Removal of methylene blue from aqueous solutions by poly(acrylic acid) and poly(ammonium acrylate) assisted ultrafiltration

Reactive red 120 retention through ultrafiltration enhanced by synthetic and natural polyelectrolytes

“…Herein, the polyelectrolyte-dye complexes were suitably prepared by adding 3.42 × 10 −6 M polyelectrolyte solution in varying volumetric proportions (0-5 mL corresponding to ratio 0-5) to aqueous 6.84 × 10 −7 M (1 mg/L) RR 120 solutions, wherein the volume of the dye solution was 5 mL. Thereafter, the total volume of each polyelectrolyte-dye complex solution was made up to 10 mL [1,30]. The polyelectrolyte to dye ratio in this case was reckoned on a molar basis (moles of polyelectrolyte/moles of RR 120) [30].…”

“…Meticulous retrospection of archival literature however manifests the parochial availability of studies dealing with the application of PEUF for bringing about effective retention of dyes from colour-contaminated effluent streams. Moreover, these scientific investigations mostly cater to the removal of cationic dyes such as methylene blue, crystal violet, and malachite green by way of PEUF technology [1,[30][31][32]. The potential use of PEUF for enabling the retention of reactive anionic dyes nonetheless has seldom been explored [13].…”

Response surface-optimized removal of Reactive Red 120 dye from its aqueous solutions using polyethyleneimine enhanced ultrafiltration

“…As such, the inclusion of temperature as a process factor would have involved unnecessarily large number of experimental trials involving five process parameters, in the central composite design (CCD) prescribed by RSM. Also the selection of the process variables, namely, pH, polymer to dye ratio, transmembrane pressure and cross-flow rate, for experimental analyses was based on the fact that these factors were considered as the principal process parameters in similar PEUF based investigations documented in archival literature (Fradj et al, 2014;Ouni and Dhahbi, 2010). Hence, temperature was not included as a process factor in the present study and the experiments were carried out at the unperturbed room temperature of 35°C (Chakraborty et al, 2014).…”

“…This trade-off between operation cost and dye retention efficiency can be substantially resolved by employing a hybrid process involving complexation and ultrafiltration, wherein the target contaminants are bound by water-soluble polymers or polymeric macroligands to form macromolecular complexes, which can be effectively retained by the subsequent ultrafiltration process. This process has been termed as polymer enhanced ultrafiltration (PEUF) and its applicability in removing contaminants such as heavy metal ions from industrial wastewaters has been explicitly reconnoitered in the recent scientific investigations (Chakraborty et al, 2014;Shao et al, 2013;Zamariotto et al, 2010), although studies on the usage of PEUF in dye contaminated wastewater remediation is still relatively limited, as revealed in the appraisal of archival literature (Fradj et al, 2014;Mondal et al, 2012;Ouni and Dhahbi, 2010). A meticulous survey of the PEUF based scientific investigations available in archival literature has, moreover, revealed the fact that most of these have employed classical methods to appraise the effects of various process parameters, such as pH, polyelectrolyte concentration, and transmembrane pressure, on the retention of the target solutes from their respective aqueous solutions (Fradj et al, 2014;Ouni and Dhahbi, 2010).…”

“…This process has been termed as polymer enhanced ultrafiltration (PEUF) and its applicability in removing contaminants such as heavy metal ions from industrial wastewaters has been explicitly reconnoitered in the recent scientific investigations (Chakraborty et al, 2014;Shao et al, 2013;Zamariotto et al, 2010), although studies on the usage of PEUF in dye contaminated wastewater remediation is still relatively limited, as revealed in the appraisal of archival literature (Fradj et al, 2014;Mondal et al, 2012;Ouni and Dhahbi, 2010). A meticulous survey of the PEUF based scientific investigations available in archival literature has, moreover, revealed the fact that most of these have employed classical methods to appraise the effects of various process parameters, such as pH, polyelectrolyte concentration, and transmembrane pressure, on the retention of the target solutes from their respective aqueous solutions (Fradj et al, 2014;Ouni and Dhahbi, 2010). The application of a flexibile statistical tool, such as response surface methodology (RSM) in such cases, reduces the time expended on the required analyses by resorting to the formulation of a robust design matrix, that is engineered to yield precisely configured experimental trials within the dictated ranges of variables.…”