Big Chemical Encyclopedia

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

Articles Figures Tables About

Removal rate energy

As with the case of energy input, detergency generally reaches a plateau after a certain wash time as would be expected from a kinetic analysis. In a practical system, each of its numerous components has a different rate constant, hence its rate behavior generally does not exhibit any simple pattern. Many attempts have been made to fit soil removal (50) rates in practical systems to the usual rate equations of physical chemistry. The rate of soil removal in the Launder-Ometer could be reasonably well described by the equation of a first-order chemical reaction, ie, the rate was proportional to the amount of removable soil remaining on the fabric (51,52). In a study of soil removal rates from artificially soiled fabrics in the Terg-O-Tometer, the percent soil removal increased linearly with the log of cumulative wash time. [Pg.531]

The same kind of optimization has been performed for the thoron daughters. In the calculations the sampling period was set at 30 min and the first decay time interval is started after the decay of the radon daughters (270 min). For a total measurement time of 16 hours the optimized MMC of Pb-212 and Bi-212 are respectively 0.02 Bq/m and 60 Bq/m (270-370 min, 540-960 min). Better results for Bi-212 are obtained with only one decay time interval and an estimation of the ratio of Pb-212 to Bi-212 out of the removal processes (ventilation and deposition of the attached thoron daughters). The influence of the removal rate on the potential alpha energy concentration is small. For the decay interval (270-960 min) the MMC of Pb-212 is 0.014 Bq/m, assuming the sum of the removal rates to be 0.6+0.5/h. [Pg.306]

In a 1996 report compiled by EANE, cost estimates were prepared for seven innovative off-gas treatment technologies as well as for three off-gas technologies currently in use. Results of the estimate for SDP are summarized in Table 1. It was estimated that SDP was most cost effective in treating high concentrations of specific contaminants at low flow rates. It was found that cost was independent of VOC concentration but was dependent on the desired destruction and removal efficiency (DRE) and the flow rate. Energy costs drop for gas matrices other than air (e.g., off-gas from a pyrolizer or low-temperature desorber or gas streams carried by an inert gas such as argon) (D130756, p. 21). [Pg.650]

Note that as the coolant flow rate is increased at lower rates, the capability of the heat sink to remove thermal energy is enhanced. This effect has diminishing retnrns at high rates due to the increased dependency on condnctive rather than convective heat transfer. At low flow rates and at reduced effective heat-transfer coefficients, the resnlts are somewhat impractical. In these cases, adjacent IGBTs are not maintained at equal temperatures. This condition would generate imbalances in the electrical current sharing, resulting in nndesirable switch performance. [Pg.100]

The transition states in both steps of the reaction are not likely to be far removed in energy or structure from the intermediate, which may be used as a model to rationalize variations in the rates and products of such reactions. If silicon is in a position such that it is to the positive charge in one of the resonance forms, this might be expected to lower the energy and increase the rate, provided the carbon-silicon bond can overlap with the vacant TT-orbital. [Pg.383]

When a typical elastic solid is stressed, it immediately deforms by an amount proportional to the applied stress and maintains a constant deformation as long as the stress remains constant - i.e. it obeys Hooke s law. On removal of the stress, the elastic energy stored in the solid is released and the solid immediately recovers its original shape. Newtonian liquids, on the other hand, deform at a rate proportional to the applied stress and show no recovery when the stress is removed, the energy involved having been dissipated as heat in overcoming the internal frictional resistance. [Pg.256]

The recombination must also have energy transfer as rate determining, and for this removal of energy a third body is required, leading to third order kinetics (see Section 4.5.12). [Pg.228]

The second item is the concentration of the reactant in the feed. We considered the case in which the feed is pure reactant A and found a heat removal rate for a given conversion and reactor temperature. However, suppose that the feed were a mixture of reactant A and product B. Now for the same feedrate and conversion, there is less of A to react so the heat transfer requirements are lower. This indicates one method of improving reactor controllability, which is to reduce reactant feed composition by diluting the feed with some nonreactive component. Of course, the downside of this approach is that there must be more material to recycle, which increases capital and energy costs. [Pg.48]

An energy balance around the reactor at 333 K shows that this small reactor (jacket area = 21.6 m2) with a heat removal rate of 1.04 x 106 J/s requires a jacket temperature of 276 K This is impossible if 294 K cooling water is the cooling medium. [Pg.104]

To reduce the energy demand in such a system Huang et al. [92] modified the set-up successfully and found that the average removal rate of each impurity was approximately proportional to the product of its initial concentration and the separator area/anolyte volume ratio. More detailed investigations have been reported in Huang et al. [93]. [Pg.322]

However, if the attention is focused on the removal of phenol from aqueous solutions, a possible comparison may be done in terms of energy demand and effectiveness. Al Momani et al. (2004) compared the performances of ozonisation, photolysis and UV/H2C>2, photocatalysis and Fenton for the treatment of phenol solutions. Fenton-based process showed the highest removal rate, whereas the treatment with ozone was the less-expensive process among the UV-based processes, the UV/H202 showed the higher removal rate. [Pg.221]

Calculate the energy removal An energy balance around the crystallizer (see Fig. 10.5) gives Q = LHl + SHs — FHf, where Q is the heat added (or the heat removed, if the solved value proves to be negative) L, S, and F are the flow rates for mother liquor, solid product, and feed, respectively and Hl, Hs, and Hp are the enthalpies of those streams relative to some base temperature. Select a base temperature Tr of 70°C, so that Hp = 0. [Pg.400]

TABLE 10. Vibrational and Electronic Energy Removal Rate Constants and Cross Sections for the B2C0 (A, lA2) in the 4l Level at 23°Ca... [Pg.36]

Figure 8 shows a plot of thickness of PBS removed versus time in both the CF4/O2 and CF4/He/02 plasmas for samples priorly exposed to an oxygen plasma (lOOW, 0.5 Torr, 3 minutes 16X). The etching curves in the fluorocarbon plasma are characterized by two distinct regions. Initially, the etch rate of PBS is quite high being comparable to that of samples not subjected to pretreatment in O2 plasma (cf. Figure 1). The etch rate then quickly diminishes to a low constant value of 12 2A/min (for CF4/He/02 and 29 5A/min in CF4/O2. When the linear removal rate, obtained from a least-squares plot of the thickness removed versus plasma exposure time, is plotted as an Arrhenius expression at different temperatures (Figure 9), an activation energy of zero is obtained. Figure 8 shows a plot of thickness of PBS removed versus time in both the CF4/O2 and CF4/He/02 plasmas for samples priorly exposed to an oxygen plasma (lOOW, 0.5 Torr, 3 minutes 16X). The etching curves in the fluorocarbon plasma are characterized by two distinct regions. Initially, the etch rate of PBS is quite high being comparable to that of samples not subjected to pretreatment in O2 plasma (cf. Figure 1). The etch rate then quickly diminishes to a low constant value of 12 2A/min (for CF4/He/02 and 29 5A/min in CF4/O2. When the linear removal rate, obtained from a least-squares plot of the thickness removed versus plasma exposure time, is plotted as an Arrhenius expression at different temperatures (Figure 9), an activation energy of zero is obtained.

See other pages where Removal rate energy is mentioned: [Pg.1902]    [Pg.221]    [Pg.1665]    [Pg.164]    [Pg.375]    [Pg.252]    [Pg.373]    [Pg.375]    [Pg.376]    [Pg.385]    [Pg.269]    [Pg.327]    [Pg.469]    [Pg.347]    [Pg.591]    [Pg.100]    [Pg.221]    [Pg.231]    [Pg.232]    [Pg.259]    [Pg.163]    [Pg.171]    [Pg.193]    [Pg.207]    [Pg.486]    [Pg.499]    [Pg.304]    [Pg.160]    [Pg.227]    [Pg.291]    [Pg.221]    [Pg.75]    [Pg.94]    [Pg.248]    [Pg.191]    [Pg.1486]    [Pg.298]   
See also in sourсe #XX -- [ Pg.766 , Pg.793 ]




SEARCH



Removal rate

© 2024 chempedia.info