Talk:Filtration
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Filtration vs. Filtering
This page discusses only chemical filtration. What about using other filters (optical, signal, software, etc?) Is it OK to use "filtration" for them too, or should one use "filtering" instead? Can we say "filtering" for chemical filtration?
Jorge Stolfi 00:46, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
-
- Filtration is the term that scientists and engineers use, but a better disambiguation note would do not harm. However, we are not talking here about chemical filtration, but rather filtration as a physical operation in chemistry in chemical engineering and in industry in general. LouisBB 18:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Filter efficiency and the word "further"
I removed the reference to "further" disadvantages, since no other disadvantages had been mentioned.
I also removed the comment about filter efficiency decreasing as solids are trapped. In fact that increases the filter's efficiency, defined as the percentage of solids removed, by decreasing the average size of a pore. The disadvantage is that as channels in the filter are plugged, the effective lumen is decreased and the resistance to flow goes up. CarlFink 11:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Flow
The section on Flow is odd. It only refers to liquids, and says things that aren't true (or at least I don't know of a cite for liquids "mostly" flowing via gravity. And by its topic it should really be "propulsion" or something. I was expecting a discussion of crossflow vs. direct flow filtration.
Speaking of which, why is the illustration at the top of the relatively obscure crossflow filtration? CarlFink 11:48, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Filtration is a wide subject
More expertise is required on the subject. A new section is required for Filtration equipment or Filters, and a serious re-write to improve its quality standard. There is no need for the restriction to liquid filtration. LouisBB 18:55, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
