Search results for: Smita Lahkar

Authors: Smita Mondal, Dinesh Kumar Pandey, Prakash Biswas

Abstract:

During past two decades, considerable attention has been given to the value addition of biodiesel derived glycerol (~10wt.%) to make the biodiesel industry economically viable. Among the various glycerol value-addition methods, hydrogenolysis of glycerol to 1,2-propanediol is one of the attractive and promising routes. In this study, highly active and selective γ-Al₂O₃ supported bimetallic Cu-Ni catalyst was developed for selective hydrogenolysis of glycerol to 1,2-propanediol in the liquid phase. The catalytic performance was evaluated in a high-pressure autoclave reactor. The formation of mixed oxide indicated the strong interaction of Cu, Ni with the alumina support. Experimental results demonstrated that bimetallic copper-nickel catalyst was more active and selective to 1,2-PDO as compared to monometallic catalysts due to bifunctional behavior. To verify the effect of calcination temperature on the formation of Cu-Ni mixed oxide phase, the calcination temperature of 20wt.% Cu:Ni(1:1)/Al₂O₃ catalyst was varied from 300°C-550°C. The physicochemical properties of the catalysts were characterized by various techniques such as specific surface area (BET), X-ray diffraction study (XRD), temperature programmed reduction (TPR), and temperature programmed desorption (TPD). The BET surface area and pore volume of the catalysts were in the range of 71-78 m²g⁻¹, and 0.12-0.15 cm³g⁻¹, respectively. The peaks at the 2θ range of 43.3°-45.5° and 50.4°-52°, was corresponded to the copper-nickel mixed oxidephase [JCPDS: 78-1602]. The formation of mixed oxide indicated the strong interaction of Cu, Ni with the alumina support. The crystallite size decreased with increasing the calcination temperature up to 450°C. Further, the crystallite size was increased due to agglomeration. Smaller crystallite size of 16.5 nm was obtained for the catalyst calcined at 400°C. Total acidic sites of the catalysts were determined by NH₃-TPD, and the maximum total acidic of 0.609 mmol NH₃ gcat⁻¹ was obtained over the catalyst calcined at 400°C. TPR data suggested the maximum of 75% degree of reduction of catalyst calcined at 400°C among all others. Further, 20wt.%Cu:Ni(1:1)/γ-Al₂O₃ catalyst calcined at 400°C exhibited highest catalytic activity ( > 70%) and 1,2-PDO selectivity ( > 85%) at mild reaction condition due to highest acidity, highest degree of reduction, smallest crystallite size. Further, the modified Power law kinetic model was developed to understand the true kinetic behaviour of hydrogenolysis of glycerol over 20wt.%Cu:Ni(1:1)/γ-Al₂O₃ catalyst. Rate equations obtained from the model was solved by ode23 using MATLAB coupled with Genetic Algorithm. Results demonstrated that the model predicted data were very well fitted with the experimental data. The activation energy of the formation of 1,2-PDO was found to be 45 kJ mol⁻¹.

Keywords: glycerol, 1, 2-PDO, calcination, kinetic

Procedia PDF Downloads 122

Authors: Eglal Y. Ali, Smita Rao, Anat Lubetzky, Wen Ling

Abstract:

Background: Postural abnormalities, rigidity, clumsiness, and frequent falls are common among children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The central nervous system’s ability to process all reliable sensory inputs (weighting) and disregard potentially perturbing sensory input (reweighting) is critical for successfully maintaining standing postural control. This study examined how sensory inputs (visual and somatosensory) are weighted and reweighted to maintain standing postural control in children with ASD compared with typically developing (TD) children. Subjects: Forty (20 (TD) and 20 ASD) children and adolescents participated in this study. The groups were matched for age, weight, and height. Participants had normal somatosensory (no somatosensory hypersensitivity), visual, and vestibular perception. Participants with ASD were categorized with severity level 1 according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) and Social Responsiveness Scale. Methods: Using one force platform, the center of pressure (COP) was measured during quiet standing for 30 seconds, 3 times first standing on stable surface with eyes open (Condition 1), followed by randomization of the following 3 conditions: Condition 2 standing on stable surface with eyes closed, (visual input perturbed); Condition 3 standing on a compliant foam surface with eyes open, (somatosensory input perturbed); and Condition 4 standing on a compliant foam surface with eyes closed, (both visual and somatosensory inputs perturbed). Standing postural control was measured by three outcome measures: COP sway area, COP anterior-posterior (AP), and mediolateral (ML) path length (PL). A repeated measure mixed model analysis of variance was conducted to determine whether there was a significant difference between the two groups in the mean of the three outcome measures across the four conditions. Results: According to all three outcome measures, both groups showed a gradual increase in postural sway from condition 1 to condition 4. However, TD participants showed a larger postural sway than those with ASD. There was a significant main effect of the condition on three outcome measures (p< 0.05). Only the COP AP PL showed a significant main effect of the group (p<0.05) and a significant group by condition interaction (p<0.05). In COP AP PL, TD participants showed a significant difference between condition 2 and the baseline (p<0.05), whereas the ASD group did not. This suggests that the ASD group did not weigh visual input as much as the TD group. A significant difference between conditions for the ASD group was seen only when participants stood on foam regardless of the visual condition, suggesting that the ASD group relied more on the somatosensory inputs to maintain the standing postural control. Furthermore, the ASD group exhibited significantly smaller postural sway compared with TD participants during standing on a stable surface, whereas the postural sway of the ASD group was close to that of the TD group on foam. Conclusion: These results suggest that participants with high-functioning ASD (level 1, no somatosensory hypersensitivity in ankles and feet) over-rely on somatosensory inputs and use a stiffening strategy for standing postural control. This deviation in the reweighting mechanism might explain the postural abnormalities mentioned above among children with ASD.

Keywords: autism spectrum disorders, postural sway, sensory weighting and reweighting, standing postural control

Procedia PDF Downloads 84

Authors: Eglal Y. Ali, Smita Rao, Anat Lubetzky, Wen Ling

Abstract:

Background: Postural abnormalities, rigidity, clumsiness, and frequent falls are common among children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The central nervous system’s ability to process all reliable sensory inputs (weighting) and disregard potentially perturbing sensory input (reweighting) is critical for successfully maintaining standing postural control. This study examined how sensory inputs (visual and somatosensory) are weighted and reweighted to maintain standing postural control in children with ASD compared with typically developing (TD) children. Subjects: Forty (20 (TD) and 20 ASD) children and adolescents participated in this study. The groups were matched for age, weight, and height. Participants had normal somatosensory (no somatosensory hypersensitivity), visual, and vestibular perception. Participants with ASD were categorized with severity level 1 according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-V) and Social Responsiveness Scale. Methods: Using one force platform, the center of pressure (COP) was measured during quiet standing for 30 seconds, 3 times first standing on stable surface with eyes open (Condition 1), followed by randomization of the following 3 conditions: Condition 2 standing on stable surface with eyes closed, (visual input perturbed); Condition 3 standing on compliant foam surface with eyes open, (somatosensory input perturbed); and Condition 4 standing on compliant foam surface with eyes closed, (both visual and somatosensory inputs perturbed). Standing postural control was measured by three outcome measures: COP sway area, COP anterior-posterior (AP), and mediolateral (ML) path length (PL). A repeated measure mixed model Analysis of Variance was conducted to determine whether there was a significant difference between the two groups in the mean of the three outcome measures across the four conditions. Results: According to all three outcome measures, both groups showed a gradual increase in postural sway from condition 1 to condition 4. However, TD participants showed a larger postural sway than those with ASD. There was a significant main effect of condition on three outcome measures (p< 0.05). Only the COP AP PL showed a significant main effect of the group (p<0.05) and a significant group by condition interaction (p<0.05). In COP AP PL, TD participants showed a significant difference between condition 2 and the baseline (p<0.05), whereas the ASD group did not. This suggests that the ASD group did not weight visual input as much as the TD group. A significant difference between conditions for the ASD group was seen only when participants stood on foam regardless of the visual condition, suggesting that the ASD group relied more on the somatosensory inputs to maintain the standing postural control. Furthermore, the ASD group exhibited significantly smaller postural sway compared with TD participants during standing on the stable surface, whereas the postural sway of the ASD group was close to that of the TD group on foam. Conclusion: These results suggest that participants with high functioning ASD (level 1, no somatosensory hypersensitivity in ankles and feet) over-rely on somatosensory inputs and use a stiffening strategy for standing postural control. This deviation in the reweighting mechanism might explain the postural abnormalities mentioned above among children with ASD.

Keywords: autism spectrum disorders, postural sway, sensory weighting and reweighting, standing postural control

Procedia PDF Downloads 37