2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.11.041
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preparation of patterned microfiltration membranes and their performance in crossflow yeast filtration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…When the evaporation time was extended to 30 s, a homogeneous spongelike structure was generated. Similar behavior for membrane preparation has also been reported by other researchers . This is associated with a surface liquid layer on the cast film that emerges because of the intake of water from humid air .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…When the evaporation time was extended to 30 s, a homogeneous spongelike structure was generated. Similar behavior for membrane preparation has also been reported by other researchers . This is associated with a surface liquid layer on the cast film that emerges because of the intake of water from humid air .…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Therefore, it may be possible to increase MF performance by increasing the local shear rates near the membrane surface. On the other hand, a higher cross-flow velocity of a feed solution leads to increase energy demand which effects on economic aspects of the process [4,34,65]. However, according to Streit et al [23], for the same operational conditions such as transmembrane pressure, increasing the feed cross-flow velocity may reduce MF process time.…”
Section: Effect Of the Feed Flow Ratementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, it leads to the reduction of the productivity of the system and makes membrane cleaning a necessity. This causes in increasing operational costs and reduces a membrane's lifetime [33][34][35][36]. Based on literature review, it can be analyzed that flux decline during MF of biological suspensions is affected by a great number of factors, such as: (i) process parameters (transmembrane pressure, feed flow rate, and temperature) [1,2,4,6,12,16,[18][19][20][21][22][23]25,37,38], (ii) membrane properties (pore size and its distribution, hydrophilicity/hydrophobicity character) [1,3,6,14,21,25,37,39], (iii) feed solution properties (nature, bacterial cell mass, particle size, and pH) [11,12,21,22,38], and (iv) interaction between foulants and membranes [3,22].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the first time, a patterned superhydrophobic PVDF membrane with porous micropillars was prepared via a micro-molding phase separation (µPS) technique. A similar technique has been used to create macro-patterned surfaces for pressure driven membranes (Çulfaz, Rolevink et al 2010, Çulfaz, Haddad et al 2011, Hashino, Katagiri et al 2011, Won, Lee et al 2012, Jamshidi Gohari, Lau et al 2013, Lee, Won et al 2013, Gençal, Durmaz et al 2015, Maruf, Greenberg et al 2016, Won, Jung et al 2016, ElSherbiny, Khalil et al 2017. However, pressure driven processes only involve a liquid-solid interface with a convective flow of liquid across the membrane.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%