MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162302429 · doi:10.1002/cjce.22056

Modelling development for ultrafiltration membrane fouling of heterogeneous membranes with non‐uniform pore size

2014· article· en· W2162302429 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Amira Abdelrasoul, Huu Doan, Ali Lohi, Chil‐Hung Cheng

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsUltrafiltration (renal)DispersityPolysulfoneMembraneFoulingMembrane foulingParticle sizeMaterials scienceParticle (ecology)CoagulationChemical engineeringChromatographyChemistryComposite materialPolymerPolymer chemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The aim of the present study is to develop a mathematical model for a better understanding and prediction of the Ultrafiltration membrane fouling, which can be applied to the heterogeneous membrane with non‐uniform pore size. Polysulfone flat membrane with a molecular weight cut‐off (MWCO) of 60 000 (nominal size of 0.05 µm) was used with a constant feed flow rate and a cross‐flow mode in ultrafiltration of a latex paint solution. The pore size distribution of the heterogeneous membrane was estimated using ImageJ software. The model was developed based on analyses of particle attachments. All possible depositional and coagulation fouling attachments were included in the model with the evidence derived from the SEM images. Monodisperse particles with sizes of 50 nm and 100 nm, as well as the latex effluent with a wide range of particle size distribution, were utilized in order to test the validity of the model. The transmembrane pressure estimated from the mathematical model agreed with the transmembrane pressure experimentally measured mostly within 3.3–10.0 % error and up to 13.0 % error, using the monodisperse particles and latex effluent, respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.181
Teacher spread0.172 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207