1994
DOI: 10.1016/0376-7388(94)87031-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Characterization of ultrafiltration membranes by simultaneous streaming potential and flux measurements

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
54
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
2
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 161 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
54
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These observations were consistent with the isoelectric point of the modifier proteins. Membranes coated with protein foulant display isoelectric points slightly higher than the free protein (Nyström et al, 1994). The situation is similar here for membranes modified by covalent bonding of protein.…”
Section: Membrane Chargementioning
confidence: 56%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…These observations were consistent with the isoelectric point of the modifier proteins. Membranes coated with protein foulant display isoelectric points slightly higher than the free protein (Nyström et al, 1994). The situation is similar here for membranes modified by covalent bonding of protein.…”
Section: Membrane Chargementioning
confidence: 56%
“…Before and after modification treatment, membrane compaction and initial water flux test were performed for 1 h at 100 kPa and 0.6 m s −1 crossflow using purified water (Millipore RO, <1 S cm −1 ). The crossflow cell was fitted with Ag/AgCl electrodes above and below the membrane for the purpose of measurement of streaming potential at a range of pressures <100 kPa using 10 −3 M KCl solution (Nyström et al, 1994). The streaming potential arises from the non-coincident distribution of fixed and mobile ions, and counter-ions during flow of solution through the pores of the membrane.…”
Section: Flow Cell For Flux and Streaming Potentialmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Surface deposition has been probed using techniques such as scanning electron microscopy (SEM) (Kim et al, 1992;Lee and Merson, 1975), AFM (Gesan et al, 1993;Makardij et al, 1999;Martinez et al, 2000), SEM coupled with Energy Dispersive X-ray (EDX) Spectroscopy (Rabiller-Baudry et al, 2002), UV microspectrophotometry (Reisterer et al, 1993), and confocal microscopy (Reichert et al, 2002). Pore and internal fouling by proteins has been examined by using standard infrared and x-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) (Labbe et al, 1990), radiolabeling (Robertson and Zydney, 1990), streaming potential measurements (Nystrom et al, 1994), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) (Kim et al, 1994;Sheldon et al, 1991), electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy (EPRS) (Oppenheim et al, 1994), attenuated total reflection Fourier-Transform Infra-Red Spectroscopy (ATR-FTIR) (Pihlajamaki et al, 1998) and small angle neutron scattering (SANS) (Su et al, 1998). Quantitative measurements have generally been undertaken by eluting proteins from fouled membranes followed by spectrophotometric determination or SDS-PAGE analysis of the total protein content (Fane et al, 1983;Suki et al, 1984;Tong et al, 1989).…”
Section: The Causes and Characterization Of Protein Fouling On Membranesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the already available techniques measures streaming potential (SP) online through the pores of the membrane. From the streaming potential the zeta potential can be calculated [10][11][12]. The measurement can be done both during pure water flux experiments and during fouling or cleaning.…”
Section: Electrical Laser Magnetic and Acoustic Techniques In Membrmentioning
confidence: 99%