Response to "comment on Comparison between solutions of the general dynamic equation and the kinetic equation for nucleation and droplet growth' " [J. Chem. Phys. 132, 047101 (2010)]

V. Holten; M.E.H. van Dongen

doi:10.1063/1.3299320

Response to "comment on Comparison between solutions of the general dynamic equation and the kinetic equation for nucleation and droplet growth' " [J. Chem. Phys. 132, 047101 (2010)]

V. Holten, M.E.H. van Dongen

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

The analytical results presented in the comment of Shneidman for the droplet size distribution, the thickness of the distribution front, and the location of the stationary source are compared to our earlier numerical results. The agreement is very good in the case of the size distribution and the source location, but the analytical result for the thickness of the front deviates from the numerical result at high supersaturations.

Original language	English
Article number	047102
Journal	Journal of Chemical Physics
Volume	132
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3299320
Publication status	Published - 8 Feb 2010

Access to Document

10.1063/1.3299320

Cite this

@article{dcce266c6c9d439c94a25f4d1acf97fc,

title = "Response to {"}comment on Comparison between solutions of the general dynamic equation and the kinetic equation for nucleation and droplet growth' {"} [J. Chem. Phys. 132, 047101 (2010)]",

abstract = "The analytical results presented in the comment of Shneidman for the droplet size distribution, the thickness of the distribution front, and the location of the stationary source are compared to our earlier numerical results. The agreement is very good in the case of the size distribution and the source location, but the analytical result for the thickness of the front deviates from the numerical result at high supersaturations.",

author = "V. Holten and {van Dongen}, M.E.H.",

year = "2010",

month = feb,

day = "8",

doi = "10.1063/1.3299320",

language = "English",

volume = "132",

journal = "Journal of Chemical Physics",

issn = "0021-9606",

publisher = "American Institute of Physics",

number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Response to "comment on Comparison between solutions of the general dynamic equation and the kinetic equation for nucleation and droplet growth' " [J. Chem. Phys. 132, 047101 (2010)]

AU - Holten, V.

AU - van Dongen, M.E.H.

PY - 2010/2/8

Y1 - 2010/2/8

N2 - The analytical results presented in the comment of Shneidman for the droplet size distribution, the thickness of the distribution front, and the location of the stationary source are compared to our earlier numerical results. The agreement is very good in the case of the size distribution and the source location, but the analytical result for the thickness of the front deviates from the numerical result at high supersaturations.

AB - The analytical results presented in the comment of Shneidman for the droplet size distribution, the thickness of the distribution front, and the location of the stationary source are compared to our earlier numerical results. The agreement is very good in the case of the size distribution and the source location, but the analytical result for the thickness of the front deviates from the numerical result at high supersaturations.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=75749090036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1063/1.3299320

DO - 10.1063/1.3299320

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:75749090036

SN - 0021-9606

VL - 132

JO - Journal of Chemical Physics

JF - Journal of Chemical Physics

IS - 4

M1 - 047102

ER -

Response to "comment on Comparison between solutions of the general dynamic equation and the kinetic equation for nucleation and droplet growth' " [J. Chem. Phys. 132, 047101 (2010)]

Abstract

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this