Relating osmotic performance of thin film composite hollow fiber membranes to support layer surface pore size

Ren, Jian; Chowdhury, Maqsud R.; Qi, Jie; Xia, Lingling; Huey, Bryan D.; McCutcheon, Jeffrey R.

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2017.06.024

Cited by 49 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A similar effect was observed by Ren et al [114] who found that the roughness of the selective layer depends on the support's pore size. Larger pores result in a rougher selective layer which results in a higher flux [114].…”

Section: Structural Parameter (S)supporting

confidence: 82%

“…They tested four different supports with a pore size range between 0.025 and 0.45 µm, and the support with the largest pores showed the lowest S parameter of 1400 ± 160 µm [197]. A similar effect was observed by Ren et al [114] who found that the roughness of the selective layer depends on the support's pore size. Larger pores result in a rougher selective layer which results in a higher flux [114].…”

Section: Structural Parameter (S)supporting

confidence: 64%

“…As a result, even IP on the same supports can result in different selective layer characteristics due to both slight differences in the support's surface properties and the high sensitivity of the IP process. In summary, the high sensitivity of IP to experimental conditions [144,145] and the support's surface properties [114,140,141] can lead to shortcomings such as delamination [146] and lower reproducibility. This is especially much more challenging when an IP is applied on the inner surface of hollow fibers.…”

Section: Thin-film Composites Membranes By Interfacial Polymerizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Secondly, several other parameters besides tortuosity, porosity, and thickness are known to influence ICP, i.e. the support pore diameter [114,197], pore morphology [136,[198][199][200], hydrophilicity [187,195,201], and charge [202].…”

Section: Structural Parameter (S)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Forward Osmosis: A Critical Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of forward osmosis (FO) for water purification purposes has gained extensive attention in recent years. In this review, we first discuss the advantages, challenges and various applications of FO, as well as the challenges in selecting the proper draw solution for FO, after which we focus on transport limitations in FO processes. Despite recent advances in membrane development for FO, there is still room for improvement of its selective layer and support. For many applications spiral wound membrane will not suffice. Furthermore, a defect-free selective layer is a prerequisite for FO membranes to ensure low solute passage, while a support with low internal concentration polarization is necessary for a high water flux. Due to challenges affiliated to interfacial polymerization (IP) on non-planar geometries, we discuss alternative approaches to IP to form the selective layer. We also explain that, when provided with a defect-free selective layer with good rejection, the membrane support has a dominant influence on the performance of an FO membrane, which can be estimated by the structural parameter (S). We emphasize the necessity of finding a new method to determine S, but also that predominantly the thickness of the support is the major parameter that needs to be optimized.

show abstract

Section: Structural Parameter (S)supporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Structural Parameter (S)supporting

confidence: 64%

Section: Thin-film Composites Membranes By Interfacial Polymerizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Structural Parameter (S)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Forward Osmosis: A Critical Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present study examines the effect of roughness in a hollow fiber where a thin PA film was synthesized separately on either the outer surface or the inner surface for nanofiltration applications (filtrating always from the PA side: in‐out in the inner TFC and out‐in in the outer TFC configuration). Generally, ultrafiltration substrates have been used to fabricate TFC membranes, but in the current work, a commercial microfiltration polysulfone support provided by the membrane manufacturer Polymem was used instead. Since the membrane was designed to separate from the outer surface, the manufacture states that the pore size there should be above 200 nm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nanofiltration thin‐film composite membrane on either the internal or the external surface of a polysulfone hollow fiber

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inner and outer surfaces of a porous hollow fiber polysulfone support are compared as substrates for the synthesis of polyamide thin-film composite (TFC) membranes by interfacial polymerization. While both surfaces have pores common of microfiltration membranes, the inner surface has a larger pore diameter than the outer surface (2,700 nm compared to 950 nm). The inner TFC membrane showed higher water nanofiltration permeance than the outer (2.20 ± 0.17 compared to 0.13 ± 0.03 L m −2 hr −1 bar −1 ). This was due to the influence of the porosity and roughness, which were different on both support surfaces. These membranes are interesting because they were synthesized in a hollow fiber support with a high membrane area per volume unit (~6,900 m 2 /m 3 ) and the substrate used was commercial, which means that the TFC membrane obtained is suitable for industrial application. A mathematical simulation of the nanofiltration run with COMSOL Multiphysics 5.3 software confirmed the experimental trends observed. K E Y W O R D S hollow fiber, interfacial polymerization, microfluidics, nanofiltration, thin-film composite

show abstract

Decorating a Loose Defect‐free Hybrid Selective Layer on a Smooth Intermediary: An Effective Way for Unexpected Performances of Nanofiber‐based Forward Osmosis Membranes

Han

et al. 2020

ChemNanoMat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A novel composite forward osmosis (FO) membrane was fabricated by introducing a chitosan (CS) sublayer between nanofibers and polyamide (PA) layer, which was beneficial to forming thin and defect‐free PA layer and improved binding strength between substrate and the selective layer. Results exhibited low reverse salt flux (0.73 gMH) while maintained high water flux (85.4 LMH), which were better than that in other reports. In order to further improve permeability of membranes, oxidized multiwall carbon nanotubes (OMWNTs) were added into PA layer based on the optimized sublayer. The crosslinking degree of PA layer was reduced, leading to loose PA layers, which promoted the increase of water flux. After modifying, water flux reached 96.9 LMH without sacrificing salt rejection. It was worth mentioning that PAN/CS composite FO membrane, which could adjust microstructure of support layer and selective layer respectively, may provide a promising way for preparing membranes with anticipated separation performance.

show abstract

Relating osmotic performance of thin film composite hollow fiber membranes to support layer surface pore size

Cited by 49 publications

References 66 publications

Forward Osmosis: A Critical Review

Forward Osmosis: A Critical Review

Nanofiltration thin‐film composite membrane on either the internal or the external surface of a polysulfone hollow fiber

Decorating a Loose Defect‐free Hybrid Selective Layer on a Smooth Intermediary: An Effective Way for Unexpected Performances of Nanofiber‐based Forward Osmosis Membranes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About