The role of sulphonated polymer and macrovoid-free structure in the support layer for thin-film composite (TFC) forward osmosis (FO) membranes

Widjojo, Natalia; Chung, Tai‐Shung; Weber, Martin; Maletzko, Christian; Warzelhan, Volker

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2011.08.041

Cited by 298 publications

(176 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

171

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The flux did not vary too much by changing DS and FS flow rates of the flat sheet FO membranes [18,33,40,41,53].…”

Section: Effect Of Changing Ds and Fs Flow Ratementioning

confidence: 89%

“…To overcome RSF and FO PR issues which seem directly linked to the FO membrane characteristics, various research groups focussed their attention to develop a very thin membrane AL on a highly porous support layer [18,[28][29][30]. Some of their work was focussed on AL improvement [31] while the others aimed their activities to improve FO outcome through SL modification [30,[32][33][34]. Following Hydration Technology Innovations (HTI) work, who initially produced their commercial flat sheet membrane, some other companies also introduced their flat sheet membranes and used them for various applications [1][2][3]5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…FO performance was evaluated for new kinds of FO membranes as hollow fiber FO (HFFO) membrane [36], polybenzimidazole (PBI) nanofiltration membrane [37], crosslinked layer-by-layer (xLbL) FO membrane [29], layerby-layer polyelectrolyte applied on a PES hollow fiber substrate [38], high flux FO membranes by chemically crosslinked layer-by-layer polyelectrolytes [39], novel poly (amide-imide) FO hollow fiber membranes with a positively charged selective layer [28], TFC FO membrane for PRO [40], FO membrane with sulfonated polyphenylenesulfone (sPPSU) as the supporting substrate [41], Cellulose acetate nanofiltration hollow fiber membranes for FO [42] cellulose acetate membranes for forward osmosis with an ultra-thin selective layer [43] and others [33,[44][45][46]. Some other unique and distinctive polifilration membranes, carbon nano tubes [47], aquaporin membranes [48] are also used for forward osmosis applications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Influence of the process parameters on hollow fiber-forward osmosis membrane performances

Majeed

Phuntsho

Sahebi

et al. 2015

Desalination and Water Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Continued efforts are made in improving the performance of the low-cost forward osmosis (FO) membrane process which utilizes naturally available osmotic pressure of the draw solution (DS) as the driving force. Selection of a suitable DS and development of a better performing membrane remained the main research focus. In this study, the performance of a hollow fiber forward osmosis (HFFO) membrane was evaluated with respect to various operating conditions such as different cross-flow directions, membrane orientation, solution properties, and solution flow rates (Reynolds number). The study observed that operating parameters significantly affect the performance of the FO process. FO comparatively showed better performance at counter-current orientation. NaCl, KCl, and NH 4 Cl were evaluated as DS carrying common anion. Properties of the anionic part of the DS were found important for flux outcome, whereas reverse solute flux (RSF) was largely influenced by the properties of DS cationic part. FO was operated at different DS and feed solution (FS) flow rates and FO outcome was assessed for varying DS and FS Reynolds number ratio. FO showed better flux outcome as Re ratio for DS and FS decreases and vice versa. Results indicated that by adjusting FO processes conditions, HFFO membrane could achieve significantly lower specific RSF and higher water flux outcome. It was observed that using 2 M NaCl as DS and deionized water as FS, HFFO successfully delivered flux of 62.9 LMH which is significantly high compared to many FO membranes reported in the literature under the active layer-DS membrane orientation mode.

show abstract

“…The flux did not vary too much by changing DS and FS flow rates of the flat sheet FO membranes [18,33,40,41,53].…”

Section: Effect Of Changing Ds and Fs Flow Ratementioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Influence of the process parameters on hollow fiber-forward osmosis membrane performances

Majeed

Phuntsho

Sahebi

et al. 2015

Desalination and Water Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The dry weight membrane was recorded (m 2 , g). Since the densities of both water (ρ w ,1.00 g/cm 3 ) and polymers PSf (ρ p , 1.24 g/cm 3 ) are known, the porosity ε was calculated as follows [25]:…”

Section: Characterization Of the Support Membranesmentioning

confidence: 99%

A sacrificial-layer approach to fabricate polysulfone support for forward osmosis thin-film composite membranes with reduced internal concentration polarisation

Xiao

Nghiem

Yin

et al. 2015

Journal of Membrane Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

He, T. (2015). A sacrificial-layer approach to fabricate polysulfone support for forward osmosis thin-film composite membranes with reduced internal concentration polarisation. Journal of Membrane Science, 481 106-114.A sacrificial-layer approach to fabricate polysulfone support for forward osmosis thin-film composite membranes with reduced internal concentration polarisation AbstractThis study demonstrates a sacrificial-layer approach by co-casting, which is the simultaneous casting of two layers, to prepare a polysulfone support (denoted as PSfco) layer with open bottom surface morphology for fabricating thin-film composite forward osmosis (FO) membranes. In the co-casting process, polyetherimide (PEI), used as the sacrificial layer, was co-cast beneath the PSf layer. After the PEI layer was peeled off, PSfco was yielded with an open-bottom structure. Results showed that under the same operating condition, the FO membrane prepared by co-casting (denoted as PSfco-TFC) demonstrated a 10% higher water flux using 0.5 M NaCl draw solution and 30% higher water flux using 4 M NaCl draw solution in the AL-FS mode in comparison to membranes prepared in a single layer casting technique (denoted as PSfs-TFC). The PSfco-TFC exhibits a lower average structural parameter (S, 167 μm) than that of the PSfs-TFC (241 μm), while the water and salt permeability coefficients of both membranes are similar. Results reported here demonstrate that the co-casting technique can be used to fabricate FO membranes with significantly improved performance compared to the conventional approach. Results showed that under the same operating condition, the FO membrane prepared by cocasting (denoted as PSf co -TFC) demonstrated a 10% higher water flux using 0.5 M NaCl draw solution and 30% higher water flux using 4 M NaCl draw solution in the AL-FS mode in comparison to membranes prepared in a single layer casting technique (denoted as PSf s -TFC).The PSf co -TFC exhibits a lower average structural parameter (S, 167 microns) than that of the PSf s -TFC (241 microns), while the water and salt permeability coefficients of both membranes are similar. Results reported here demonstrate that the co-casting technique can be used to fabricate FO membranes with significantly improved performance compared to the conventional approach.

show abstract

“…As a result, the reported water and salt fluxes are scattered over a broad range. Testing conditions reported in recent publications on FO membrane development [7,8,12,13,15,[17][18][19][23][24][25][26][27][28][29] are summarized in Table 1. It can be seen from the data that both temperatures and draw solution concentrations are not consistent, and therefore, make membrane performance difficult to compare.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standard Methodology for Evaluating Membrane Performance in Osmotically Driven Membrane Processes

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Osmotically driven membrane processes (ODMPs) such as forward osmosis (FO) and pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) are extensively investigated for utilization in a broad range of applications. In ODMPs, the operating conditions and membrane properties play more critical roles in mass transport and process performance than in pressure-driven membrane processes. Search of the literature reveals that ODMP membranes, especially newly developed ones, are tested under different temperatures, draw solution compositions and concentrations, flow rates, and pressures. In order to compare different membranes, it is important to develop standard protocols for testing of membranes for ODMPs. In this article we present a standard methodology for testing of ODMP membranes based on experience gained and operating conditions used in FO and PRO studies in recent years. A round-robin testing of two commercial membranes in seven independent laboratories revealed that water flux and membrane permeability coefficients were similar when participants performed the experiments and calculations using the same protocols. The thin film composite polyamide membrane exhibited higher water and salt permeability than the asymmetric cellulosebased membrane, but results with the high permeability thin-film composite membrane were more scattered. While salt rejection results in RO mode were relatively similar, salt permeability coefficients for both membranes in FO mode were more varied. Results suggest that high permeability ODMP membranes should be tested at lower hydraulic pressure in RO mode and that RO testing be conducted with the same membrane sample used for testing in FO mode. AbstractOsmotically driven membrane processes (ODMP) such as forward osmosis (FO) and pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) are extensively investigated for utilization in a broad range of applications. In ODMPs, the operating conditions and membrane properties play more critical roles in mass transport and process performance than in pressure-driven membrane processes.Search of the literature reveals that ODMP membranes, especially newly developed ones, are tested under different temperatures, draw solution compositions and concentrations, flowrates, and pressures. In order to compare different membranes, it is important to develop standard protocols for testing of membranes for ODMP. In this article we present a standard methodology for testing of ODMP membranes based on experience gained and operating conditions used in FO and PRO studies in recent years. A round-robin testing of two commercial membranes in seven independent laboratories revealed that water flux and membrane permeability coefficients were similar when participants performed the experiments and calculations using the same protocols. The thin film composite polyamide membrane exhibited higher water and salt permeability than the asymmetric cellulose-based membrane, but results with the high permeability thin-film composite membrane were more scattered. While salt rejection results in RO mode were...

show abstract

The role of sulphonated polymer and macrovoid-free structure in the support layer for thin-film composite (TFC) forward osmosis (FO) membranes

Cited by 298 publications

References 38 publications

Influence of the process parameters on hollow fiber-forward osmosis membrane performances

Influence of the process parameters on hollow fiber-forward osmosis membrane performances

A sacrificial-layer approach to fabricate polysulfone support for forward osmosis thin-film composite membranes with reduced internal concentration polarisation

Standard Methodology for Evaluating Membrane Performance in Osmotically Driven Membrane Processes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About