4.5 Review

A review of techniques to improve performance of metal organic framework (MOF) based mixed matrix membranes for CO2/CH4 separation

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11157-022-09612-5

关键词

Membrane separations; Metal Organic Framework (MOF); Mixed matrix membranes (MMM); Biogas upgradation; CO2; CH4 separation

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology (DST)-Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB) [SRG/2019/000336]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The use of Mixed Matrix Membranes (MMMs) for CO2/CH4 separation, which disperses inorganic fillers in the polymer matrix, offers a new approach to improving separation performance but faces challenges such as uneven filler dispersion and strong interaction between filler and polymer.
The separation of carbon dioxide and methane is vital for biogas upgradation and natural gas sweetening applications. Membrane separation is one of the techniques used for CO2 and CH4 separation for biogas upgradation and natural gas sweetening owing to its energy efficiency, low capital cost, portable, and ease of operation. Polymer membranes and inorganic membranes have a trade-off relationship between permeability and selectivity. A new class of membranes known as Mixed Matrix Membranes (MMMs) is being explored to overcome this trade-off by dispersing inorganic fillers in the polymer matrix. However, the addition of filler poses new interfacial morphological difficulties, such as poor dispersion, very strong interaction between filler and polymer, and formation of voids. These challenges can be tackled by suitable choice of filler and polymer, functionalization of filler and polymer, polymer blending. The hybrid membranes separation process or use of two or more strategies can lead to the formation of defect-free membranes with improved separation performance. In this review article, we provide a concise literature review and analysis of the strategies for improving the transport properties of MMMs based on MOF as filter materials for CO2/CH4 separation.

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

4.5
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