4.8 Article

Graphene oxide (GO) laminar membranes for concentrating pharmaceuticals and food additives in organic solvents

期刊

CARBON
卷 130, 期 -, 页码 503-514

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbon.2018.01.040

关键词

Graphene oxide; Organic solvent nanofiltration; Pharmaceuticals; Food additives; Dyes

资金

  1. National Research Foundation, Prime Minister's Office, Singapore [NRF-CRP14-2014-01, R-279-000-466-281]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An ultrathin graphene oxide (GO) laminar composite membrane has been fabricated in-house via pressure-assisted filtration. It has a relatively high pure water permeability (PWP) of 7.70 LMH/bar with a molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) of 1243 Da. When being treated with various solvents, the membrane exhibits good stability in both polar and nonpolar solvents. The GO laminar composite membrane has relatively high pure solvent fluxes of 24.89 Lm(-2)h(-1), 7.95 Lm(-2)h(-1) and 12.08 Lm(-2)h(-1) for ethanol, isopropanol and hexane, respectively. Its rejections to orange II sodium salt, safranin O, solvent blue 35, rhodamine B and remazol brilliant blue are 56.60%, 86.52%, 4.39%, 66.95% and 97.11%, respectively. Experimental results suggest that the Donnan exclusion is less effective in organic solvent nanofiltration (OSN) than in aqueous systems, while the size exclusion and solute-membrane affinity are the dominant factors in determining separation performance. Some active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and food additives, e.g. tetracycline, rifampicin, roxithromycin, spiramycin, vitamin B12 and lecithin, are used to demonstrate the separation capability of the newly developed membrane in real-life applications. It can effectively retain those compounds with rejections of 65.80%, 82.67%, 84.27%, 92.21%, 95.34% and 98.44%, respectively. Several 7-day tests of vitamin B12 in isopropanol also confirm the membrane integrity and separation performance for continuous OSN uses. (c) 2018 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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