3.9 Article

Effects of a dynamic membrane formed with polyethylene glycol on the ultrafiltration of natural organic matter

Journal

Publisher

HIGHER EDUCATION PRESS
DOI: 10.1007/s11783-010-0002-y

Keywords

dynamic membrane; natural organic matters; ultrafiltration membrane performance; effective PSD; effective molecular weight cutoff

Funding

  1. Korea Science and Engineering Foundation [R0A-2007-000-20055-0]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [R0A-2007-000-20055-0] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The formation of a dynamic membrane (DM) was investigated using polyethylene glycol (PEG) (molecular weight of 35000 g/mol, concentration of 1 g/L). Two natural organic matters (NOM), Dongbok Lake NOM (DLNOM) and Suwannee River NOM (SRNOM) were used in the ultrafiltration experiments along with PEG. To evaluate the effects of the DM with PEG on ultrafiltration, various transport experiments were conducted, and the analyses of the NOM in the membrane feed and permeate were performed using high performance size exclusion chromatography, and the effective pore size distribution (effective PSD) and effective molecular weight cut off (effective MWCO) were determined. The advantages of DM formed with PEG can be summarized as follows: (1) PEG interferes with NOM transmission through the ultrafiltration membrane pores by increasing the retention coefficient of NOM in UF membranes, and (2) low removal of NOM by the DM is affected by external factors, such as pressure increases during UF membrane filtration, which decreases the effective PSD and effective MWCO of UF membranes. However, a disadvantage of the DM with PEG was severe flux decline; thus, one must be mindful of both the positive and negative influences of the DM when optimizing the UF performance of the membrane.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available