2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101903
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Polyaniline/polysulfone ultrafiltration membranes with improved permeability and anti-fouling behavior

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The water permeation decline in this step is the result of pores blocking and adsorption . After deionized water cleaning, the normalized deionized water flux of both Kevlar and PVDF membranes increased but did not recover to the initial deionized water flux level due to irreversible membrane fouling . Compared with the Kevlar membrane, the PVDF membrane suffered more serious fouling and irreversible membrane fouling.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The water permeation decline in this step is the result of pores blocking and adsorption . After deionized water cleaning, the normalized deionized water flux of both Kevlar and PVDF membranes increased but did not recover to the initial deionized water flux level due to irreversible membrane fouling . Compared with the Kevlar membrane, the PVDF membrane suffered more serious fouling and irreversible membrane fouling.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…44 After deionized water cleaning, the normalized deionized water flux of both Kevlar and PVDF membranes increased but did not recover to the initial deionized water flux level due to irreversible membrane fouling. 45 Compared with the Kevlar membrane, the PVDF membrane suffered more serious fouling and irreversible membrane fouling. Specifically, compared to Kevlar membrane, the commercial PVDF membrane showed a higher loss in permeance both in HA and BSA, i.e., 92.3% (final flux: 43.7 (L bar −1 m −2 h −1 )) and 82.9% (final flux: 97.1 (L bar −1 m −2 h −1 )), respectively, whereas our prepared Kevlar-2.0 membrane showed 72.6% (final flux: 122.7 (L bar −1 m −2 h −1 )) and 50.6% (final flux: 221.2 (L bar −1 m −2 h −1 )) permeance drop.…”
Section: Antifouling Performance Of Kevlarmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Generally, big pore size will be corresponding to a high pure water flux and a low rejection. Yuan et al 38 found that the blend PSF membrane with 2 wt% polyaniline along with 38.4 nm pore radius had 92% BSA rejection, which was less than 97% rejection of the pristine PSF membrane with 23.5 nm pore radius. However, our BSA rejection rates appeared to have a negative interrelation to the water contact angle.…”
Section: Separation Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This result was in accordance with those in literatures. 38,39 Membrane morphology can be explained by phase inversion process. DMF in the casting solutions had high mutual affinity to water, which would lead to instantaneous liquid-liquid demixing-the polymer-poor phase and the polymer-rich phase.…”
Section: Sem Images Of Top Surfaces and Cross-sections Of Psf Cm-psf ...mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation