MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030252418 · doi:10.2166/wst.2010.877

An assessment of oxygen transfer efficiency in a gas permeable hollow fibre membrane biological reactor

2010· article· en· W2030252418 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabriela Soreanu, Lori Lishman, Sarah A. Dunlop, H. Behmann, Peter Seto

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersSustainable Development Technology Canada
KeywordsAerationBubbleMass transferMembraneChemistryChemical engineeringOxygenNitrogenChemical oxygen demandVenturi effectEnvironmental engineeringInletMaterials scienceChromatographyEnvironmental scienceSewage treatmentOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clean water oxygen transfer efficiency (OTE) of a full scale non-porous hollow fibre gas permeable (GP) membrane (surface area of 500 m(2)) was evaluated at inlet air pressures of 1.2, 1.4, and 1.8 atm using two established testing methods. To form a basis of comparison with traditional aeration technologies, additional testing was done with conventional aerators (fine bubble and coarse bubble diffusers) replacing the GP membrane. OTE can be established based on the re-aeration of deoxygenated water or by monitoring the catalytic oxidation of a sodium sulphite (Na(2)SO(3)) solution. In this study, OTE values determined by sulphite oxidation (SOTE(S)) were consistently higher than those established during re-aeration (SOTE(R)) suggesting that the chemical reaction was enhancing the mass transfer. The chemical reaction was sufficiently fast in the case of the GP membrane, that the gas phase limited the mass transfer. The GP membrane operating at 1.2 atm had a SOTE(S) of 70.6% and a SOTER of 52.2%. SOTE(R) for the coarse bubble and fine bubble diffusers were 3.8% and 23.6%, respectively. This is comparable to the manufacturer's values, corrected for depth of 3.4% and 18.3%, respectively. Particularly, the derived OTE values were used to evaluate differences in energy consumption for a conventional treatment plant achieving carbon removal and nitrification. This analysis highlights the potential energy efficiency of GP membranes, which could be considered for the design of the membrane modules.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.266 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Science & TechnologySame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207