2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-3812(00)00437-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of different methods for determination of the S–L–G equilibrium curve of a solid component in the presence of a compressed gas

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
28
0
2

Year Published

2003
2003
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
1
28
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The initial decrease in melting point is attributed to the solubility effect and the increase in melting point at higher pressures is due to the pressure effect. This is mainly because CO 2 at low pressures acts as a plasticising solvent which reduces the melting point of Pluronics®; whereas, the application of higher pressures increases the melting point 7,33 . Similarly, recent studies have shown that ionic salts also demonstrate melting point depression in CO 2 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The initial decrease in melting point is attributed to the solubility effect and the increase in melting point at higher pressures is due to the pressure effect. This is mainly because CO 2 at low pressures acts as a plasticising solvent which reduces the melting point of Pluronics®; whereas, the application of higher pressures increases the melting point 7,33 . Similarly, recent studies have shown that ionic salts also demonstrate melting point depression in CO 2 .…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The second method considers the formation of the first solids from fluid phase(s) as equilibrium criteria [8][9][10][11][12]. Some apparatus have been alternatively developed with slight modifications of the melting or freezing methods with successful results such as the modified capillary method [13,14]. Alternatively, SLG phase equilibrium can be experimentally obtained by other methods such as differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), high pressure microscopy and transitiometry [15][16][17][18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the case of using l-menthol, the temperature and pressure of the section for preparing the supercritical solution of the solid solute and the solid cosolvent (i.e., the equilibrium temperature, T eq and pressure, p eq ), the temperature of the pre-expansion section (i.e., the pre-expansion temperature, T pre-exp ), and the temperature of the expansion nozzle (i.e., the nozzle temperature, T noz ) were as follows: (i) T eq = 308.2 K, p eq = 14.0 MPa, T pre-exp = 313.2 K and T noz = 323.2 K, (ii) T eq = 308.2 K, p eq = 18.0 MPa, T pre-exp = 313.2 K and T noz = 323.2 K, and (iii) T eq = 338.2 K, p eq = 14.0 MPa, T pre-exp = 338.2 K and T noz = 343.2 K. The experimental conditions in the case of using vanillin were as follows: T eq = 313.2 K, p eq = 22.0 MPa, T pre-exp = 338.2 K and T noz = 343.2 K. These experimental conditions were so selected as to prevent an appearance of heterogeneous gas-liquid phases of CO 2 + l-menthol binary system or CO 2 + vanillin binary system in accordance with the solid-liquid-vapor equilibria of the systems [48][49][50]. The spray distance, L spray was varied with 3, 5 and 7 cm and the collection temperature, T collect was varied with 265.2, 283.2 and 303.2 K to examine the effects of the operation parameters on the production of particles by RESS-SC.…”
Section: Apparatus and Proceduresmentioning
confidence: 99%