4.4 Article

pH-responsive hydrogel membranes based on modified chitosan: water transport and kinetics of swelling

Journal

JOURNAL OF POLYMER RESEARCH
Volume 22, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10965-015-0786-3

Keywords

Membranes; Chitosan cross-linking; pH-responsive polymers; Water transport; Swelling kinetics

Ask authors/readers for more resources

pH-responsive membranes prepared by treating chitosan (Ch) with glutaraldehyde (GA) or with GA and sulfuric acid (SA) were studied. The structure and properties of the membranes were characterized by Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy, wide-angle X-ray diffraction (WAXD), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) and elemental analysis. The effect of the cross-linking process both on the dynamic swelling behaviour of the hydrogel membranes and on the mechanism of water transport through those membranes was investigated in buffer solutions of different pH (1.2-9.5). The mechanism of water transport through the hydrogel chitosan membranes was affected by membrane composition and pH of the swelling medium. Non-cross-linked Ch membrane showed a non-Fickian swelling behaviour in the pH range 6.5-9.5. Chitosan membrane cross-linked with GA (Ch/GA) showed less-Fickian or Fickian swelling behaviour in all buffer solutions. In the case of chitosan membrane cross-linked with GA and SA (Ch/GA/SA), at low pH (lower than the pK(a) of the hydrogel) the water transport was controlled more by polymer relaxation than by penetrant diffusion. The experimental data clearly suggested that the swelling process in all buffer solutions obeyed second-order kinetics. Values of an apparent swelling rate constant for Ch/GA and Ch/GA/SA membranes were of the same order of magnitude for acidic and neutral swelling media but they increased for alkaline solutions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available