MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406842798 · doi:10.3390/app15031312

Modified Solution–Diffusion Model Incorporating Rotational Kinetic Energy in Pressure Retarded Osmosis

2025· article· en· W4406842798 on OpenAlexafffund
Daniel Ruiz-Navas, Édgar Quiñones-Bolaños, Mostafa H. Sharqawy

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMembrane Separation Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKinetic energyPressure-retarded osmosisThermodynamicsMaterials scienceMechanicsForward osmosisChemistryMembraneReverse osmosisPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pressure-retarded osmosis (PRO) is a process that allows the production of mechanical energy from the chemical potential difference between two solutions of different concentrations separated by a semi-permeable membrane. One of the main obstacles for this technology to be commercially competitive is the difference between the theoretical power density and the experimental power density due to negative factors like ICP. Analytical models facilitate the analysis of the relationships between system parameters and thus facilitate the optimization of components. In general, PRO has traditionally been explained through the solution–diffusion model, where the flow of water through the membrane depends on a diffusivity factor, the concentration gradient, and the hydraulic pressure gradient. This paper focuses on developing a modified solution–diffusion model that includes means to control the ICP through rotational kinetic energy. An energy balance method for obtaining a solution diffusion-based model is explained, and an analytical model is obtained. Finally, said model is verified through simulations with parameters reported in the literature to obtain insight on the required dimensions for a prototype. It was found that a turning radius of 0.5 m and an angular speed of less than 3000 rev/min could generate enough kinetic energy to compensate for ICP losses in a PRO scenario. Also, the results suggest that bigger concentration differences could benefit more of this technology, as they require almost the same energy as smaller concentration differences but allow for more energy extraction.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied SciencesSame topicMembrane Separation TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207