Quantum J. Wei
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Research Subjects
Quantum J. Wei has a total of 6 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- John H. Lienhard
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
2 shared publications - Danyal Rehman
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States
1 shared publication - Endre Nagy
University of Pannonia
1 shared publication - Imre Hegedüs
Department of Biophysics and Radiation Biology, Semmelweis University, 1094 Budapest, Hungary, Hungary
1 shared publication - Ronan K. McGovern
Rohsenow Kendall Heat Transfer Laboratory, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
1 shared publication - Yvana D. Ahdab
Rohsenow Kendall Heat Transfer Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139-4307, USA
1 shared publication
Latest Publications
- Open Access
The Need for Accurate Osmotic Pressure and Mass Transfer Resistances in Modeling Osmotically Driven Membrane Processes
The widely used van ’t Hoff linear relation for predicting the osmotic pressure of NaCl solutions may result in errors in the evaluation of key system parameters, which depend on osmotic pressure, in pressure-retarded osmosis and forward osmosis. In this paper, the linear van ’t Hoff approach is compared to the solutions using OLI Stream Analyzer, which gives the real osmotic pressure values. Various dilutions of NaCl solutions, including the lower solute concentrations typical of river water, are considered. Our results indicate that the disparity in the predicted osmotic pressure of the two considered methods can reach 30%, depending on the solute concentration, while that in the predicted power density can exceed over 50%. New experimental results are obtained for NanoH2O and Porifera membranes, and theoretical equations are also developed. Results show that discrepancies arise when using the van ’t Hoff equation, compared to the OLI method. At higher NaCl concentrations (C > 1.5 M), the deviation between the linear approach and the real values increases gradually, likely indicative of a larger error in van ’t Hoff predictions. The difference in structural parameter values predicted by the two evaluation methods is also significant; it can exceed the typical 50–70% range, depending on the operating conditions. We find that the external mass transfer coefficients should be considered in the evaluation of the structural parameter in order to avoid overestimating its value. Consequently, measured water flux and predicted structural parameter values from our own and literature measurements are recalculated with the OLI software to account for external mass transfer coefficients.
Open AccessThe Need for Accurate Osmotic Pressure and Mass Transfer Resistances in Modeling Osmotically Driven Membrane Processes
The widely used van ’t Hoff linear relation for predicting the osmotic pressure of NaCl solutions may result in errors in the evaluation of key system parameters, which depend on osmotic pressure, in pressure-retarded osmosis and forward osmosis. In this paper, the linear van ’t Hoff approach is compared to the solutions using OLI Stream Analyzer, which gives the real osmotic pressure values. Various dilutions of NaCl solutions, including the lower solute concentrations typical of river water, are considered. Our results indicate that the disparity in the predicted osmotic pressure of the two considered methods can reach 30%, depending on the solute concentration, while that in the predicted power density can exceed over 50%. New experimental results are obtained for NanoH2O and Porifera membranes, and theoretical equations are also developed. Results show that discrepancies arise when using the van ’t Hoff equation, compared to the OLI method. At higher NaCl concentrations (C > 1.5 M), the deviation between the linear approach and the real values increases gradually, likely indicative of a larger error in van ’t Hoff predictions. The difference in structural parameter values predicted by the two evaluation methods is also significant; it can exceed the typical 50–70% range, depending on the operating conditions. We find that the external mass transfer coefficients should be considered in the evaluation of the structural parameter in order to avoid overestimating its value. Consequently, measured water flux and predicted structural parameter values from our own and literature measurements are recalculated with the OLI software to account for external mass transfer coefficients.
- Open Access
- 5 June 2017
- Published by Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology
- Vol. 3 (4) , 659-670
Saving energy with an optimized two-stage reverse osmosis system
We optimize the design and operation of two-stage reverse osmosis desalination systems and identify the operating conditions that will maximize energy savings.
- 5 June 2017
- Published by Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) in Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology
- Vol. 3 (4) , 659-670
Open AccessSaving energy with an optimized two-stage reverse osmosis system
We optimize the design and operation of two-stage reverse osmosis desalination systems and identify the operating conditions that will maximize energy savings.