Clay nanoparticles effects on performance and morphology of poly(vinylidene fluoride) membranes

Morihama, A. C. D.; Mierzwa, José Carlos

doi:10.1590/s0104-66322014000100009

Cited by 31 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 82 publications

(40 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The dope solutions were prepared by dispersing the nanoclay (when applicable), in the NMP and then dissolving the polymer. The same procedure was previously described in the literature [30][31][32].…”

Section: Ii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The method used to determine membrane porosity was previously reported (wet/dry weight method) [30,31]. The wet weight was measured after removing the superficial water from membrane sample using two polyester/cellulose wipers and the dry weight was measured using a digital micrometer (Fowler Tools and Instruments; 1.27 to 25,400 µm) after drying the samples.…”

Section: Membrane Porosity and Thicknessmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clay Nanoparticles Composite Membranes Prepared with Three Different Polymers: Performance Evaluation

Rodrigues

Morihama

Barbosa

et al. 2018

J. Memb. Separ. Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the results obtained from the evaluation of clay nanoparticles as an additive for improving the characteristics and performance of composite membranes cast with polysulfone (PS), polyethersulfone (PES), and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF). Different concentrations of clay nanoparticles, ranging from 1 to 10% based on the polymer mass, were used to prepare all dope solutions. The addition of clay nanoparticles changed the internal pore morphology of membranes, which resulted in significant changes on their performance, regarding its water permeability, and fouling potential. The optimum nanoclay concentration for permeability enhancement was different for each polymer, 1.5%, 2.0%, and 6.0% for PS, PES, and PVDF, respectively. This difference can be attributed to the differences of polymer's hydrophobicity, based on the contact angle of a sessile water drop, which is higher for PVDF (PVDF is more hydrophobic than PS and PES). The flow improvement changed based on the main polymer. Significant changes in internal pore structure were observed for all membranes. The proportion of macrovoids was decreased and pores had a better connectivity across the cross section for PES and PS membranes. For PVDF membranes, the addition of nanoclay had a different effect on their microstructure. In this case, internal pores were 20% wider, factor that increased the average membrane porosity. The simultaneous evaluation of the clay nanoparticles used as an additive have clearly demonstrated its potential application for composite membrane production. It is also worth to note that the best way for identifying and evaluating the potential for an additive for membrane casting is considering its effects for different polymers, under the same casting conditions.

show abstract

Section: Ii)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Membrane Porosity and Thicknessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clay Nanoparticles Composite Membranes Prepared with Three Different Polymers: Performance Evaluation

Rodrigues

Morihama

Barbosa

et al. 2018

J. Memb. Separ. Tech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A number of other investigations have also been done to modify the PVDF, PPSU, PSf and PES membranes for effective removal and antifouling performance using NOM. Literature reported that bentonite nanoclay was used as modifiers in membrane fabrication [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Bentonite clay has smectite group with an arrangement of aluminium-phyllosilicate with tetrahedral silica and octahedral alumina layers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Membrane modifier like nanoclay (bentonite) has been proved to increase pore size, hydrophilic, antifouling property in polymeric membranes, which has also increased the water permeate flux through the membranes [12]. Naturally available nanoclay is therefore a potential modifier for the polymer for water purification, which provides strong hydrophilicity, good chemical and mechanical strengths with low cost.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Preparation of nanoclay embedded polymeric membranes for the filtration of natural organic matter (NOM) in a circular crossflow filtration system

Seshasayee

Arthanareeswaran

et al. 2020

Journal of Water Process Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In-house and commercial membranes were used with different properties for humic acid separation in a circular crossflow filtration system to determine the membranes' performances. The in-house membranes were fabricated with the addition of bentonite nanoclay in Mendall, polyvinylidenefluoride (PVDF), polyphenylsulfone (PPSU), polysulfone (PSF) and polyether sulfone (PES) polymers. Bentonite nanoclay is recognized as a promising material for membrane applications due to its ability to produce membranes with superior properties such as the mechanical strength, large surface areas, adsorbing, antifouling and well-defined pore morphology. Three types of commercial membranes were also used for humic acid removal from water. The morphology, surface roughness, porosity and average pore size of the in-house and commercial membranes were then compared. The XM50 commercial membranes showed smooth and even surface topography as compared to other commercial and in-house membranes. The addition of bentonite into the polymer changed the morphological structure, surface roughness, pore size of the polymeric membranes. Pure water flux, permeate flux and rejection of humic acid were compared for in-house polymeric membranes and commercial membranes in a circular crossflow filtration system. It was observed that the fouling of humic acid was reduced by the addition of bentonite nanoclay in the in-house polymeric membranes.

show abstract

“…The superficial structure, in different magnifications in micrometric scale, do not show the pore structure as it can be seen on other research paper (MIERZWA et al, 2013;MORIHAMA;MIERZWA, 2014). Therefore, the image refinement for pore distribution was not possible to be completed and compared to the membrane calculated porosity.…”

Section: Porosity Thickness and Morphologymentioning

confidence: 82%

Synthesis and characterization of polysulfone/nanoclay/polyethylene oxide composite ultrafiltration membranes.

Rodrigues¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Catalogação-na-publicaçãoRodrigues, Raphael Synthesis and characterization of polysulfone/nanoclay/polyethylene oxide composite ultrafiltration membranes / R. Rodrigues --versão corr. --São Paulo, 2016. 165 p. Palavras-chave: membranas de polisulfona, modificação de estrutura, nano-argila, PEO ABSTRACTMembrane structure modification is a common approach to enhance membrane properties and performance. For example, the addition of dopants to the membrane casting solution has been observed to increase hydrophilicity, alter surface and internal pore structure, increase thermal and mechanical resistance, and impart anti-fouling properties. In this study, it was evaluated how the addition of individual and simultaneous nanoclay and polyethylene oxide (PEO) dopants affected the structure and performance of polysulfone (PSU) ultrafiltration membranes. Membrane performance was evaluated in the cross-flow configuration. The pure water permeability of the neat PSU membrane was 15 L/m².h.bar and at the optimal dosage of the individually doped membranes was 1.5% weight nanoclay to PSU and 5% weight PEO to PSU resulting in permeability of 56 and 237 L/m².h.bar, respectively.Simultaneous doping using the optimal individual weight percentages had a lower effect resulting in a permeability of 192 L/m².h.bar, in contrast the simultaneous addition of 4.5% nanoclay and 5% PEO had a higher effect resulting in a permeability of 319 L/m².h.bar. The control membrane was compared to the referred membranes and with the 4.5% nanoclay membrane (best permeability only when combined with PEO). These membranes were further examined to determine dopant effects on pore microstructure, superficial charge, separation performance, and fouling susceptibility.In general, doping with nanoclay improved membrane thermal/mechanical resistance and permeability with minimal loss in rejection. Doping with PEO resulted in a greater permeability as compared to nanoclay; however, PEO doping decreased rejection, mechanical resistance, and increased irreversible fouling. Thus, both advantageous and disadvantageous effects should be considered when selecting a dopant to optimize membrane performance.

show abstract

Clay nanoparticles effects on performance and morphology of poly(vinylidene fluoride) membranes

Cited by 31 publications

References 82 publications

Clay Nanoparticles Composite Membranes Prepared with Three Different Polymers: Performance Evaluation

Clay Nanoparticles Composite Membranes Prepared with Three Different Polymers: Performance Evaluation

Preparation of nanoclay embedded polymeric membranes for the filtration of natural organic matter (NOM) in a circular crossflow filtration system

Synthesis and characterization of polysulfone/nanoclay/polyethylene oxide composite ultrafiltration membranes.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About