Comparative Evaluation of Membrane Contactor and Stripping Device for Ammonia Separation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study compares two semi-operational devices for ammonia separation from high-ammonia wastewater: a membrane contactor and a stripping device.The membrane contactor utilizes a bundle of hollow-fibre membranes, facilitating the transfer of ammonia nitrogen from the outer shell into an acidic solution inside the fibres.In contrast, the stripping device operates across various temperatures, with ammonia removal assessed by absorption into an acidic solution.Both devices were tested using a model solution simulating high-ammonia liquid digestate from a biogas plant to determine their optimal operating conditions.The pilot experiments evaluated separation efficiency and highlighted each technology's unique advantages and limitations.Our results demonstrate that the membrane contactor achieved the highest efficiency using a KH₂PO₄ solution, long fibres, and elevated temperature, resulting in complete ammonia removal within 240 minutes without pH adjustment, with 50% efficiency at 60 minutes.Further measurements without any condition adjustments resulted in a final separation efficiency of 69 ± 6% after 300 minutes, with 50% efficiency achieved at 181 minutes.Subsequent experiments using a KHSO₄ absorption solution helped to investigate optimal conditions and process kinetics, but the separation efficiency was lower compared to using KH₂PO₄.When using KHSO₄, a maximum efficiency of 93 ± 3% was obtained in 90 minutes after adjusting the pH to around 12. However, while this pH increase enhanced ammonia desorption, the high base consumption makes it economically unfavourable.In comparison, the stripping device achieved its best results at a pH of 10.5, a temperature of 60°C, and an airflow rate of 120 l/min, reaching 85% efficiency within 50 minutes.At a lower pH of 9, the efficiency dropped to 64% over the same time period.These results highlight the stripping device's potential for faster ammonia removal, though efficiency is heavily dependent on pH and airflow conditions
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".