Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T14:02:04.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The interaction between stirring and osmosis. Part 2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2006

T. J. Pedley
Affiliation:
Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge

Abstract

A semipermeable membrane forms part of a plane boundary which separates pure solvent from a solution of concentration Cb. Stirring motions in the solution cause it to flow parallel to the plane with uniform wall shear rate α. The velocity of osmotic solvent flow across the membrane into the solution at any point is PΔC, where P is the osmotic permeability of the membrane and ΔC is the local concentration difference across it. ΔC is reduced below Cb by a position-dependent factor γ because of the concentration boundary layer over the membrane, which is thicker than in the absence of osmosis as a result of advection by the osmotic flow itself. The concentration boundary layer is analysed, on the assumption that it is two-dimensional, for both small and large values of the dimensionless longitudinal co-ordinate \[ \xi = PC_b (9x/\alpha D^2)^{\frac{1}{3}}, \] where x is the dimensional co-ordinate and D is the solute diffusivity. These expansions are used to compute γι, the average value of the flux-reduction factor γ over the whole membrane, as a function of β′, which is the value of ξ at the downstream end of the layer, x = l. It is shown that the standard physiological model, in which the layer has a given thickness δ and the stirring motions are not explicitly considered, gives accurate results for γl as a function of β = PCb δ/D as long as δ is given by \[ \delta = 1.22(Dl/\alpha)^{\frac{1}{3}}, \] so that β is proportional to β′.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 1981 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abramowitz, M. & Stegun, I. A. 1964 Handbook of Mathematical Functions. Washington: National Bureau of Standards.
Domb, C. & Sykes, M. F. 1957 On the susceptibility of a ferromagnetic above the Curie point. Proc. Roy. Soc. A 240, 214228.Google Scholar
Everitt, C. T., Redwood, W. R. & Haydon, D. A. 1969 Problem of boundary layers in the exchange diffusion of water across bimolecular lipid membranes. J. Theor. Biol. 22, 2032.Google Scholar
Gill, W. N., Tien, C. & Zeh, D. W. 1966 Analysis of continuous reverse osmosis systems for desalination. Int. J. Heat Mass Transfer 9, 907923.Google Scholar
Hendricks, T. J. & Williams, F. A. 1971 Diffusion-layer structure in reverse osmosis channel flow. Desalination 9, 155180.Google Scholar
House, C. E. 1974 Water Transport in Cells and Tissues. London: Edward Arnold.
Lévěque, M. A. 1928 Transmission de chaleur par convection. Ann. des Mines 13, 201362.Google Scholar
Pedley, T. J. 1980 The interaction between stirring and osmosis. Part 1. J. Fluid Mech. 101, 843861.Google Scholar
Schafer, J. A., Patlak, C. S. & Andreoli, T. E. 1974 Osmosis in cortical collecting tubules. J. Gen. Physiol. 64, 201227.Google Scholar
Smith, F. T. 1976 Flow through constricted or dilated pipes and channels. I. Quart. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 29, 343364.Google Scholar
Van Dyke, M. 1975 Perturbation Methods in Fluid Mechanics, 2nd edn. Parabolic.