4.7 Article

Surface coating on the polyamide TFC RO membrane for chlorine resistance and antifouling performance improvement

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
卷 451, 期 -, 页码 205-215

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.09.040

关键词

Surface coating; Reverse osmosis (RO); Thin-film composite membrane (TFC); Chlorine resistance; Antifouling

资金

  1. National Nature Science Foundation of China [21274108]
  2. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China (863 Program of China) [2012AA03A602]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel random terpolymer poly(methylacryloxyethyldimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride-r-acryl-amide r-2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (P(MDBAC-r-Am-r-HEMA)) was synthesized via free radical polymerization and used as the coating material on the polyamide thin film composite (TFC) reverse osmosis (RO) membrane to improve its chlorine resistance and antifouling performance. The chlorine resistance of the membranes was evaluated by cross-flow filtration of the NaCIO solution. Antifouling performance was evaluated by cross-flow filtration of the protein solution and cell-culture experiments. The membrane surface was analyzed via ATR-FTIR, XPS, SEM and streaming potential measurements. The coated membrane can tolerate chlorine exposure over 16,000 ppm h, which is 7-10 times the pristine membrane. The bacteria growth can be significantly depressed on the coated membrane surface. The coated membrane can retain its flw( very well under protein filtration. It is believed that the surface coating layer works as a protective and sacrificial layer, preventing the attack of chlorine on the underlying polyamide film. The PMDBAC and PAm components are essential to the antimicrobial property and the improved surface hydrophilicity is beneficial to the antifouling performance of the membrane. The coated membrane offers potential use as a novel RO membrane with improved antifouling performance and chlorine resistance. (C) 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据