ArticleMembranes2023
Modelling and Comparative Analysis of Different Methods of Liquid Membrane Separations.
Article in Membranes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictive modeling of pH on the transport of Co(II) Ions from aqueous solutions through supported ceramic polymer membrane.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Emulsion Liquid Membranes Based on Os-NP/n-Decanol or n-Dodecanol Nanodispersions for p-Nitrophenol Reduction.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Treatment of Stainless Steel Rinse Waters Using Non-Dispersive Extraction and Strip Dispersion Membrane Technology.Membranes · 2023Article
- The Latest Achievements of Liquid Membranes for Rare Earth Elements Recovery from Aqueous Solutions-A Mini Review.Membranes · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article is devoted to a brief review of the modelling of liquid membrane separation methods, such as emulsion, supported liquid membranes, film pertraction, and three-phase and multi-phase extraction. Mathematical models and comparative analyses of liquid membrane separations with different flow modes of contacting liquid phases are presented. A comparison of the processes of conventional and liquid membrane separations is carried out under the following assumptions: mass transfer is described by the traditional mass transfer equation; the equilibrium distribution coefficients of a component passing from one of the phases to another are constant. It is shown that, from the point of view of mass transfer driving forces, emulsion and film pertraction liquid membrane methods have advantages over the conventional conjugated extraction stripping method, when the mass-transfer efficiency of the extraction stage is significantly higher than the efficiency of the stripping stage. The comparison of the supported liquid membrane with conjugated extraction stripping showed that when mass-transfer rates on the extraction and stripping sides are different, the liquid membrane method is more efficient, while when they are equal to each other, both processes demonstrate the same results. The advantages and disadvantages of liquid membrane methods are discussed. The main disadvantages of liquid membrane methods-low throughput and complexity-can be overcome by using modified solvent extraction equipment to carry out liquid membrane separations.
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.