4.7 Article

Effects of a dual nanofiller, nano-TiO2 and MWCNT, for polysulfone-based nanocomposite membranes for water purification

期刊

DESALINATION
卷 372, 期 -, 页码 47-56

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.desal.2015.06.014

关键词

Nanocomposite membrane; Multiwalled carbon nanotube; Titanium dioxide nanoparticle; Membrane fouling; Natural organic matter; Ultrafiltration

资金

  1. TTU Center for the Management, Utilization, and Protection of Water Resources at Tennessee Technological University
  2. NSF [NSF EPS-1004083]
  3. Office Of The Director
  4. EPSCoR [1004083] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polysulfone/nano-TiO2/multiwalled carbon nanotube (MWCNT) ultrafiltration membranes with variable nanoparticle (NP) ratios (total filler content at 1%(w/w)) were fabricated by the phase inversion method. Effects of the ratio of TiO2/MWCNT nanoparticles on membrane pore size and morphology, permeation, fouling and rejection of humic acid (HA) were examined. In terms of membrane characterization, scanning electron microscopy images showed that addition of TiO2 (approximately 21 nm) or MWCNTs resulted in finger-like interconnected pores and increased numbers of pores in the surface layer of the membrane. Membranes with a greater amount of MWCNTs also had an increased pore size, and therefore greater pure water flux. Membranes with greater TiO2 composition showed lower flux declines in the presence of HA. The membranes in which the NPs were combined (e.g., 0.5% TiO2 and 0.5% MWCNT (w/w)) exhibited an optimal balance of performance and synergism in terms of increased flux combined with increased total organic carbon rejection at 2 ppm HA. Additionally, the mechanisms for membrane fouling at 2 ppm HA and 700 ppm HA were different. The presence of an equivalent mixture of both NPs (e.g., the 0.5%/0.5% mixture) provided the flexibility to improve properties of a single membrane under both types of fouling conditions. (C) 2015 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