Test method heat capacity

With liquids, the refractive index at a specified temperature and wavelength is a sensitive test of purity. Note however that this is sensitive to dissolved gases such as O2, N2 or CO2. Under favourable conditions, freezing curve studies are sensitive to impurity levels of as little as 0.(X)1 moles per cent. Analogous fusion curves or heat capacity measurements can be up to ten times as sensitive as this. With these exceptions, most of the above methods are rather insensitive, especially if the impurities and the substances in which they occur are chemically similar. In some cases, even an impurity comprising many parts per million of a sample may escape detection. 

The test is primarily a screening tool relative to reactivity of substances and reaction mixtures and is highly useful for that purpose. The determined initiation temperature is approximate. The energy calculations based on temperature increase and heat capacities are semi-quantitative because of the quasi-adiabatic mode of the system operation. The method of insulating the test cell results in moderate reproducibility of temperature rise and related pressure rise. Another disadvantage is the relatively small sample quantity with respect to full scale quantities thus, there could be a problem in that the sample may not be truly representative. 

ASTM E1269, 2004. Standard test method for determining specific heat capacity by differential scanning calorimetry. 

Refs 2 4). The method consists of dropping the substance into a calorimeter operating at or near room temp. Changes in enthalpy of the substance between the temp of the furnace and that of the calorimeter are measured. Once the enthalpies, after repeated tests, are known as function of temp, heat capacities are obtained by differentiation ... 

The nonlinear resilience analysis methods of the previous few sections, although rigorous, are limited to rather specific situations (Saboo et al., 1987a,b) minimum unit HENs with piecewise constant heat capacities (but no stream splits or flow rate uncertainties), minimum unit HENs with stream splits (but constant heat capacities and no flow rate uncertainties), or minimum unit HENs with flow rate and temperature uncertainties (but constant heat capacities and no stream splits). Although it might be possible to combine these resilience analysis methods, the combined method would still be limited to HENs with a minimum number of units, and it would only be a sufficient test for resilience (at least for HENs with stream splits). 

Similar results, heat balances plus calculated efficiencies, are given in Table VI for seven additional tests. Results from LSF-31 are included for comparison. The results for all eight tests are considered satisfactory based on the error analysis mentioned above. For those tests where the enthalpy balance closes within + 2.556, either method for calculating efficiency may be used for the other four tests, the heat loss method value should be selected. Thermal performance of the unit — the steam generating capacity compared to the Btu input — appears to be similar for all eight tests. 

An interesting test of the third law is possible when a solid is capable of existing in two or more modifications, i.e., enantiotropic forms, with a definite transition point. The entropy of the high temperature form (a) at some temperature above the transition point may, in some cases, be obtained in two independent ways. First, heat capacity measurements can be made on the form (/3) stable below the transition point, and the entropy at this temperature may then be determined in the usual manner. To this is then added the entropy of transition, thus giving the entropy of the o-f orm at the transition point (cf. first three lines of Table XVI). The entropy contribution of the a-form from the transition temperature to the chosen temperature is then obtained from heat capacity measurements on the o-form. The second procedure is to cool the ot-form rapidly below the transition point so that it remains in a metastable state. Its heat capacity can then be determined from very low temperatures up to temperatures above the normal transition point, and the entropy of the a-form is then obtained directly from these data. Measurements of this kind have been made with a number of substances, e.g., sulfur, tin, cyclohexanol and phosphine, and the entropies obtained by the two method have been found to be in close agreement. ... 

As opposed to inertial sensors, micromachined anemometers are often based on micro hot plates, that is, combinations of heaters and thermometers on thermally insulating membranes or multilayered thin films [4]. Functional sensor parameters are obviously determined by thermal conductivities and heat capacities, which can be monitored to reject faulty chips. Until recently, suitable wafer-level testing methods have not been available, and most sensor designs were based on literature values, despite the fact that these values depend strongly on fabrication processing parameters. 

This testing method enables us to simultaneously monitor three different model parameters (i.e., thermal conductivity, heat capacity, and film thickness) -not only for a single thin film system but also for multilayer systems and buried structures. 

Each of the above three methods employs a different data base. Most of the property values required for the evaluation of in Equations 7-9 have been experimentally determined for III—V systems and these three relationships can be used as a test for thermodynamic consistency. The first method, Equation 7, is most reliable at or near the binary compound melting temperature. As the temperature is lowered below the melting one, uncertainties in the extrapolated stoichiometric liquid heat capacity and component activity coefficients become important. The second method, Equation 8, is limited to the temperature range in which an experimental determination of AG. is feasible (e.g., high temperature galvanic cell). Method II is also valuable for "pinning down" the low temperature values of 0yp. Method III is the preferred procedure when estimating solution model parameters from liquidus data. Since the activity coefficients of the stochiometric liquid... 

Enthalpy, entropy and heat capacities are determined by using DFT and ab initio methods (G3 and G3MP2B3). Our calculated values were compared to the vinyl + O2 calculation data of Mebel et al., to the phenyl + O2 calculation data of Hadad et al. and to recent data for phenyl + O2 by Tokmakov et al. Group additivity calculations were performed as well to test our group additivity values. 

The qualitative idea that cooperativity starts at the crossover region and develops at lower temperatures [113-116], was able to be quantified with the development of heat-capacity spectroscopy [117] (HCS or 3entropy fluctuations within the sample, from which the cooperativity (number of particles per CRR as defined above) can be calculated using the formula [49,118] ... 

---