Steady-state solutions dynamical equations

The polymerization system for which experiments were performed is represented by the mathematical model consisting of Equations 1 and 7. Their steady state solutions are utilized for kinetic evaluation of rate constants. Dynamic simulations incorporate viscosity dependency. 

Throughout this book, we have seen that when more than one species is involved in a process or when energy balances are required, several balance equations must be derived and solved simultaneously. For steady-state systems the equations are algebraic, but when the systems are transient, simultaneous differential equations must be solved. For the simplest systems, analytical solutions may be obtained by hand, but more commonly numerical solutions are required. Software packages that solve general systems of ordinary differential equations— such as Mathematica , Maple , Matlab , TK-Solver , Polymath , and EZ-Solve —are readily obtained for most computers. Other software packages have been designed specifically to simulate transient chemical processes. Some of these dynamic process simulators run in conjunction with the steady-state flowsheet simulators mentioned in Chapter 10 (e.g.. SPEEDUP, which runs with Aspen Plus, and a dynamic component of HYSYS ) and so have access to physical property databases and thermodynamic correlations. 

The basic equations of column dynamics were introduced in Section 13.6 in the context of developing a convergence strategy for a steady-state solution. For a full representation of column dynamics, these equations are rewritten here in a slightly modified form and additional equations are introduced to complete the model. The equations refer specifically to a column tray with liquid and vapor holdups. The vapor holdup is negligible compared to the liquid holdup and is usually omitted from the equations. The liquid and vapor on the tray are each assumed of uniform composition. 

This is the key result for application of the boundary-integral technique to interface dynamics problems. Let us first consider a case in which the interfacial tension is constant, i.e., gradvi/ = 0. In this case, if the shape of the interface is specified, then V n is known, and (8-209) is an integral equation for the interface velocity, u(x,v). Hence the problem defined by (8-199)-(8-203) can be solved as follows for a specified undisturbed flow, u Uoo as x - cxc. The drop shape is initially specified (usually as a sphere). The integral equation (8-209) is then solved to obtain the interface velocity, u(xs). Then, with u(x,v) known, we can use a discretized form of the kinematic condition, (8-20 lb), to increment the drop shape forward one step in time. We then return to (8-209) with this new drop shape, and again solve for u(xv ), and so on. This process continues as long as the interface shape continues to evolve. If there is a steady-state solution, and our numerical scheme is working properly, we should find that... 

Linear stability analysis is carried out on dynamical equations linearized about the steady-state solution (Mj,Vj). The steady-state solution is stable if the eigenvalues of the system of linearized equations are negative, unstable if those are positive, and indeterminate otherwise. 

For the steady-state solution of a CSTR, the dynamical equations in terms of deviation variables (Denn, 1975),... 

It may be concluded that Sequential-Modular approach keeps a dominant position in steady state simulation. The Equation-Oriented approach has proved its potential in dynamic simulation, and real time optimisation. The solution for the future generations of flowsheeting software seems to be a fusion of these strategies. The release 11.1 of Aspen Plus (2002) incorporates for the first time EO features in the environment of a SM simulator. 

Flowsheeting is still dominated by the Sequential-Modular architecture, but incorporates increasingly features of the Equation-Oriented solution mode. A limited number of systems can offer both steady state and dynamic flowsheeting simulators. 

An efficient way to treat such a system is to assemble all coefficients of the different terms of the mass-balance equations in a matrix and to apply methods of matrix algebra to solve the system for steady-state concentrations (level III) or for the concentrations as functions of time (level IV) [19]. We denote the matrix of coefficients (the fate matrix ) by S, the vector of concentrations in all boxes of the model by c, and the vector of all source terms by q. The set of mass-balance equations describing the temporal changes of the concentrations in all boxes then reads c = -S c + q. The steady-state solution is obtained by setting c equal to zero and solving for c. This leads to ss -1. j obtain the steady-state concentrations the emission vector has to be multiplied by the inverse of the matrix S. For the dynamic solutions of the system, the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of S have to be determined. 

Consider, first, only steady state solutions of a dynamical system. As in the examples in the previous section, the dynamical system may be a single ordinary differential equation (ODE) such as a rate equation or population growth equation, in the case where there is a single dynamical variable. If there is more than one dynamic variable, the dynamical system consists of the same number of usually coupled ODEs. In the former case of a single variable, the dynamical system is thus given by a single equation of die form... 

We let X be a steady state solution of the dynamical equation, that is, x satisfies ... 

Interest in flowing systems focuses on (i) the existence of multiple steady-state solutions of the reactor equations and (ii) the stability of such solutions. These are not independent the existence of parametrically sensitive regions of dynamic behaviour can give rise to oscillations in both temperature and concentration, constant in period and amplitude. The anticipation and control of such oscillatory modes of reaction is clearly of no less importance to the successful operation of the reactor than is the prediction of its stability. 

This confusion does not avoid that, for the essential problems of structural chemistry, it remains relatively simple for us to avoid the dynamic problems (the models for all sciences since the eighteenth century) and base the entire structure of chemical systems essentially in the steady state solutions of the Schrodinger equation. This is a good enough approximation since the spacing between electronic levels is sufficiently high for, at the temperatures common at the Earth s surface, we only have the fundamental electronic levels filled (Bent, 1965). In fact, apart from the explanatory discourse between levels 1 and 2 (the structural or quan-tum/electronic level and the reactional or statistical/molecular level), particularly for the description of transition states, photochemical reactions, the ground quantum level will be sufficient for the more intricate thematic descriptions. 

It is easy to obtain the master equation for the case Qi/Qo>l, in which the system dynamics is described by the Hamiltonian (63). By exchanging parameters A B, D changing coupling constant gate g in B, C, Di, we obtain the master equation for the case Qi/Qo>l-Correspondingly, the steady-state solutions are obtained. Especially, the stability condition (aoo)... 

The resulting equation (15.18) is known as the logistic equation and has played a major role in efforts to understand population dynamics. It is analyzed in detail in many books on mathematical biology (e.g., Edelstein-Keshet, 1988). The key result is that for any initial population, the system approaches the single stable steady-state solution Pi = K. 

The advantage of the transient NOE experiment is that the transport of magnetization takes place in the absence of RE irradiation and also the dynamics of Solomon s equations are identical to the 2D NOE experiment, described in the next section. The driven experiment has no 2D analogue and the solution given earlier in Equation [4] has the limitation that the details of saturation are not included. In fact if one uses Equation [2] instead of Equation [1], for the steady-state solution, by substituting dSJ t)lAt = 0 S (t) = 0, one obtains a wrong result... 

It is not easy to make a similar evaluation for a large, complicated steady-state or dynamic model. However, there is one general requirement. In order for the model to have a unique solution, the number of unknown variables must equal the number of independent model equations. An equivalent statement is that all of the available degrees of freedom must be utilized. The number of degrees of freedom, Np, can be calculated from the expression... 

In Section 2 the formalism of the Master equation, our main tool in the microscopic approach developed in this chapter, is laid down. This formalism, which constitutes a convenient intermediate between purely microscopic and macroscopic theories, accounts for microscopic dynamics through the fluctuations of the macrovariables. We review the main assumptions at the basis of this description, the formal properties of its solutions, and some results established in the early literature on this subject in connection with bifurcations leading to steady-state solutions. We subsequently focus on dynamical bifurcation phenomena and discuss, successively, thermodynamic fluctuations near Hopf bifurcation (Section 3) and in the regime of deterministic chaos (Section 4). A summary and suggestions for further study are given in the final Section 5. 

---