The Effect of the Oleophobicity Deterioration of a Membrane Surface on Its Rejection Capacity: A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this work, the effects of the deteriorating affinity-related properties of membranes due to leaching and erosion on their rejection capacity were studied via computational fluid dynamics (CFD). The function of affinity-enhancing agents is to modify the wettability state of the surface of a membrane for dispersed droplets. The wettability conditions can be identified by the contact angle a droplet makes with the surface of the membrane upon pinning. For the filtration of fluid emulsions, it is generally required that the surface of the membrane is nonwetting for the dispersed droplets such that the interfaces that are formed at the pore openings provide the membrane with a criterion for the rejection of dispersals. Since materials that make up the membrane do not necessarily possess the required affinity, it is customary to change it by adding affinity-enhancing agents to the base material forming the membrane. The bonding and stability of these materials can be compromised during the lifespan of a membrane due to leaching and erosion (in crossflow filtration), leading to a deterioration of the rejection capacity of the membrane. In order to investigate how a decrease in the contact angle can lead to the permeation of droplets that would otherwise get rejected, a CFD study was conducted. In the CFD study, a droplet was released in a crossflow field that involved a pore opening and the contact angle was considered to decrease with time as a consequence of the leaching of affinity-enhancing agents. The CFD analysis revealed that the decrease in the contact angle resulted in the droplet spreading over the surface more. Furthermore, the interface that was formed at the entrance of the pore opening flattened as the contact angle decreased, leading the interface to advance more inside the pore. The droplet continued to pass over the pore opening until the contact angle reached a certain value, at which point, the droplet became pinned at the pore opening.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".