ParaH2

Seems like I haven't been connected for more around two years. And seems like I am back :D

Hi, wanna try your skills at identifying molecules? This app is for you!

\o

@orthocresol thank you for your time editing my answer. +40 rep thanks to you :D

@Mithoron As far as I know I didn't create another account :D

@Mithoron I do not have no idea about what you speak :D

I had the privilege to ask one on organic mechanisms. And my favourite is by far why is gold golden?

Great questions are scarce

A bit like my hexacoordinate-carbon

Wow $\ce{NaCl7}$ lol

I'm in the end of my last year of school so... I'll go to party later :D

I am a sci nerd for sure

pong :p

Now I "just" have to finish with my heat and momentum balances :p

@Mithoron finally I got what I wanted !!! :D

Am I crazy? (sorry for the looooooooooooong question) ^^

And by the way for those who know Python, this library enable you to perform the calculation of many thermodynamics values with a pretty nice accuracy compare to ASPEN.

(well actually doing units analysis I do) but from the equations of kinetics I absolutely don't ^^

But still, if my last graph is correct I don't understand why my formulas are..

Yeah so we both agree on the reasonable thing

Which seems to me much more coherent (in last graph I took in consideration the conversion I want)

And if I do use it which seems to me a good idea although it's not written in the kinetics equations (i.e. $r = \frac{1}{\nu_A}\frac{d[A]}{dt}=\frac{1}{\nu_B}\frac{d[B]}{dt}=...$) I get

If I don't use molar ratio this is what I get...

Well this is the purpose of my project to do it by hand. My professor used to do it in Fortran so I should succeed

Also to calculate rH2 I'd like to know if I need to take in consideration the ratio of molar weight? At first I thought it was a good idea to convert the mol_CO /( ...) into mol_H2/(...) but now I'm thinking about the ratio of stoechiometric number I've already done...

no cheating

I've slept less than 5 hours for days and I'm shivering at the moment so I'd like to have some confirmation I'm not crazy

And I mean this is chemistry so... I want to be sure about my kinetics understanding

Yes but I have to do it without ASPEn

(sorry for the latex) because if we have $\ce{\nu_A A + \nu_B B --> \nu_C C + \nu_D D}$ then $r = \frac{1}{\nu_A}\frac{d[A]}{dt}=\frac{1}{\nu_B}\frac{d[B]}{dt}=...$ and for me my rFT correspond to the "r" although I'm not sure :/

So just to be sure, given the reaction nCO + (2n+1)H2 --> C_n + nH2O (where C_n is an average alkane I know I will have to implement it in another way but my question for the moment is mostly about the rate of CO and H2 only) is the rate of CO, rCO, equal to - rFT? (the value is given positive) or - n * rFT ?

Now the thing is that I feel confused by all the results I get

Hi everyone, I feel a bit ashamed to ask this question but I'm starting to be crazy at the moment after days trying to model a Fischer-Tropsch multitubular reactor. I have a given intrinsic rate for CO (called rFT) in mol_CO / (m^3 . s)

If a moderator (@Loong maybe?) could remove my last messages I would be glad ^^

Oh lord I'm so dumb.... my units are not consistent lol I should make breaks sometimes

OK I will do that then. Thank you very much

I just don't know if I write "personal statement" or not

There are more explanations here

It is supposed to be a short description of what I'm looking for and my strength

@Loong Ooopsie, Danke! Do you know if it is acceptable to say in it in a German CV?

Hi everyone, I am writing my CV in German and I am wondering how you would translate correctly "Personal Statement"? Is "Persöniches Statement" correct?

Here are my calculation on units. (mélange stands for mixture and réacteur for reactor)

30% w/w in Cobalt*

And I don't understand why it's not a mass fraction as it should be thanks to my mass balance...

Then my dCOdz is calculated from the mass balance on a dz length of a tube and it should be in mass fraction. However when I print the values for CO for example the values are really high (around -0.35) calculated 100 times it makes a total variation of around -35 .... which can't be a mass fraction