4.7 Article

A high-flux polystyrene-reinforced styrene-acrylonitrile/polyacrylonitrile nanofibrous membrane for desalination using direct contact membrane distillation

期刊

JOURNAL OF MEMBRANE SCIENCE
卷 638, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119744

关键词

Superhydrophobic; Composite membrane; Electroblowing; Air-assisted electrospraying; Membrane distillation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

High-flux composite MD membranes were successfully fabricated using electroblowing and hot-pressing techniques, achieving high permeate flux and high salt rejection rates, addressing the pore wetting and low permeation challenges in the MD process.
High-flux composite MD membranes were fabricated using high-productive electroblowing and air-assisted electrospraying processes. Top layer thickness of dual-layer nanofibrous styrene-acrylonitrile (SAN)/polyacrylonitrile (PAN) membrane was designed to be as small as possible to balance the mass and heat transfer resistance to gain better permeability. In this regard, the nanofibrous PAN layer was firstly fabricated by the electroblowing process as the support layer for the SAN nanofibers. Mechanical strength and wetting resistance were improved considerably After the hot-pressing operation. Upon fabricating polystyrene (PS) microbeads on the hot-pressed SAN/PAN membrane, a superhydrophobic surface with a water contact angle (WCA) of 155.9 degrees was formed. The single-layer SAN, dual-layer SAN/PAN, and the PS-reinforced membranes (PS/SAN/PAN) were then used for 35 g/L feed water desalination by direct contact membrane distillation (DCMD). The permeate flux (37.16-84.4 kg/m2 h) of the fabricated membranes was higher than the commercial polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) membrane and high salt rejection of 99.9% was measured for all of the tested membranes. Our proposed composite membranes can significantly impede the pore wetting problem and low permeation as the most pronounced challenges of the membrane distillation (MD) process.

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