Digester performances Sample Clauses

Digester performances. During the first 7 days of the experiment, the OLR of FOGs were kept at 0.25 g VS L-1, d-1 and then raised to 0.5 g VS L-1 d-1 to acclimate the digesters to the new substrate. The control digester maintained specific methane production of 307 (+2.4%, -4.8%) NmL g VS-1, d-1 throughtout phase 1 (Figure 16). However, at day 19-27 and 34-37, the gas production fluctuated a lot. In the experimental digester, the specific methane production was increasing from around 307 NmL g VS-1, d-1 between day 11-14, to around 380 between day 24-27and D. Afterwards, the methane yield started to decrease. Like the control digester, the experimental digesters gas production started to fluctuate at day 24- 27and 34-37, thus indicating digestion inefficiency in the digesters. During phase 1, the experimental digester maintained a specific methane yield of 363 (+3.3, -2 .1) NmL g VS-1. In the second phase, the BiSl TS increased with about 47% and the PrSl TS dropped by 50%, hence creating a large shift in the TS ratio between the PrSl and the BiSl. This also resulted in an overall lower OLR which made the FOGs contribution greater, hence the specific methane yield increased in the digesters. Between day 40-50 in phase 2, the cavitated digester stabilized quicker compared to the control digester (Fel! Hittar inte referenskälla.), consequently reaching a specific methane production of 412 (+3.3, -2.1) NmL g VS-1. In contrast, the methane yield gradually increased in the control between day 40-51 until it stabilized between day 51-63, resulting in a specific methane yield of 358 (+1.9%, - 0.7%) (Figure 16). In the third phase, the BiSl and PrSl TS increased with 24% and 83% respectively, thus the overall OLR was substantially increased. This caused a decrease in the specific methane yield in the digesters, but as the digester acclimated to the conditions and the old liquid phase were substituted, the specific methane yield increased. The specific methane yield went from 266 to 288 (+ 2.6%, -2.7%) NmL g VS-1 in the control and 308 to 347 (+ 4.9%, -3.2%) NmL g VS-1 in the cavitated digester (Figure 16). In the fourth phase, the TS conditions were similar to the previous phase. However, the FOGs’ addition in the HC pre-treatment was adjusted to accommodate for the detected TS reduction in the process optimisation and in the previous phases. This resulted in a close to equal OLR between the control and the cavitated digester, but it also put some strain on the experimental digester whi...

Related to Digester performances

  • Work Performance ▇▇▇▇▇▇ agrees that all Services performed hereunder shall be performed on a best effort basis by employees, students, faculty, graduate assistants and staff having an appropriate experience and skill level and in compliance with the statement of work.

  • Software Performance HP warrants that its branded software products will conform materially to their specifications and be free of malware at the time of delivery. HP warranties for software products will begin on the date of delivery and unless otherwise specified in Supporting Material, will last for ninety (90) days. HP does not warrant that the operation of software products will be uninterrupted or error-free or that software products will operate in hardware and software combinations other than as authorized by HP in Supporting Material.

  • Contract Performance C19.1 The Contractor shall ensure that: C19.1.1 the Goods conform in all respects with the Specification and, where applicable, with any sample or performance demonstration approved by the Authority; C19.1.2 the Goods operate in accordance with the relevant technical specifications and correspond with the requirements of the Specification and any particulars specified in the Contract; C19.1.3 the Goods conform in all respects with all applicable Laws; and C19.1.4 the Goods are free from defects in design, materials and workmanship and are fit and sufficient for all the purposes for which such Goods are ordinarily used and for any particular purpose made known to the Contractor by the Authority.

  • School Performance The School shall achieve an accountability designation of Good Standing or Honor on each of the three sections of the Performance Framework. In the event the School is a party to a third party management contract which includes a deficit protection clause, the School shall be exempt from some or all measures within the financial portion of the Performance Framework. In accordance with Charter School Law, the Authorizer shall renew any charter in which the public charter school met all of the terms of its performance certificate at the time of renewal.

  • CONTRACTOR’S PERFORMANCE 2.21.1 Contractor shall make citizen satisfaction a priority in providing services under this Agreement. Contractor shall train its employees to be customer service-oriented and to positively and politely interact with citizens when performing contract services. Contractor’s employees shall be clean, courteous, efficient, and neat in appearance and committed to offering the highest quality of service to the public. If, in the Director’s opinion, Contractor is not interacting in a positive and polite manner with citizens, he or she shall direct Contractor to take all remedial steps to conform to these standards