4.8 Article

Interfacial Force-Assisted In-Situ Fabrication of Graphene Oxide Membrane for Desalination

期刊

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
卷 10, 期 32, 页码 27205-27214

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.8b08531

关键词

partially reduced graphene oxide (PrGO); in-situ fabrication; graphene-based membranes; desalination; hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2016YFC0204200]
  2. Key Research and Development Program of Ningxia [2017BY064]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21337003, 21577158, 21707152]
  4. Special Environmental Protection Foundation for Public Welfare Project [201409016]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Graphene-based membranes have shown great potential application prospects in many fields, especially for water purification. Except for the current relatively low salt rejection rate, another main factor restricting application of such membranes is the lack of applicable preparation processes. In this work, a facile and cost-effective method was developed that can be used to in situ fabricate a graphene oxide (GO)-based membrane inside a filtration apparatus. Novel partial reduction and cross-linking was employed to adjust the surface properties and interlayer distance of GO membranes at the subnanometer range. A simple compacting process was applied to promote the integrity and compactness of the GO-based membranes by making full use of the interfacial tensions of gas/liquid/solid, which enables the in-situ fabrication. The as-prepared PrGO membranes show good water permeability (17.2-86.5 L m(-2) h(-1) MPa-1), reasonable desalination rates (27.7-62.6% for NaCl and 68.4-86.1% for Na2SO4), and good rejection rates of 92.3-96.8% for methyl orange. The method is appropriate for large-scale preparation and is theoretically not restricted by the shape or texture of the basement membrane, which represents another step forward in the fabrication of GO-based membranes toward wide-ranging applications.

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