4.6 Article

SiC nanofiber reinforced porous ceramic hollow fiber membranes

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS CHEMISTRY A
卷 2, 期 16, 页码 5841-5846

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3ta15348g

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Center of Excellence in Desalination Australia
  2. Australian Government through the Water for the Future initiative
  3. Australian Research Council [FT100100192]
  4. Department of Chemical Engineering of Monash University
  5. Australian Research Council [FT100100192] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Brittleness is the main obstacle for commercial implementation of ceramic hollow fiber membranes. Here we report the reinforcement of porous alumina hollow fiber membranes by using commercial SiC nanofibers. The SiC reinforced alumina hollow fiber membranes were produced by the polymer-assisted phase inversion method and subsequent removal of the polymer and sintering at high temperatures. The effects of the amounts of SiC nanofibers (2.5-10.0 wt%) on the mechanical strength, microstructure and water flux of the hollow fiber membranes were investigated. The results showed that without addition of SiC nanofibers, the maximum bending strength was about 154 MPa for the porous alumina hollow fiber sintered at 1510 degrees C. However, the maximum bending strength of the reinforced membrane reached 218 MPa, in which 5 wt% SiC was incorporated and sintered at 1450 degrees C; in other words, a 40% improvement in bending strength was achieved. After being sintered at 1450 degrees C, the 5% SiC reinforced membrane exhibits a porosity of 41.7% and a peak pore size of 1.35 mm whereas the pure alumina membrane has a porosity of 37.5% and a peak pore size of 1.25 mu m; the former shows a water permeability of 7.99 L m(-2) h(-1) kPa(-1), which is 3.3 times higher than that of the latter. Therefore, the ceramic nanofiber reinforcement is promising for the development of high-performance ceramic hollow fiber membranes for practical applications.

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

4.6
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