## 3 Results and Discussion
### Analysis of Influence of Diffusion Resistance
Since the weight by volume of the zeolite-based adsorbent is almost 1.5 times less than that of aluminium oxide, the dynamic capacity related to the gram of the adsorbent is greater (Figure 3); however, the protective power time of the layers of different adsorbents is comparable (Figure 4). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**No. of** & **Adsorbent Volume,** & **Layer Height,** & **Water Content,** & **Minimal** & **DC,** \\
**Experiment** & **L** & **cm** & **g/m\({}^{3}\)** & **T\({}_{\text{d.p. }}\)**o\({}^{\text{o}}\)C** & **g/100 cm\({}^{3}\)** \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\)} \\ \hline
1 & 0.3 & 15.3 & 15.07 & –59.5 & 3.77 \\ \hline
2 & 0.6 & 30.6 & 15.11 & –55.5 & 6.9 \\ \hline
3 & 0.9 & 46.0 & 15.91 & –60.9 & 9.5 \\ \hline
4 & 0.9 & 46.0 & 14.94 & –65.3 & 7.55 \\ \hline
5 & 1.2 & 61.0 & 15.6 & –60.1 & 11.31 \\ \hline \multicolumn{6}{c}{NaX} \\ \hline
6 & 0.3 & 15.3 & 14.67 & –49.3 & 3.3 \\ \hline
7 & 0.6 & 30.6 & 14.72 & –48.7 & 8.53 \\ \hline
8 & 0.6 & 30.6 & 15.2 & –60.2 & 9.13 \\ \hline
9 & 0.9 & 46.0 & 14.57 & –60.9 & 11.66 \\ \hline
10 & 1.2 & 61.0 & 15.38 & –60.5 & 12. The linear dependence between the experimentally measured values of the dynamic capacity of the adsorbents (Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) and NaX) with respect to water vapour, classified as a unit of their volume and a mass unit (Figure 5), indicates that the density of the layer filling (and, as a consequence, porosity) in different experiments was the same. This figure shows that the averaged weight by volume of the adsorbents (\(\rho_{\text{Al2O3}}\) and \(\rho_{\text{NaX}}\)) can be estimated from the ratio of dynamic capacities classified as a volume unit and a mass unit, i.e. :  
\[\rho_{\text{Al2O3}}=\frac{DE,\text{g/cm}^{3}}{\text{DE, g/g}}=\frac{15.6}{18}\approx\frac{15.6}{18}\approx 0.87 \frac{\text{g}}{\text{cm}^{3}}, \tag{1}\]  
\[\rho_{\text{NaX}}=\frac{DE,\text{ g/cm}^{3}}{\text{DE, g/g}}=\frac{10.6}{18}\approx 15.6/18 \approx 0.59\ \frac{\text{g}}{\text{cm}^{3}}, \tag{2}\]  
In the case under consideration, another criterion of the \"consistency\" of the experimental data is the presence of the correlation between the protective power time of the layer and the dynamic capacity of the adsorbents (Figure 6). The linear dependence between the experimentally measured values of the protective power time of the layer and the dynamic capacity of the adsorbents (Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) and NaX) with respect to water vapour bears evidence of the properly obtained data. The protective power time of the layer was reduced to the water content at the entrance-15 g/cm\({}^{3}\). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**No. of Experiment**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**P, MPa**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Minimal T\({}_{\text{d.p.}}\), \({}^{\circ}\)C**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**DC**} \\ \cline{3-4}  & & & **g/100 g** \\ \hline
7 & 0.1 & \(-\)48.7 & 14.79 \\ \hline
8 & 0.2 & \(-\)60.5 & 21.11 \\ \hline
9 & 0.3 & \(-\)59.1 & 23.09 \\ \hline
10 & 0.5 & \(-\)63.2 & 19.46 \\ \hline
11 & 0.6 & \(-\)60.4 & 16.95 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: _Cont._  
Figure 5: Correlation between the experimentally measured values of the dynamic capacity of the adsorbents (Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) and NaX) with respect to water vapour, classified as a unit of their volume and a mass unit (conditions: the saturator temperature is 18 \({}^{\circ}\)C, pressure is 0.1 \(\div\) 0.6 MPa). Figure 7 shows that when the pressure increases, in this case-to 0.3 MPa, the dynamic capacity and, respectively, the protective power time of the adsorbent layer increase proportionally. The data in Figure 7b were obtained from Table 2, taking into account the specific weight of the adsorbents (\(\rho\)Al\({}_{2}\)O\({}_{3}\) = 0.87 g/cm\({}^{3}\); \(\rho\)NaX = 0.59 g/cm\({}^{3}\)). At the atmospheric pressure, the adsorption characteristics of the NaX adsorbent are better than those of the aluminium oxide adsorbent.