Membrane characterization via evapoporometry (EP) and liquid-liquid displacement porosimetry (LLDP) techniques

Tanis-Kanbur, Melike Begüm; Peinador, René Israel; Hu, Xiao; Calvo, José Ignacio Madalena; Chew, Jia Wei

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2019.05.077

Cited by 21 publications

(29 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The intrusion/extrusion technique for pore size characterization on membrane media operates in similar way as the well-known mercury porometry (HgP) technique and, consequently, it is also among the characterization methods that are also based on the Young-Laplace equation [15][16][17][18][19]. The HgP technique relies on the fact that, in this case, it is mercury (i.e., a non-wetting liquid) that is forced to enter the pores measuring the intruded volume (more specifically, the differential increment of specific volume) versus applied pressure.…”

Section: Liquid Intrusion/extrusion Porometry (Liep) Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Capillary Flow Porometry (CFP) and Liquid Extrusion Porometry (LEP) Techniques for the Characterization of Porous and Face Mask Membranes

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work aims to study the characterization of several membrane filters by using capillary flow porometry (CFP) and liquid extrusion porometry (LEP) to obtain their pore size distributions (PSD) and mean pore diameters (davg). Three polymeric membranes of different materials namely, polyethylene (PET), cellulose nitrate (CN), and FM (face mask), and one inorganic (namely, alumina Al2O3) from ultrafiltration (UF)/microfiltration (MF) and particle separation were analyzed using a pressure constant fluid/liquid extrusion porometer, developed at institute de la filtration et techniques séparatives (IFTS). Several porosimetric fluids have been used to wet and penetrate into the porous/fiber structure. The results show the accuracy of the setup on characterizing membranes in the UF/MF range by CFP, with reasonable agreement with nominal data of the filters. Additionally, LEP extension of the equipment obtained good agreement with nominal data and the CFP results, while filters presenting a microstructure of highly interconnected pores (face mask) resulted in clear differences in terms of resulting PSD and average sizes when CFP and LEP results are compared.

show abstract

Section: Liquid Intrusion/extrusion Porometry (Liep) Principlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Capillary Flow Porometry (CFP) and Liquid Extrusion Porometry (LEP) Techniques for the Characterization of Porous and Face Mask Membranes

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, they have different levelized cost values so that their levelized costs are compared to one another at different _ Q DC , independently from the A m , in Figure 9B. As expected from the nature of the exergy cost matrix in Equation (34), the _ C p has the highest levelized product cost values since it consists of both DC cooling and DCMD operation. The _ C dc follows the _ C p , and the difference between them decreases by rising of the _ Q DC .…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…However, the membrane characteristics are determined via experimental measurements that may result in additional uncertainties. 34 More details about these methods can be found in Reference 33. Compared to the foregoing alternatives, the use of mass flow rates is an easier way to calculate the mass flux rate especially for the experimental setups.…”

Section: Thermodynamic Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are also different ways to calculate the mass flux rate in the DCMD module such as (a) multiplying the membrane permeability with the vapor pressure difference between the feed and permeate sides of the membrane surface and (b) using the non‐equilibrium thermodynamic fundamentals (eg, vapor free path) and membrane characteristics (eg, porosity, average pore size diameter, average membrane temperature, membrane thickness). However, the membrane characteristics are determined via experimental measurements that may result in additional uncertainties 34 . More details about these methods can be found in Reference 33.…”

Section: Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Multi‐criteria thermoeconomic and thermodynamic assessments of the desalination‐integrated two‐phase liquid‐immersion data center cooling system

Kanbur

Duan

2020

Int J Energy Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The waste heat management of the data center cooling systems has a significant share in the energy-efficient operations of the data centers. In this study, a new hybrid desalination-data center cooling system is proposed to reduce the cost drawback of the waste heat in the data center cooling operations. A two-phase liquid-immersion cooling unit is selected as the data center cooling method with the cooling load range of 0.7 to 1.5 kW. It is a promising solution thanks to the high heat flux removal performance but there is still a lack of research about waste heat management. The waste heat of the immersion cooling system is used to heat up the feed side of the desalination module. A direct contact membrane distillation system as preferred as the desalination module with the membrane area range of 5 to 75 cm 2. The proposed hybrid system is investigated according to the thermodynamic, economic, and thermoeconomic aspects. The thermoeconomic assessment is done concerning the unique exergy-cost matrix of the original design. The maximum thermal and exergy efficiencies are found as 64.5% and 53.7%, respectively. The daily distilled water rate can reach 6.13 kg at the highest cooling load and membrane area. Compared to the stand-alone data center cooling operation, the hybrid system has higher capital and operation costs. The payback period is found 3.72 years that means the proposed system is economically feasible for real applications. Also, the levelized product cost of the hybrid design is calculated in the range of 2.69 to 5.33 SGD/h. In the multiobjective optimization study, the best trade-off point is decided at the cooling load of 1.1 kW whilst the membrane area varies between 5.12 and 5.19 cm 2 .

show abstract

“…The major advantage of LLDP over GLDP is the lower surface tension of the interface liquid-liquid membrane as compared with the air-liquid membrane one, which makes LLDP suitable to analyze membranes having pores smaller than the usual MF range. In fact, LLDP is one of the most accurate available methods to determine PSD for membranes aimed for ultrafiltration (UF), or even nanofiltration (NF) [24][25][26][27][28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Non-Destructive Characterization of Industrial Membrane Cartridges by Using Liquid–Liquid Displacement Porosimetry (LLDP)

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This works aims to propose and demonstrate the accuracy of a novel method of characterization aimed for non-destructive analysis of microfiltration (MF) membrane cartridges. The method adapts conventional liquid–liquid displacement porosimetry (LLDP) for performing an in-line porosimetric analysis of the membrane cartridges, getting their pore size distributions (PSDs) and mean pore diameters (davg). Six commercial filtration cartridges featuring polyethersulfone (PES) pleated membranes were analyzed using a newly designed filtration rig, based on the liquid–liquid displacement porometer, developed at the Institut de la Filtration et des Techniques Séparatives (IFTS) and operated at constant flow. The experimental rig allows the direct and non-destructive characterization of the cartridge in its original presentation. Results have been compared with those obtained by using gas–liquid displacement porosimetry (GLDP) on small membrane coupons detached from such cartridges. The comparison allows us to conclude that the proposed method gives enough accuracy in the determination of porosimetric characteristics of the filters. This method can be used as a precise characterization technique for a non-destructive in-line study of filter performance and can be envisaged as useful to periodic quality or fouling control of the commercial cartridges.

show abstract

Membrane characterization via evapoporometry (EP) and liquid-liquid displacement porosimetry (LLDP) techniques

Cited by 21 publications

References 50 publications

Comparison of Capillary Flow Porometry (CFP) and Liquid Extrusion Porometry (LEP) Techniques for the Characterization of Porous and Face Mask Membranes

Comparison of Capillary Flow Porometry (CFP) and Liquid Extrusion Porometry (LEP) Techniques for the Characterization of Porous and Face Mask Membranes

Multi‐criteria thermoeconomic and thermodynamic assessments of the desalination‐integrated two‐phase liquid‐immersion data center cooling system

Non-Destructive Characterization of Industrial Membrane Cartridges by Using Liquid–Liquid Displacement Porosimetry (LLDP)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About