Pore Processing Continuation
In my previous post, there still appears to be a discrepency between the calculated pore statistcis and the experimental permeabilities. I explored what I could do with the pore processing to bring the experimental closer to the calculated permeabilities. I set the minimum pore cutoff higher (15nm) and tried to remove any pores that did not appear to be “real.”
Here is the scatter data for three membranes:
Here is a bar graph:
There’s still a little deviation, but this is looking closer. However, I do not have justification yet for raising the pore cutoff so high. In an EQ system, would we expect some of these smaller pores to be useless in passing water?