4.7 Article

High flux MWCNTs-interlinked GO hybrid membranes survived in cross-flow filtration for the treatment of strontium-containing wastewater

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 320, 期 -, 页码 187-193

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2016.08.020

关键词

Graphene oxide; MWCNTs; Radioactive water; High flux; Cross-flow process

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51238006, 51578485]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2015CB655303]
  3. Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education of China [20130101110064]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graphene oxide (GO)-based membranes provide an encouraging opportunity to support high separation efficiency for wastewater treatment. However, due to the relatively weak interaction between GO nanosheets, it is difficult for bare GO-based membranes to survive in cross-flow filtration. In addition, the permeation flux of the bare GO membrane is not high sufficiently due to its narrow interlayer spacing. In this study, GO membranes interlinked with multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) via covalent bonds were fabricated on modified polyacrylonitrile (PAN) supports by vacuum filtration. Due to the strong bonds between GO, MWCNTs and the PAN membrane, the membranes could be used for the treatment of simulated nuclear wastewater containing strontium via a cross-flow process. The result showed a high flux of 210.7 L/(m(2) h) at 0.4 MPa, which was approximately 4 times higher than that of commercial nanofiltration membranes. The improved water permeation was attributed to the nanochannels created by the interlinked MWCNTs in the GO layers. In addition, the hybrid membrane exhibited a high rejection of 93.4% for EDTA-chelated Sr2+ in an alkaline solution, and could also be used to separate Na+/Sr2+ mixtures. These results indicate that the MWCNTs-interlinked GO membrane has promising prospects for application in radioactive waste treatment. (C) 2016 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