Process water recovery via forward osmosis: membrane and integrated process development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work reports on efforts to develop an integrated continuous forward osmosis system for the recovery of water from wastewater streams, highlighting critical process parameters to minimize energy consumption. Forward osmosis experiments were performed using NaCl draw solutions of various concentrations and the intrinsic membrane parameters (water permeability, draw solution permeability, and structural parameter) were then determined via nonlinear regression using MATLAB. The experimental data was then used to validate a theoretical water flux model, which was subsequently applied to simulate the forward osmosis performance under different hydrodynamic conditions using both NaCl and TMA-CO2-H2O (TMA: trimethylamine) draw solutions. Analysis of the energy efficiency of the TMA-CO2 draw solution regeneration stage revealed that the draw solution flow rate has a significant impact on energy consumption. Also, increasing the feed flow rate was found to slightly enhance the water flux up to 2.5%, while having a negligible impact on the downstream regeneration process energy consumption.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 teacher head, 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".