Laserfiche WebLink
<br />W <br />--J <br />W <br />1-"" <br /> <br />26 <br /> <br />2,1.le Varitation of Parameters <br /> <br />The experimental runs were divided between those using weathered <br /> <br />shale (W-l through W-6) and those using unweathered shale (U-I <br />through U-3 and R-l through R-3). In W-l there was no flow rotation. <br /> <br />The water and samples were introduced in the described manner to <br /> <br />contrast the runs with water movement over the sample. Next, a very <br /> <br />low rate of flow (8 rpm) was used. The repeatability of the results <br /> <br />was checked with a still higher rate (17 rpm) on'W-3a, band c, W-4a <br /> <br />was sampled in exactly the same way but at 33 rpm. W-4b was run at <br /> <br />33 rpm but with only one sample taken at the end of two hours. This <br /> <br />demonstrated the effect of sampling on the results. For the next <br /> <br />run, W-5, the rate was increased to 60 rpm which was sufficient for <br /> <br />bed motion. . W-6 was at 82 rpm. <br /> <br />For the unweathered shale, U-l, U-2 and U-3 runs were performed <br /> <br />at 9, 58 and 77 rpm. Bed motion was noted at a higher velocity <br />(7'7 Tpm) than on the weathered samples due to increased particle size. <br /> <br />Runs R-I, R-2 and R-3 also used 'unweathered shale using coarser <br /> <br />material than in the U runs. Rocks with diameters in the range 12,7- <br /> <br />'76.2mm (0.5-3 inch) were placed in the cylinder as closely <br /> <br />packed as possible. These runs were done to contrast the U runs where <br /> <br />bed motion was an important factor, <br /> <br />2,1.2 Results <br /> <br />The changes in EC of the water as it was rotated over the various <br /> <br />samples of shale are shown in Figures 2.2 through 2,4 and in Table 2.2, <br /> <br />All the curves show that EC increases at a decreasing rate. The EC <br /> <br />VB time curves of Figure 2,2 show that dissolution rate of weathered <br />