Rejection calculation

When the professor saw the final result for the specific rotation, +164.62 0.22, she was bewildered. The reported value exceededihe literature value of the pure dextrarotatory compound, +152.70, by 11.92, about 50 times the claimed limit of error This ridiculous result could mean only that a serious error or mistake had been made in this determination, unless the literature value itself were seriously in error, which seemed unlikely. She looked for, but could not find, a mistake in arithmetic. She examined the data and asked the student why the reading of 20.09° had been rejected. The student replied that the reading seemed too far out of line. In order to check on this, the professor suggested that they carry out a Q test. This test showed that the reading had been wrongfully rejected (calculated Q = 0.29 for = 10, = 0.41 see Table 1 and accompanying discussion). With a... 

Figure 11. Measured apparent rejection of polyethylene oxide (Carbowax) at aP -= 50 psi (a) GPC trace of a blend solution containing 0.02% of each Carbowax 1000,1400,1540, 4000, and 6000 (b) GPC trace of a permeate obtained by UF at AP = 50 psi through Nuclepore 150 A membrane (c) apparent rejection calculated from GPC traces shown in a and b, (Q), as a function of solute radius of gyration. The solid line shows theoretical prediction according to Equation 4.

Examples.—(1) The result of 13 determinations of the atomio weight of oxygen made by the same observer is shown in the first column of the subjoined table. Should 19 81 be rejected Calculate the other two columns of the table in the usual way. 

Rejection (R ) is defined by equation (3.1). This definition is the apparent rejection calculated from the bulk concentration cb and the permeate concentration cp, for sample i. The true membrane rejection is higher due to concentration changes in the boundary layer. However, the values of concentration in the boundar layer are not accessible. 

A Vatian Cary IE UV/VIS Spectrophotometer was used to evaluate the method and for further standard analysis. Spectra of UV/VIS in the range from 190 to 500nm were obtained and correlations established with DOC analysis. The method is further described and evaluated in Appendix 4. UV/VIS was also a routine analysis and the wavelength was used in rejection calculations. 

After the data are rejected, calculate a new mean and uncertainty using the remaining data. 

Examination of the results for the conventimial parameters tested in the feed and permeate (Table 3) provides some insight into the separation mechanism. High concentrations of oil and grease found in the feedwater suggests that cmisiderable oil remained in a dispersed or colloidal form. This oil would be removed by a membrane with ultrafiltration or hyperfiltration characteristics. Since the PAHs are more soluble in oil than in water, concurrent removal of the PAHs entrained within the oil may have occurred. The phenols with relatively high solubility in water are, also as expected, removed more poorly. This also is reflected in the poor rejections calculated for TOC and COD. Other contaminants, not quantified by the semivolatile analysis, also may contribute to the high TOC and COD in the permeate. 

Additional Gallons of Permeate Produced Semivolatile Rejection % (calculated from initial feed)... 

Next, an equation for a test statistic is written, and the test statistic s critical value is found from an appropriate table. This critical value defines the breakpoint between values of the test statistic for which the null hypothesis will be retained or rejected. The test statistic is calculated from the data, compared with the critical value, and the null hypothesis is either rejected or retained. Finally, the result of the significance test is used to answer the original question. 

The second type of error occurs when the null hypothesis is retained even though it is false and should be rejected. This is known as a type 2 error, and its probability of occurrence is [3. Unfortunately, in most cases [3 cannot be easily calculated or estimated. 

Regardless of whether equation 4.19 or 4.20 is used to calculate fexp, the null hypothesis is rejected if fexp is greater than f(a, v), and retained if fexp is less than or equal to f(a, v). 

Since Fgxp is larger than the critical value of 7.15 for F(0.05, 5, 5), the null hypothesis is rejected and the alternative hypothesis that the variances are significantly different is accepted. As a result, a pooled standard deviation cannot be calculated. 

The critical value for f(0.05, 5) is 2.57. Since the calculated value of fgxp is greater than f(0.05, 5) we reject the null hypothesis and accept the alternative hypothesis that the mean values for %w/w Na2C03 reported by the two analysts are significantly different at the chosen significance level. 

Rule 3. If the new vertex has the worst response, then reject the vertex with the second-worst response, and calculate the new vertex using rule 2. This rule ensures that the simplex does not return to the previous simplex. 

The Chauvenet tables relate the number of measurements to p values and assess the probability that the unusual value may be real or may be ignored. In the present example, the tables show that p = 1.73 for 6 measurements. Since the calculated value (1.80) is greater than 1.73, the result may be rejected. 

Using this simplified model, CP simulations can be performed easily as a function of solution and such operating variables as pressure, temperature, and flow rate, usiag software packages such as Mathcad. Solution of the CP equation (eq. 8) along with the solution—diffusion transport equations (eqs. 5 and 6) allow the prediction of CP, rejection, and permeate flux as a function of the Reynolds number, Ke. To faciUtate these calculations, the foUowiag data and correlations can be used (/) for mass-transfer correlation, the Sherwood number, Sb, is defined as Sh = 0.04 S c , where Sc is the Schmidt... 

Some plants use a bleed-and-feed process where a calculated quantity is withdrawn to waste treat each day and replaced with an equivalent amount of fresh solution. Using cleaners that reject oils can be effective if proper equipment is available. Stripping racks and reject parts off-line helps extend the... 

Condenser performance should be expressed as evaporating effect to enable matching with compressor and evaporator performance. Condenser evaporating effect is the refrigeration capacity of an evaporator served by a particular condenser. It is the function of the cycle, evaporating temperature, and the compressor. The evaporating effect could be calculated from the heat-rejection ratio qc / e -... 

In Fig. 30-25, representation of the fault detection monitoring activity, there appears to be two distinct time periods of unit operation with a transition period between the two. The mean parameter value and corresponding sample standard deviation can be calculated for each time. These means can be tested by setting the null hypothesis that the means are the same and performing the appropriate t-test. Rejecting the null hypothesis indicates that there may have been a shift in operation of the unit. Diagnosis (troubleshooting) is the next step. 

Much later (Marcinkowsky and Berty 1973) it was proven that ethane did indeed have an effect. In the study of the inhibitor action of chlorinated hydrocarbons it was discovered that these compounds chlorinate the silver catalyst and ethane removes the chlorine from the catalyst by forming ethyl chloride. Since the inhibitor was in the 10 ppm range and similar quantities were used from the ethane present in about one volume percent, the small difference could not be calculated from material balance. The effect of ethane was only noticed as significant by the statistics, which justifies the statement made by Aris (1966) that, The need for sophistications should not be rejected unsophisticatedly. ... 

Setting the flowrate of the permeate to be Q we can calculate the reject flowrate by rearranging the material balance (Eq. 11.17) as follows ... 

Select an iterative value of Cp which satisfies Eq. (11.15). Therefore, one can calculate the reject concentration by rearranging the component material balance on the solute (Eq. 11.21), i.e.. 

A gas turbine plant with an overall efficiency t]cq = 0.25 matching a heat load Acc, = 2.25 is again considered as the basic CHP plant also implied is a non-useful heat rejection ratio (Cnu)cg( cg = [1 ( cg)( g + 1)1 =. 3/16. For FESR calculations, we again take the conventional plant efficiency as 0.4 and the conventional boiler efficiency as 0.9. At the fully matched condition the.se assumptions previously led to EUF = 0.8125 and FESR = 0.2. 

---