Third Trial

The layout for this trial is the same for the second trial except for the above changes in weir heights and clearances. Also, the tray spacing in the top section changed from 13 to 21 in. Throughout this trial, vapor and liquid loads and physical properties are taken from Table 6.10. Tray layout parameters are shown in Table 6.11. Some variables that remain unchanged from the previous trial are 

Summary. The third trial checks well against the various hydraulic criteria. Column capacity is limited by downcomer backup flood in the bottom section center-to-side trays (i.e., side downcomers). All trays will operate in the emulsion regime. 

These checks will use all the pasrameters in flie layout summary in Sec. 6.5.8 (Table 6.11, third trial). The minimum throu put calcula tions will be perform for stages 8 and 9 in the depropanizer, where the loads are lowest. Sin( the example requires column turndown to 60 percent of the expected design loads, the vapor and liquid loads shown in Table 6.10 for stages 8 and 9 are multiplied fay 0.6 for the turndown checks. 

Weep point check. If the trays operate above their weep points at turndown conditions, checks of the fractional weep and dump point may not be needed. The weep point check will be performed using Fair s correlation (Sec. 6.2.12). 

Dump point cheek. This check will be performed umng the Prince and Chan correlation (Sec. 6.2.14). 

---

Thus, Ti = 401.5 F. If greater accuracy is desired, carry out a third trial. (An experimental vapor pressure is 161.8 mm Hg.)... 

Hengstebeck s method is used to find the third trial value for L/V. The calculated values are plotted against the assumed values and the intercept with a line at 45° (calculated = assumed) gives the new trial value, 2.4. 

Emulsion sizes determined only on first and third trials Microfluidized sample not prepared for first trial... 

Values determined only for first and third trials... 

Microfluidized sample prepared only for third trial... 

Third, plot trial values of pressure against the resulting summation as in Figure 12-3, and interpolate to determine a third trial value of bubble-point pressure of 237 psia. 

The Method of steepest ascent has proved to be successful since in the third trial the yield of 85.0% has been reached, which is 30% more than the best yield from FUFE. A new FUFE 24 has been set up near trial No. 3, with conditions and outcomes of the first 16 trials from Table 2.243. A calculation of regression coefficients of some interactions has shown that the mentioned effects are even more significant. A decision has therefore been made to upgrade FUFE to CCOD, as shown in Table 2.242. 

The third trial was a subgroup analysis of the CLARITY (29) trial performed in acute Ml. It was demonstrated that in STEM I patients, treated with fibrinolytic and who underwent PCI during the hospitalization period (n = 1863 patients), the dual antiplatelet treatment was able to reduce major vascular events (death, Ml, and stroke) from 12% to 7.5% (RRR = 0.59 95% Cl 0.43-0.81 P = 0.001). Thus, the treatment with clopidogrel + aspirin of 43 STEMI patients followed by PCI prevents one major vascular event. 

Twenty-six volunteers were recruited. In the first trial, 18 volunteers received either a 100 pg or 500 pg dose of plasmid THr.HIVA DNA intramuscularly on two occasions (days 0 and 21). In the second trial, 8 volunteers were administered two intradermal injections on days 0 and 21 with 5 x 107pfu MVA-HIVA, and then in the third trial, 9 volunteers from the first trial were boosted with two doses of MVA-HIVA (21 days apart) 9 to 14 months after their last vaccination with DNA. All volunteers were followed for up to six months to two years after the last vaccination. 

Table VII summarizes the plant data where this finish was applied to a 3 oz./sq, yd. printed polyester/cotton fabric. In the first and second trials (columns 1 and 2), the dryer temperature was maintained at 350°F. in order to overcome a heat set put into the fabric during a high temperature curing of the printed pigments. In the third trial (column 3) where the dryer was used only for drying the fabric, it was possible to operate the dryer at its lowest temperature and still increase range speed.

In trial 1 and 2, all participants used their own method and a common method. After trial 1 and 2, the most representative strains for coliforms Eschericha coli) and streptococci (five strains) were selected. As some methods already failed on the artificially contaminated samples of the first two trials, they were not used in trial 3 and 4. After the third trial, three groups of methods for each parameter appeared to be the most reliable. The participants selected these methods as reference methods for the next steps. Each participant applied the three methods on the set of real seawater samples together with the own method. The real seawater samples were transported overnight by plane to the central laboratory. Over the various trials, several participants identified bad practice or weak points in their own method(s) and were allowed to correct for them. Finally, three methods emerged as the most robust, reliable (comparable) and precise for each of the two (groups oO parameters. In total several thousands of determinations on samples of increasing difficulty were performed. The overall conclusions and the results have been published by the Commission [62]. 

By comparison of these expressions with those given by Eqs. (2-25), (2-26), and (2-29), it is evident that the method of direct iteration amounts to setting 0 = 1 in Eq. (2-26) for all trials. The results obtained for Example 2-2 with the flow rates held fixed at the set stated in this example are presented in Table 2-1. When the method of direct iteration was used, a calculated value of 52.14 was obtained for D at the end of the third trial, and 11 trials were required to obtain temperatures which were correct to eight digits. 

The third trial is approximately correct, and we read from App, A.2 that Tn. equals about 190 F (88°C). ... 

Hi) Further trials This weir loading is acceptable and calculations continue with the third trial and eventually tray layout is determined at the fourth trial. The trial results are listed in Table 12.5. 

---