Fig. 5. Evolution of carbon removal as a function of inlet O3 concentration at different outlet temperatures (QG = 12.7 l/h, TOS = 30 min).
| have a rather moderate impact on the conversion. This result may be in fact explained by the existence of a temperature gradient of about 10 ◦C along the reactor (C removal being improved by an increase of temperature in this range). As abovementioned, the different regeneration yields of samples A and B are mainly due to the | different types of carbonaceous deposit on their surface, since multiplying TOS by a factor 4 only increased the mean carbon removal of sample B to 35% conversion.
Finally, Fig. 9 displays the photos of partially regenerated sample A for two outlet temperatures: 95 ◦C and 140 ◦C (after 1 h TOS). On |
Fig. 6. Evolution of carbon removal as a function of (a) time on stream and (b) outlet temperature (QG = 12.7 l/h, CO3,in =48 g/m3).
