The treatment of landfill leachate using an MFUF membrane system: Focusing on membrane fouling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Membrane systems are being used increasingly throughout the western world to treat landfill leachate as environmental regulations tighten. This work examined leachate filtration using a bench-scale MF/UF membrane system, focussing on surface fouling and constituent reductions at the Trail Road Landfill in Ottawa, Ontario. The study found that ultrafiltration membranes with a molecular weight cut-off of 10 KDa and below gave the best overall leachate treatment. A 1 KDa ultrafiltration membrane gave the highest percent removals overall of all the membranes tested, but had one of the lowest steady state fluxes ranging from 2 to 5 L/m2h. Carbonates such as calcite and dolomite were determined to be one of the main foulants/scalants. Iron sulphides or iron oxides tended to form a general coating over the membrane surface and may have been the base for a surface coating of mixed-element origins observed in spring 2003. The fouling type was generally thought to be cake filtration based on flux results and basic fouling determination equations. (Abstract shortened by UMI.)
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".