4.7 Article

Hydrophilic poly(phenylene sulfone) membranes for ultrafiltration

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2020.117107

关键词

Poly(phenylene sulfone); Ultrafiltration membranes; Pluronic (R) F127 additive; Fouling; Water treatment

资金

  1. Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) Germany [03XP0043A]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Poly(alkylene oxide) based tri- and multiblock oligomers with hydrophobic poly(phenylene sulfone) blocks were evaluated as dope solution additives used for preparation of improved poly(phenylene sulfone) (PPSU) flat sheet (FS) and single bore (SB) ultrafiltration membranes by non-solvent induced phase separation (NIPS). Identical polymer dope recipes were used in both of FS membrane preparation and SB fiber spinning processes. PPSU membranes modified with 9.2 wt % Pluronic (R) F127 based additive, M2 (7.5 kDa PPSU/ Pluronic (R) F127), or Lutensol (R) AT80 based additive, T2 (7.5 kDa PPSU/ Lutensol (R) AT80), displayed compared to pristine PPSU membranes elevated hydraulic permeance ranging from 485 to 674 kg m(-2) bar(-1) h(-1) (pristine PPSU: 310 - 464 kg m(-2) bar(-1) h(-1) ), higher molecular weight cut-off values from 37.0 to 53.5 kDa (pristine PPSU: 21.4 - 23.7 kDa), lower contact angles of 46.4 degrees and 49.8 degrees (pristine PPSU: 86.7 degrees) and reduced fouling propensity with irreversible fouling values of 10 % (pristine PPSU: 15 %) for diluted potting soil extract as model substance. The combined analysis methods of X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) and proton nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (H-1 NMR) indicated modest surface enrichment of the additives in the filtration layer. Consequently, PPSU ultrafiltration membranes modified with additives T2 and M2 provide interesting alternatives to poly(ether sulfone) (PESU) and poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF) based membranes for surface water filtration combining both excellent filtration characteristics with a long lifetime due to its higher chemical resistance.

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