Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 49
49
· For the Octagon MaxFlo 100/0 base case, the frequency of range distance. The results are given in Table 32. Because the
tests generating a percentage difference greater than 20% lake-effect data was collected at an OAT lower than -3°C
increased from: (26.6°F), fluid ABC-S at the 50/50 strength is not included in
2% at the shortest distance; to the analysis.
17% at mid-range distance; and The table shows that the frequency of cases where the
26% at the longest distance. between-site difference in HOT is 20% or more of the lower
· For the ABC-S 75/25 base case, the frequency of tests gen- site value is substantially greater for the lake-effect data. Much
erating a percentage difference greater than 20% increased of the increase shows up in the above 50% difference category.
from:
1% at the shortest distance; to Relationship Between Site-Separation-Distance
21% at mid-range distance; and and Between-Site HOT Differences Excluding
28% at the longest distance. Lake-Effect Data
· For the ABC-S 50/50 base case, the frequency of tests gen-
erating a percentage difference greater than 20% increased Syracuse Hancock International Airport was selected for
from: tests as it offered an opportunity to study lake-effect snowfall.
0% at the shortest distance; to Precipitation rates were recorded during one event, on Janu-
38% at mid-range distance; and ary 8, 2009.
42% at the longest distance. The lake-effect snowfall data was included in the previous
analysis of between-site HOT differences versus distance sep-
The mid-range distance showed a higher frequency of cases aration between sites. Because this data occurred only in the
having between-site differences greater than 50%. mid-range distance, it would distort the true relationship of
This examination shows that a relationship does exist be- between-site HOT differences versus distance. The base case
tween site-separation distance and size of between-site hold- data was re-examined with the lake-effect snowfall data re-
over time differences. moved. The results of the analysis with the lake-effect snow-
fall data removed are given in Table 33.
Examination of Lake-Effect Snowfall Removal of the lake-effect data produces a smoother rela-
on HOT Differences tionship of HOT difference to distance, removing the bulge at
the mid-range distance seen in the previous analysis (Table 31).
The impact of lake-effect snowfall was examined by looking The final results by fluid type are:
at the lake-effect snowfall data in isolation and comparing it to
other data collected within the same site-separation range. · For the Type I fluid base case, the frequency of tests generat-
The lake-effect data was collected at a between-site distance ing a percentage difference greater than 20% increased from:
of 8,300 ft, placing it in the mid-range for distance analysis. To 4% at the shortest distance to
examine its influence on HOT at the two sites, the lake-effect 12% at mid-range distance and
data was compared to the other data collected at the mid- 15% at the longest distance.
Table 32. Effect of lake-effect snowfall on between-site HOT differences (20072008).
Number of Tests where Difference Between Sites is
Distance Range # (%)
Fluid Type
7017 to 13390 ft
50% Total
Type I no lake-effect 44 (88%) 2 (4%) 4 (8%) 0 (0%) 50 (100%)
HOTs in Snow lake-effect 18 (56%) 2 (6%) 4 (13%) 8 (25%) 32 (100%)
Clariant no lake-effect 45 (90% 3 (6%) 1 (2%) 1 (2%) 50 (100%)
2012 100/0
HOTs in Snow lake-effect 25 (78%) 3 (9%) 0 (0%) 4 (13%) 32 (100%)
Octagon no lake-effect 44 (88%) 3 (6%) 2 (4%) 1 (2%) 50 (100%)
MaxFlo 100/0
HOTs in Snow lake-effect 24 (75%) 5 (16%) 0 (0%) 3 (9%) 32 (100%)
ABC-S 75/25 no lake-effect 43 (86%) 4 (8%) 2 (4%) 1 (2%) 50 (100%)
HOTs in Snow lake-effect 22 (69%) 5 (16%) 1 (3%) 4 (13%) 32 (100%)
OCR for page 50
50
Table 33. Relationship of between-site differences and distance (excluding lake-effect data 20072009).
Type I Holdover Times in Snow - Measured Rates
(without lake-effect data)
Number of tests where difference between
Distance Range sites is
(ft) 20% to 30% to
50% Total
29.9% 49.9 %
4167 5052 64 3 67
96% 4% 100%
7017 13390 44 2 4 50
88% 4% 8% 0% 100%
27800 28500 78 6 6 3 93
84% 6% 6% 3% 100%
Total tests 186 11 10 3 210
analyzed
89% 5% 5% 1% 100%
Clariant 2012 100/0 Holdover Times in Snow - Measured Rates Octagon MaxFlo 100/0 Holdover Times in Snow - Measured Rates
(without lake-effect data) (without lake-effect data)
Number of tests where difference between Number of tests where difference between
Distance Range sites is Distance Range sites is
(ft) 20% to 30% to (ft) 20% to 30% to
50% Total 50% Total
4167 5052 66 1 67 4167 5052 65 1 1 67
99% 1% 100% 97% 1% 1% 100%
7017 13390 45 3 1 1 50 7017 13390 44 3 2 1 50
90% 6% 2% 2% 100% 88% 6% 4% 2% 100%
27800 28500 73 14 6 93 27800 28500 68 16 6 3 93
78% 15% 6% 100% 73% 17% 6% 3% 100%
Total tests 184 18 7 1 210 Total tests 177 20 9 4 210
analyzed analyzed
88% 9% 3% 0% 100% 84% 10% 4% 2% 100%
ABC-S 75/25 Holdover Times in Snow - Measured Rates ABC-S 50/50 Holdover Times in Snow - Measured Rates
(without lake-effect data) (no lake-effect data due temp restriction for 50/50)
Number of tests where difference between Number of tests where difference between
Distance Range sites is Distance Range sites is
(ft) 20% to 30% to (ft) 20% to 30% to
50% Total 50% Total
4167 5052 66 1 67 4167 5052 12 12
99% 1% 100% 100% 100%
7017 13390 43 4 2 1 50 7017 13390 8 3 0 2 13
86% 8% 4% 2% 100% 62% 23% 0% 15% 100%
27800 28500 67 17 7 2 93 27800 28500 10 1 2 4 17
72% 18% 8% 2% 100% 59% 6% 12% 24% 100%
Total tests 176 22 9 3 210 Total tests 30 4 2 6 42
analyzed analyzed
84% 10% 4% 1% 100% 71% 10% 5% 14% 100%
· For the Clariant 2012 100/0 base case, the frequency of tests · For the Octagon MaxFlo 100/0 base case, the frequency of
generating a percentage difference greater than 20% in- tests generating a percentage difference greater than 20%
creased from: increased from:
1% at the shortest distance to 2% at the shortest distance to
10% at mid-range distance and 12% at mid-range distance and
21% at the longest distance. 26% at the longest distance.
