| Literature DB >> 29510556 |
Huiya Wang1, Ran Gong2, Xinliang Qian3.
Abstract
TiO₂/g-C₃N₄/PVDF composite membranes were prepared by a phase inversion method. A comparison of the performance and morphology was carried out among pure PVDF, g-C₃N₄/PVDF, TiO₂/PVDF and TiO₂/g-C₃N₄/PVDF composite membranes. The results of permeability and instrumental analysis indicated that TiO₂ and g-C₃N₄ organic-inorganic composites obviously changed the performance and structure of the PVDF membranes. The porosity and water content of 0.75TiO₂/0.25g-C₃N₄/PVDF composite membranes were 97.3 and 188.3 L/(m²·h), respectively. The porosity and water content of the 0.75TiO₂/0.25g-C₃N₄ membranes were increased by 20.8% and 27.4%, respectively, compared with that of pure PVDF membranes. This suggested that the combination of organic-inorganic composite with PVDF could remarkably improve UTS, membrane porosity and water content.Entities:
Keywords: PVDF membrane; TiO2; characterization; g-C3N4
Year: 2018 PMID: 29510556 PMCID: PMC5872196 DOI: 10.3390/membranes8010014
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1FTIR spectra of PVDF, TiO2/PVDF, g-C3N4/PVDF and TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF membranes.
Figure 2SEM images of (a) PVDF membrane; (b) TiO2/PVDF membrane; (c) g-C3N4/PVDF membrane; and (d) TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF.
TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF composite membranes compositions.
| Membrane | Composition (wt %) | UTS (MPa) | Contact Angle | Porosity | Water Content |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PVDF | - | 0.27 | 75.98 | 50 | 90.3 |
| TiO2/PVDF | - | 0.29 | 56.22 | 71 | 111.3 |
| g-C3N4/PVDF | - | 0.29 | 58.64 | 71 | 127.7 |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.75:0.25 | 0.33 | 62.57 | 67 | 143.2 |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.5:0.5 | 0.29 | 70.89 | 60 | 124.5 |
Water content of TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF composite membrane.
| Parametric Membrane | Composition (wt %) | Contact Angle | Water Content | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial State | 30 s | 60 s | Container Quality | 3 min Later Quality | |||
| PVDF | - | 82.34 | 72.62 | 75.98 | 1.9164 | 7.7294 | 90.3 |
| TiO2/PVDF | - | 73.27 | 68.06 | 56.22 | 4.0196 | 10.6646 | 111.3 |
| g-C3N4/PVDF | - | 75.53 | 65.94 | 58.64 | 3.9521 | 11.5824 | 127.7 |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.75:0.25 | 79.29 | 70.93 | 62.57 | 3.8871 | 12.4376 | 143.2 |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.5:0.5 | 77.53 | 79.42 | 70.89 | 2.7236 | 9.8236 | 124.5 |
Porosity of TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF composite membrane.
| Parametric Membrane | Composition (wt %) | Porosity (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PVDF | - | 0.06 | 0.03 | 50% |
| TiO2/PVDF | - | 0.07 | 0.02 | 71% |
| g-C3N4/PVDF | - | 0.07 | 0.02 | 71% |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.75:0.25 | 0.06 | 0.02 | 67% |
| TiO2/g-C3N4/PVDF | 0.5:0.5 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 60% |
Figure 3TGA weight loss profiles of PVDF and TiO2/g-C3N4 PVDF.
Figure 4XRD patterns of PVDF, g-C3N4, and g-C3N4/PVDF.