Gas Separation Properties of Mixed Matrix Membranes based on Polyimide and Graphite Oxide
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, three different graphene-based materials, namely graphite oxide (GrO), thermally reduced graphite oxide (T-RGrO) and ascorbic acid multi-phase reduced graphene oxide (AMP-RGO), were synthesized and used to produce mixed matrix membranes (MMM) based on Matrimid®5218 for as separation. From the samples produced, a complete set of characterization was performed including XRD, FTIR, TGA and SEM to relate with the gas separation performance using H2, CO2, O2, N2 and CH4. For all the gases studied, the results showed that membrane permeability was inversely proportional to the gas molecular size. This behavior was associated to multi-phase reduced graphite oxide (AMPRGO) being an excellent gas barrier for large gas molecules, especially for CH4. The results showed that the H2/CH4 ideal selectivity increased to 231 which represents a 328% improvement for M/AMP-RGO 0.1 compared to the neat matrix. The CO2/CH4 selectivity was 79.8 for M/AMP-RGO 0.2 wt.% which represents a 344% improvement compared to the neat polymer. These results confirmed that these membranes can be used for methane separation such as in ammonia plants (H2/CH4) or biogas upgrading/natural gas purification (CO2/CH4).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".