4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Cleaning of pH Selective Electrodes with Ionophore-doped Fluorous Membranes in NaOH Solution at 90°C

期刊

ELECTROANALYSIS
卷 30, 期 4, 页码 611-618

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/elan.201700228

关键词

ion-selective electrode; ionophore; fluorous; pH; cleaning in place; Teflon AF

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [CTS-0428046]
  2. National Institutes of Health [1R01 EB005225-01]
  3. Welch Foundation [A-1656]
  4. Hamilton (Bonaduz, Switzerland)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work demonstrates the remarkable stability of fluorous ion-selective electrode (ISE) membranes by exposing them to cleaning-in-place treatments (CIP) as they are used in many industrial processes. The sensing membranes consisted of Teflon AF2400 plasticized with a linear perfluoropolyether and doped with ionic sites and a H+ ionophore (i.e., tris[3-(perfluorooctyl)propyl]amine, 1, or tris[3-(perfluorooctyl)pentyl]amine, 2). To mimic a typical CIP treatment, the electrodes were repeatedly exposed for 30min to a 3.0% NaOH solution at 90 degrees C (pH12.7). ISE membranes doped with the less strongly H+ binding ionophore 1 started to show reduced potentiometric response slopes and increased resistances after one exposure for 30min to hot 3.0% NaOH solution. No decomposition of the ionic sites and ionophore 1 at 90 degrees C was evident by H-1 NMR spectroscopy, suggesting that the performance of membranes doped with 1 was compromised primarily by leaching of the negatively charged ionic sites along with H+ into the hot caustic solution. In contrast, even after ten exposures to hot 3.0% NaOH for a cumulative 5h at 90 degrees C, the fluorous sensing membranes doped with the more strongly H+ binding ionophore 2 still showed the ability to respond with a theoretical (Nernstian) slope up to pH12. Addition of the fluorophilic electrolyte salt methyltris[3-(perfluorooctyl)propyl]ammonium tetrakis[3,5-bis(perfluorohexyl)phenyl]borate reduced the membrane resistance by an order of magnitude.

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