Reduced power versus

Figure 7-4. Reduced power versus reduced flow.

Figure 7-5. Reduced power versus pressure ratio.

As previously mentioned, R, versus jj. is an invariant coordinate system. This means that the reduced power, jj., can be expressed as a function of pressure ratio, R, across the expander (Figure 7-5). Knowing this. Equation 7-5 can be rewritten as ... 

Complex amine. Highest degree of softening power versus cost. Especially recommended for denims to reduce ozone fading. Can be used without modifications or diluted to stock textile concentrations. 

Figure 23.13. Reduced energy versus reduced power for different types of initiators (Refs. 10 and 12).

The difference between the original (constant) electric power and the reduced power is the value of the rate of heat production of the investigated reaction measured directly, i.e. obtained instantaneously and therefore exhibiting the least error. The values of the power differences (which equals the rate of heat production of the investigated reaction) plotted logarithmically versus reciprocal temperature in Kelvins, forms the Arrhenius plot, and can be directly used for the design of production reactors. 

Most of the suppliers provided up-dated information on their technical designs, possibilities of reducing construction time and on economic comparison between nuclear and coal fired plants. Two developing countries presented papers on their SMPR market situation. Detailed information was presented about economic comparison of nuclear and coal-fired plants, based on experience in India and Canada, which clearly indicates the advantages of a nuclear power programme with small reactors. Other participants expressed doubts about the use of nuclear power versus other power sources, especially coal in the size range below 600 MW(e). 

A reduced velocity (Boure, 1966 Ishii and Zuber, 1970) involving the flow rate-versus-heating power ratio or its reciprocal [phase change number in Ishii and Zuber (1970)]. This group includes the specific volume ratio in Boure (1966) and in Ishii and Zuber (1970). 

The stabilization of 10B versus 10A of 38.1 kcal mol-1 is remarkably large for an uncharged homoaromatic. This demonstrates the power of 2e aromaticity 8B is 61.6 kcal mol-1 lower in energy than 8A. Less repulsion between the a skeleton electrons, the number of which is reduced by two in the 2n electron aromatics as compared with the classical isomers, certainly contributes to the huge energy differences. The additional stabilization by formation of BHB bridges is, however, of minor importance. Note that classical a skeletons are to be expected only for 8A2-and 10A2- [6, 20] (Scheme 3.2-6), the 2e reduction products of triborirane and triboretane. 

Fig. 33. r M uniaxial misFit m versus reduced temperature during the C-SI transition. The solid line represents the power law fit (see text). 

The ideal solvent for electrochemical studies should satisfy a number of requirements. In addition to the properties required for any good solvent for organic chemistry, such as a high solvating power and a low reactivity towards common intermediates, solvents for electrochemical use should be difficult to oxidise or reduce in the potential range of interest. Traditionally, the recommended potential limits are +3 V (versus the SCE) for oxidations and —3 V for reductions. Also, the solvent should have a dielectric constant higher than about 10 in order to ensure that the supporting electrolyte is well dissociated. Commonly used solvents are acetonitrile (MeCN) and dichloromethane for oxidations, and MeCN, N,N-dimethylformamide (DMF) and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) for reductions. 

---