On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:04:58 -0800, Pierce Nichols <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Also, even with an evaporative concentrator, it's going to be difficult to make >> really high concentrations (independent of solutes issues) - our large-scale >> sparger trials, so far, seem to indicate a "point of diminishing returns" >> somewhere around 80%. We see ways to possibly improve things, but I am not >> abandoning freezing processes yet. > > Actually, that point of diminishing returns is a result of the physics >of the process. It happens when the concentration of the vapor coming >out of the column reaches 50%. That happens around 85%, more or less. I >don't think our sparger is as efficient as it could be, but there's not >a whole lot to wring out with a single stage. Multiple stages could >drive the practical concentration levels higher, and eliminate >contaminants in the process. This is very sensitive to what you mean by "diminishing returns." There is no theoretical limit to the concentration you can get out of a sparger - you just start losing a lot of peroxide as vapor the higher you take the concentration. OTOH, if diminishing returns means the throughput falls off with concentration, then yes I agree. -R -- LSO to pilot after 6th bolter, "You have to land here, son. This is where the food is." _______________________________________________ ERPS-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.erps.org/mailman/listinfo/erps-list
