Vs. pressure for

Fig. 1.10. Pumping speed vs. pressure for a three-stage scroll pump (Varian TriScroll 600).

Figure 2.19 Conversion and selectivity vs. pressure for partial oxidation of methane at 1200 °C reaction temperature and an O/C ratio of 1 half-filled symbols indicate calculated thermodynamic equilibrium values [44] (by courtesy of ACS).

Figure 2. Boiling point vs. pressure for ethylene dibromide as determined by the differential thermal analyzer. Heating rate = 15° C. per minute vertical scale 0.1 °C. per division...

Figure 2. Photon eneigy shift vs. pressure for uniaxial compression along [1-10] (1) and [110] (2) directions. Dotted line - result rfcalculations.

Fig. 2 Comparison of experimental and simulated isotherms of benzene in NaX zeolite vs. pressure for three temperatures indicated. (View this art in color at www.dekker.com.)...

Figure 10. Flux vs. pressure for a dynamic HF membrane—Module 452...

Actual Account for non-idealities in solution (fugacity vs pressure, for example). 

Fig. 13 Temperature sensitivity and pressure exponent vs. pressure for propellant-N. Experimental data are from Lengelle, et al. [25] for n and Ibiricu and Williams [3] for Op.

Figure 1. Plots of In k vs. pressure for the forward and reverse reactions in Ru (NH3)setpy -h cyt Ru (NH3)setpy + cyt (30).

Figure 4 Variation in normal effective stiffness vs. pressure for different Z coefficients...

Figure 2. Liquid molar volume vs. pressure for the THD/CO2 system...

Fig. 2.1-29 Equilibrium constant vs. pressure, for binary mixture methane/ethane (Forg...

Fig. 10.10. Fj vs. pressure for Ce in the o, a"... phase range in comparison to Th. The curves are strikingly similar and thus point to very similar electronic properties of Ce and Th. Th is below Ce in the periodic table.

Fig. 10.11, Tc vs. pressure for yttrium. The data are from two different investigations. Arrows indicate that no superconductivity was detected down to this temperature in the particular experiment.

Fig. 10.12. vs. pressure for lutetium. The numbers indicate the sequence of 11 measurements for one particular sample. As seen, is a reversible function of pressure. Two arrows indicate that no superconductivity was detected at those pressures down to — 20 mK. The curve is a smooth fit of the data (Probst, 1974). 

Fig. 10.13. vs. pressure for Lu up to 200 kbar. Solid circles are the data of fig. 10.12. Open circles systematically deviate from the curve (see text). The curve is a fit of eq. (10.1) to the data assuming a linear pressure-dependence of the electron-phonon coupling parameter A upon pressure. The upper scale shows the corresponding values of A. 

Fig. 10.15. Tc vs. pressure for the trivalent rare earths. In the case of Sc, two arrows indicate the absence of superconductivity at 20 mK. Recently, pressure-induced superconductivity has also been observed in Sc at approximately 200 kbar (cf. section 6).

Fig. 2. Flashover voltage vs. pressure for high-density polyethylene.

Figure 11. Solubilization parameters vs. pressure for a crude oil system. (Reproduced with permission from reference 50, copyright 1996 Elsevier.)...

Fig. 1. Temperature vs. pressure for various ratios of sensor to auxiliary volume.

Figures 2-17 and 2-18 show plots of both these functions vs pressure for molten high-density polyethylene. The pressure-volume-temperature data for these graphs were obtained from Refs. 5 and 8. Graphically integrating the appropriate curve gives the enthalpy or entropy correction due to pressure change. This correction applied to the value of enthalpy or entropy at atmospheric pressure will, in turn, yield the appropriate thermodynamic function at the pressure and temperature. Figures 2-19-2-29 give enthalpy and entropy data as functions of temperature and pressure for various polymers.

Fig. 5-2 Solubility vs pressure for nitrogen-polyethylene and carbon dioxide-polyethylene [7-9].

A comparison of the output vs pressure for both screws is shown in Fig. 7-13. Initially, the deeper (0.200-in.) screw has the higher output. However, above a 5000-psi pressure differential, the shallower screw has the higher output. 

The following figure shows a plot of volume vs. pressure for a reservoir crude at constant temperature both in the single-phase and two-phase states. The change in compressibility provides the bubblepoint pressure, Pj. 

Figure 4.12 Mole percent of different phases vs. pressure for the CO -reservoir oil system at 307.6 K (adapted from Pan and Firoozabadi, 1998).

Figure 5.7 Calculated cloudpoint temperature vs. pressure for three stock-tank oils (adapted from Pan et al., 1997b).

FIG. 11. vs pressure for the runs of Fig. 10. Dashed curves are constant temperature curves, and their slopes at P=5.53 are shown by the straight lines and listed in Table 1. From reference [3]. 

---