4.7 Article

MIL-125(Ti) based mixed matrix membranes for CO2 separation from CH4 and N2

Journal

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
Volume 502, Issue -, Pages 21-28

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2015.12.022

Keywords

MIL-125; CO2 separation; Mixed matrix membranes; MOFs; Matrimid((R))

Funding

  1. OT from KU Leuven [11/061]
  2. I.A.P - P.A.I. grant (Belgian Federal Government) [IAP 7/05]
  3. long term Methusalem funding ('CASAS') by the Flemish Government
  4. IOF-Research Fund of the KU Leuven [IOF-KP-10-005]
  5. Research Foundation Flanders (FWO)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mixed matrix membranes (MMMs) were developed by adding MIL-125(Ti) and the amine-functionalized counterpart as fillers to Matrimid((R)) polyimide. Through a well-optimized synthesis, strong performing MMMs with loadings up to 30 wt% could be prepared. SEM images of the synthesized MMMs confirmed the good adhesion to and dispersion of the fillers within the polymer matrix. Significantly improved CO2 mixed gas selectivities and permeabilities for (50:50) CO2:N-2 and CO2:CH4 gas mixtures at 9 bar and 308 K were achieved. The separation results demonstrated that the overall separation efficiency is increased by the addition of both MIL-125 and NH2-MIL-125 fillers but that the NH2-functionalized filler is preferred as it leads to higher selectivities and permeabilities. The performance of the membranes was compared to previously reported literature data for (CO2:CH4) separation which shows that carefully tuned membrane synthesis procedure along with right selection of polymer and filler are crucial factors to get a highly selective and permeable membrane. Among non-fluorinated polymers forming the membrane matrix, present data outperform all previously reported MMM separation. MMMs based on fluorinated polyimide showed slightly higher selectivities, but much lower permeabilities. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available