4.6 Article

Insight into the transport mechanism of solute removed in dialysis by a membrane with double functionality

期刊

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING RESEARCH & DESIGN
卷 126, 期 -, 页码 97-108

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cherd.2017.08.017

关键词

Hemodialysis; Mathematical model; Double-layer membrane; Blood toxins removal

资金

  1. Marie Sklodowska-Curie foundation (Project BIOART: grant) [316690]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study aims at shedding light on the transport mechanisms involved in a functionalized membrane designed for improving hemodialysis. This membrane is prepared by embedding absorptive micro particles within its porous structure. To understand the transport mechanism through the membrane and make suggestions for its optimization, a mathematical model coupling convection, diffusion and adsorption is developed and validated by comparison of experimental and theoretical results. In fact, the model provides a description of the concentration profile from the donor (feed) compartment across the several layers with different properties to the acceptor (dialysate) compartment. In addition, the model allows to predict the influence of various parameters such as molecule diffusivity, membrane thickness, presence of convection, content of adsorptive particles on the flux intensification across the membrane. Comparison with experimental measurements demonstrates that the model is able to describe the transmembrane mass flux variation over time as a function of hydrodynamic conditions and membrane/module geometric parameters. The model also illustrates how the proposed double-layer membrane concept offers significant benefits in terms of toxin removal in comparison to conventional dialysis. As so, the main achievement of the developed model is that it may serve as tool for the further improvement of functionalized membrane in terms of toxin removal and optimization of process conditions. (C) 2017 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据