Highly hydrophobic microporous low‐density polyethylene hollow fiber membranes by melt‐extrusion coupled with salt‐leaching technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Microporous and highly hydrophobic low‐density polyethylene (LDPE) hollow fiber membranes were successfully prepared via a solvent‐free method, combining melt‐extrusion, and salt‐leaching techniques. NaCl particles with particle size of 5–10 µm were mixed with LDPE pellets to produce a blend of 35, 40, 50, 60, 65 and 68 wt% of salt. A microporous structure was produced by leaching the salt particles from the hollow fiber matrix via immersion in water at 60°C. The fabricated membranes were then characterized in terms of morphology, porosity and pore size distribution, surface roughness, and hydrophobicity, as well as mechanical properties. The remarkable increase in the water contact angles from 98° for LDPE hollow fibers fabricated without the addition of salt (blank sample) to 130° for membranes fabricated with initial salt content of 68 wt% is mainly attributed to the rough surface structure, comprising a large number of micropapillas produced by removing the imbedded salt crystals. The increase in surface roughness and porosity of hollow fiber membranes with increasing initial salt content was confirmed by scanning electron microscope and atomic force microscopy. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".