ArticlePolymers2022
Compaction of a Polymeric Membrane in Ultra-Low-Pressure Water Filtration.
Article in Polymers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Applications of ultra-low-pressure filtration systems are increasing as they offer enhanced sustainability due to lower energy input, almost no use of chemicals, and minimum operational expenditure. In many cases, they operate as a decentralized system using a gravity-driven membrane (GDM) filtration process. These applications are relatively new; hence, the fundamental knowledge of the process is still limited. In this study, we investigated the phenomenon of polymeric membrane compaction under an ultra-low-pressure system. The compaction phenomenon is well-recognized in the traditional pressure-driven system operating at high transmembrane pressures (ΔPs > 200 kPa), but it is less documented in ultra-low-pressure systems (ΔP < 10 kPa). A simple GDM filtration setup operated under a constant-pressure system was employed to investigate the compaction phenomena in a polymeric hollow fiber membrane for clean water filtration. Firstly, a short-term pressure stepping test was performed to investigate the occurrence of instantaneous compaction in the ΔP range of 1−10 kPa. The slow compaction was later investigated. Finally, the compaction dynamic was assessed under alternating high and low ΔP and relaxation in between the filtrations. The findings demonstrated the prominence of membrane compaction, as shown by the decreasing trend in clean water permeability at higher ΔPs (i.e., 3240 and 2401 L m−2 h−1 bar−1 at ΔPs of 1 and 10 kPa, respectively). We also found that the intrinsic permeability of the applied polymeric membrane was significantly higher than the apparent one (4351 vs. 2401 L m−2 h−1 bar−1), demonstrating >50% loss due to compaction. The compaction was mainly instantaneous, which occurred when the ΔP was changed, whereas only minor changes in permeability occurred over time when operating at a constant ΔP. The compaction was highly reversible and could be restored (i.e., decompaction) through relaxation by temporarily stopping the filtration. A small fraction of irreversible compaction could be detected by operating alternating filtrations under ΔPs of 1 and 10 kPa. The overall findings are essential to support emerging GDM filtration applications, in which membrane compaction has been ignored and confounded with membrane fouling. The role of compaction is more prominent for high-flux GDM filtration systems treating less-fouling-prone feed (i.e., rainwater, river water) and involving membrane cleaning (i.e., relaxation) in which both reversible and irreversible compaction occurred simultaneously.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.