Enhancing ultrafiltration membrane permeability and antifouling performance through surface patterning with features resembling feed spacers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study investigates the potential of surface-patterned membranes in replacing the conventional feed spacer-assisted filtration process. Two types of surface patterns, namely diamond (D) and honeycomb (HC), were utilized in the fabrication of the surface-patterned membranes. These membranes showed larger effective membrane area and higher average porosity when compared to the flat PES membrane. The D-Patterned and HC-Patterned membranes achieved pure water flux of 76.6 ± 16.9 and 88.3 ± 17.4 L m−2 h−1, respectively, which was higher than the flat PES membrane with and without the use of feed spacers. Furthermore, the patterned membranes reported lower natural organic matter (NOM) fouling in short and long-term filtration experiments and higher flux recovery ratio (FRR), indicating their superior anti-fouling performance over the PES membrane when using feed spacers. Overall, the simple fabrication technique, higher permeability, and excellent anti-fouling performance of the surface-patterned membranes render them suitable for potentially replacing the current configuration used in spacer-assisted filtration processes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".