In any membrane filtration, the prediction of permeate flux is critical to calculate the membrane surface required, which is an essential parameter for scaling-up, equipment sizing, and cost determination. For this reason, several models based on phenomenological or theoretical derivation (such as gel-polarization, osmotic pressure, resistance-in-series, and fouling models) and non-phenomenological models have been developed and widely used to describe the limiting phenomena as well as to predict the permeate flux. In general, the development of models or their modifications is done for a particular synthetic model solution and membrane system that shows a good capacity of prediction. However, in more complex matrices, such as fruit juices, those models might not have the same performance. In this context, the present work shows a review of different phenomenological and non-phenomenological models for permeate flux prediction in UF, and a comparison, between selected models, of the permeate flux predictive capacity. Selected models were tested with data from our previous work reported for three fruit juices (bergamot, kiwi, and pomegranate) processed in a cross-flow system for 10 h. The validation of each selected model's capacity of prediction was performed through a robust statistical examination, including a residual analysis. The results obtained, within the statistically validated models, showed that phenomenological models present a high variability of prediction (values of R-square in the range of 75.91–99.78%), Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) in the range of 3.14–51.69, and Root Mean Square Error (RMSE) in the range of 0.22–2.01 among the investigated juices. The non-phenomenological models showed a great capacity to predict permeate flux with R-squares higher than 97% and lower MAPE (0.25–2.03) and RMSE (3.74–28.91). Even though the estimated parameters have no physical meaning and do not shed light into the fundamental mechanistic principles that govern these processes, these results suggest that non-phenomenological models are a useful tool from a practical point of view to predict the permeate flux, under defined operating conditions, in membrane separation processes. However, the phenomenological models are still a proper tool for scaling-up and for an understanding the UF process.
The influence of membrane pore size on the permeate flux, fouling mechanism, and rejection of soluble and suspended solids, as well as of phenolics and anthocyanins, in the clarification of grape marc extract by microfiltration (MF) was studied. MF was operated by using three monotubular ceramic membranes with a pore size of 0.14, 0.2, and 0.8 µm, respectively, according to a batch concentration configuration in selected operating conditions (2.25 bar as operating pressure, 4.93 L/min as feed flow rate, and 25 °C as operating temperature). No significant differences in the permeate flux values were appreciated despite the difference in pore size. The mathematical analyses of the flux behavior revealed that intermediate pore blocking is the predominant mechanism for 0.14 and 0.2 µm membranes, whereas complete pore blocking prevails for the 0.8 µm membrane. Differences in the fouling mechanism were associated with differences in the total phenols rejection: the highest rejection was observed for the 0.8 µm membrane followed by 0.2 and 0.14 µm membranes. All selected membranes showed low rejection of sugars, with values lower than 10%, and no retention towards anthocyanins. All the clarified extracts showed a turbidity lower than 4.87 NTU. Based on the experimental results, the 0.14 µm membrane appeared as the best option for the clarification of grape marc extract.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.