4.8 Article

Controlling Ultrafiltration Membrane Rejection via Shear-Aligned Deposition of Cellulose Nanocrystals from Aqueous Suspensions

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 13, Issue 30, Pages 36548-36557

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.1c09815

Keywords

cellulose nanocrystals; ultrafiltration; tangential flow filtration; shear alignment; limiting flux

Funding

  1. Scientific and Technological Council of Turkey (TUBITAK) [119M828]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study demonstrated that CNCs aligned in the direction of flow under high shear rate, forming a nematic order which improved the rejection properties of ultrafiltration membranes. By controlling the shear rate, the order parameter of CNCs could be adjusted, affecting the membrane's rejection performance towards different molecules.
Cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) of 180 nm length and 8 nm diameter were deposited on porous supports by tangential flow filtration followed by salt permeation to form ultrafiltration membranes. At a high enough shear rate on the support surface, CNCs aligned in the direction of flow, showing a nematic order. The shear rates for transition to the nematic phase determined from rheology analysis, polarized optical microscopy, and membrane performance were consistent with one another, at ca. 10 s(-1). Permeating an AlCl3 solution through the shear-aligned CNC deposit stabilized the CNC layer by screening repulsive electrostatic interactions, and the stable CNC layer was obtained. On changing the surface shear rate from 10 to 50 s(-1), the order parameter of CNCs increased from 0.17 to 0.7 and the rejection for Blue Dextran (5 kDa) increased from 80.4 to 92.7% and that for beta-lactoglobulin (18 kDa) increased from 89.6 to 95.4%. Hence, a simple and scalable method for controlling rejection properties of ultrafiltration membranes is developed, which uses aqueous CNC suspensions to form the selective layer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available