4.4 Article

Separation of polyaromatic hydrocarbons from model diesel composition via pervaporation using a fabricated aromatic polyimide membrane and process optimization

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRESS & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY
卷 37, 期 6, 页码 1982-1992

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ep.12881

关键词

aromatic polyimide membrane; polyaromatic hydrocarbons; pervaporation; combined permeation flux; response surface methodology

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology, Government of India (DST FAST TRACK SCHEME FOR YOUNG SCIENTIST) [SERB/F/0796/2012-2013]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Removal of polyaromatics from diesel is important to meet automobile emission specifications. According to Worldwide Fuel Charter, the maximum allowable concentration of polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in automotive diesel should be less than 2% vol (max). An aromatic polyimide membrane was fabricated by solution casting a mixture of polyamic acid, N,N-dimethylacetamide and phenanthrene. This membrane was utilized for the separation of a multicomponent mixture consisting of acenaphthene and 2-methyl naphthalene (PAHs) in toluene and n-tetradecane, chosen as model diesel composition via pervaporation. The prepared membrane was characterized by mechanical strength testing, SEM and TGA-DTA study. The influence of varying downstream pressure, feed composition, and operating temperature on the pervaporative separation performance in terms of combined permeation flux of the PAHs was investigated. A central composite experimental design along with response surface methodology was conducted to optimize these process factors for maximizing the combined permeation flux. The maximum value of combined permeation flux obtained was 0.071 kg m(-2) h(-1). Hence, it can be concluded that the novel membrane fabricated using a simple and relatively inexpensive method has good potentiality for pervaporative removal of PAHs from the chosen system. (c) 2018 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 37: 1901-1907, 2018

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

4.4
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