Relation between operation pressure and current reading that measured by pressure sensor was a linear equation used to correct the pressure sensor reading . P=0.0625 C-0.25 (4.3) Where : P is pressure reading and C is current reading . 6.2. Calibration of Pressure Sensor Reading. Pressure transducer set-up was calibrated by connect U-tube manometer between two points one on the section No.1 and the other on the section No.2 , measuring the difference pressure between two points with difference values of flow rate.
The effect of temperatures on rate of reaction Temperature (degrees Celsius) Room temperature 35 50 Rate of reaction (seconds) 69 56.03 53.63 Table 2: The effect of temperatures when the temperatures were above room temperature. Graph 1: The graph of the results from table 1 Graph 2: The graph of the results from table 2 The results displayed in all the graphs and tables had shown a decrease in time for the rate of reaction, as the temperature increases. The results support the idea that as the temperature of the solution increases, the time, the rate of reaction, decreases. The results of the experiment had fluctuated based on the temperature of the solution. In reference to Table 1 and Table 2, the results was evident enough to identify the patterns and the trends when it came to using the temperature as an independent variable.
The heat release rate changes responsible for the efficiency changes are difficult to measure experimentally. However, it is apparently computed from the rate of pressure rise measured during the efficiency determination in the experimental investigation [1-5]. Computer simulation of the heat release rate overcomes the time and cost constraints in the efficiency determination by experiments since the prediction of the changes in the heat release rate responsible for the efficiency changes would reduce the number of experiments required in the performance analysis. Heat release rate and performance simulation can be carried out rapidly by a thermodynamic model. Therefore, a rapid performance simulation method is developed with a thermodynamic model in ‘C’ language for a diesel engine and validated with the experimental data in the
Variable temperature, Concentration and variable mass diffusion required discussion according to Numerical solutions. The velocity field is discussed for the chemical reaction parameter, phase angle, thermal and mass Grashof number in Figures 1-7. The mass diffusion Equation (10) can be adjusted to meet that one takes (i) K > 0 means the destructive reaction, (ii) K < 0 means the generative reaction (iii) K = 0 means no reaction. The steady – state profile for different phase angle are shown Figure.1. The velocity profiles presented are those at X=1.0.Decrease in velocity with increasing phase angle.
Then, the averages for each test were calculated and recorded in Table 2. The results were then transferred to Graph 1, which displays the effect of change in volume on pressure and illustrates the inverse relationship between the variables. Graph 2 demonstrates 1/volume versus pressure, and should have a linear best fit line that goes through the origin. However, due to the line of best fit not going through the origin, it is indicted that there are random and systematic errors. Graph 3 demonstrates pressure times volume versus pressure and should be a horizontal line.
Then the time of each reaction was recorded when the solution was completed and turned clear. Reaction rate was then calculated using the initial concentration of I2 and time recorded. If reaction rate increases, the reaction is done faster and the reaction time decreases. The first order reaction is a reaction depending only on the concentration of two reactants. Determination of the rate law and activation energy of a chemical reaction requires a number of steps.
There is not a major outlier since all of the data plots touch the line of best fit. Although, the decrease in the reaction time in Figure 2 has a fairly linear slope, the amount of decrease between each water temperature differs. For example, the fall of the average reaction time between 17°C and 27°C was 0.013 seconds, while the fall of the average reaction time between 27°C and 37°C was 0.047 seconds. Thus, a relatively less sharper decrease in the average reaction time was observed between temperatures 17°C and 27°C than the decrease between temperatures 27°C and 37°C. A lower rate of decrease in the
According to the experimental test system as shown in Fig. 3 and two ejectors as shown in Fig. 4, the performance of the steam ejector was investigated under the condition of the primary steam temperature ranged from 40 °C to 70 °C, and the secondary steam temperature was set at 10 °C, 15 °C, 20 °C and 25 °C, respectively. The experimental results of the effects of the operating temperatures, nozzle exit position and the area ratio of the ejector on the performance of the steam ejector were summarized as follows. At the beginning of the study, a tentative experiment was carried out with the Ejector 1.
As shown in Fig. 4, the system COP increased first and then decreased with the generating temperature increasing and there existed a maximum value of 0.277 at Tg = 63 °C. The variation tendency of the cooling capacity was similar to that of the system COP, but the maximum value of 734.4 W at Tg = 67 °C. The total pressure of the primary flow in the nozzle was relatively low with the generating temperature set under these conditions. The reason for the
2. Determine the inertia, stiffness and damping constants for use in a single degree of freedom model of the vibrating beam system, and compare the predicted displacement time response to the measured behaviour of the beam when subjected to an initial displacement and allowed to oscillate freely. Optional: change the damping ratio in the model and assess the effect of this in the predicted time-history displacement