Flux Increase Occurring When an Ultrafiltration Membrane Is Flipped from a Normal to an Inverted Position—Experiments and Theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effects of flipping membranes with hydrophilic/hydrophobic asymmetry are well documented in the literature, but not much is known on the impact of flipping a membrane with dense/porous layer asymmetry. In this work, the pure water flux (PWF) of a commercial polyethersulfone (PES) membrane and a ceramic ultrafiltration (UF) membrane was measured in the normal and inverted positions. Our experimental results showed that the PWF was two orders of magnitude higher when the PES membrane was flipped to the inverted position, while the increase was only two times for the ceramic membrane. The filtration experiments were also carried out using solutions of bovine serum albumin and poly(vinylpyrrolidone). A mathematical model was further developed to explain the PWF increase in the inverted position based on the Bernoulli's rule, considering a straight cylindrical pore of small radius connected to a pore of larger radius in series. It was found by simulation that a PWF increase was indeed possible when the solid ceramic membrane was flipped, maintaining its pore geometry. The flow from a layer with larger pore size to a layer with smaller pore size occurred in the backwashing of the fouled membrane and in forward and pressure-retarded osmosis when the membrane was used with its active layer facing the draw solution (AL-DS). Therefore, this work is of practical significance for the cases where the direction of the water flow is in the inverted position of the membrane.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".