights of the two columns is proportional to the pressure in the system. [Pg.264]


See other pages where Mercury experimental is mentioned: [Pg.3]    [Pg.12]    [Pg.3]    [Pg.12]    [Pg.141]    [Pg.578]    [Pg.100]    [Pg.240]    [Pg.485]    [Pg.186]    [Pg.187]    [Pg.190]    [Pg.518]    [Pg.203]    [Pg.649]    [Pg.154]    [Pg.508]    [Pg.85]    [Pg.211]    [Pg.15]    [Pg.738]    [Pg.361]    [Pg.189]    [Pg.684]    [Pg.54]    [Pg.77]    [Pg.586]    [Pg.871]    [Pg.65]    [Pg.281]    [Pg.267]    [Pg.692]    [Pg.183]    [Pg.184]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.534 , Pg.538 ]




SEARCH



© 2024 chempedia.info