Ingredient-wise study of flux characteristics in the ceramic membrane filtration of uncontaminated synthetic metalworking fluids, part 2: Analysis of underlying mechanisms

Steven J. Skerlos, N. Rajagopalan, Richard E. DeVor, Shiv G. Kapoor, V. Don Angspatt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Part 2 of this paper reveals the predominant mechanism of flux decline during microfiltration of the synthetic MWF described in Part 1 of this paper. An analysis of flux data obtained during the experimental investigation suggests that adsorptive interactions occur at the membrane surface. Field Emission Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-ESEM) images of aluminum oxide membranes after MWF microfiltration illustrate that adsorption leads to a reduction in pore diameter that serves to reduce flux. The majority of the adsorption is accounted for by a single lubricant additive in the MWF formulation. FE-ESEM images also reveal that the mechanism of flux decline for the defoamer varies depending on the presence of lubricant additive in solution. In the absence of lubricant additive, the defoamer forms a cake layer at the membrane surface. In the presence of the lubricant additive, the defoamer adsorbs to the surface of the membrane with the lubricant additive to constrict pores. In contrast to the lubricant additive and defoamer, base fluid flux decline observed after specialty additive exposure cannot be accounted for by adsorption leading to pore constriction.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)746-752
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME
Volume122
Issue number4
StatePublished - Nov 2000

Fingerprint

Lubricants
Fluxes
Membranes
Adsorption
Microfiltration
Field emission
Scanning electron microscopy
Fluids
Ceramic membranes
Aluminum
Oxides

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
  • Mechanical Engineering

Cite this

@article{709cb01e2b18466485af8dc620363552,
title = "Ingredient-wise study of flux characteristics in the ceramic membrane filtration of uncontaminated synthetic metalworking fluids, part 2: Analysis of underlying mechanisms",
abstract = "Part 2 of this paper reveals the predominant mechanism of flux decline during microfiltration of the synthetic MWF described in Part 1 of this paper. An analysis of flux data obtained during the experimental investigation suggests that adsorptive interactions occur at the membrane surface. Field Emission Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-ESEM) images of aluminum oxide membranes after MWF microfiltration illustrate that adsorption leads to a reduction in pore diameter that serves to reduce flux. The majority of the adsorption is accounted for by a single lubricant additive in the MWF formulation. FE-ESEM images also reveal that the mechanism of flux decline for the defoamer varies depending on the presence of lubricant additive in solution. In the absence of lubricant additive, the defoamer forms a cake layer at the membrane surface. In the presence of the lubricant additive, the defoamer adsorbs to the surface of the membrane with the lubricant additive to constrict pores. In contrast to the lubricant additive and defoamer, base fluid flux decline observed after specialty additive exposure cannot be accounted for by adsorption leading to pore constriction.",
author = "Skerlos, {Steven J.} and N. Rajagopalan and DeVor, {Richard E.} and Kapoor, {Shiv G.} and Angspatt, {V. Don}",
year = "2000",
month = "11",
volume = "122",
pages = "746--752",
journal = "Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME",
issn = "1087-1357",
publisher = "American Society of Mechanical Engineers(ASME)",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Ingredient-wise study of flux characteristics in the ceramic membrane filtration of uncontaminated synthetic metalworking fluids, part 2

T2 - Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME

AU - Skerlos,Steven J.

AU - Rajagopalan,N.

AU - DeVor,Richard E.

AU - Kapoor,Shiv G.

AU - Angspatt,V. Don

PY - 2000/11

Y1 - 2000/11

N2 - Part 2 of this paper reveals the predominant mechanism of flux decline during microfiltration of the synthetic MWF described in Part 1 of this paper. An analysis of flux data obtained during the experimental investigation suggests that adsorptive interactions occur at the membrane surface. Field Emission Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-ESEM) images of aluminum oxide membranes after MWF microfiltration illustrate that adsorption leads to a reduction in pore diameter that serves to reduce flux. The majority of the adsorption is accounted for by a single lubricant additive in the MWF formulation. FE-ESEM images also reveal that the mechanism of flux decline for the defoamer varies depending on the presence of lubricant additive in solution. In the absence of lubricant additive, the defoamer forms a cake layer at the membrane surface. In the presence of the lubricant additive, the defoamer adsorbs to the surface of the membrane with the lubricant additive to constrict pores. In contrast to the lubricant additive and defoamer, base fluid flux decline observed after specialty additive exposure cannot be accounted for by adsorption leading to pore constriction.

AB - Part 2 of this paper reveals the predominant mechanism of flux decline during microfiltration of the synthetic MWF described in Part 1 of this paper. An analysis of flux data obtained during the experimental investigation suggests that adsorptive interactions occur at the membrane surface. Field Emission Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-ESEM) images of aluminum oxide membranes after MWF microfiltration illustrate that adsorption leads to a reduction in pore diameter that serves to reduce flux. The majority of the adsorption is accounted for by a single lubricant additive in the MWF formulation. FE-ESEM images also reveal that the mechanism of flux decline for the defoamer varies depending on the presence of lubricant additive in solution. In the absence of lubricant additive, the defoamer forms a cake layer at the membrane surface. In the presence of the lubricant additive, the defoamer adsorbs to the surface of the membrane with the lubricant additive to constrict pores. In contrast to the lubricant additive and defoamer, base fluid flux decline observed after specialty additive exposure cannot be accounted for by adsorption leading to pore constriction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=3242890031&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=3242890031&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 122

SP - 746

EP - 752

JO - Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME

JF - Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, Transactions of the ASME

SN - 1087-1357

IS - 4

ER -