| Literature DB >> 30081505 |
Jingshi Wang1, Xiao Chen2, Rackel Reis3, Zhiqiang Chen4, Nick Milne5, Bjorn Winther-Jensen6, Lingxue Kong7, Ludovic F Dumée8.
Abstract
Although commercial membranes are well established materials forEntities:
Keywords: free volume; membrane surface modification; plasma mechanics; plasma polymerization; plasma texturation; wettability
Year: 2018 PMID: 30081505 PMCID: PMC6160937 DOI: 10.3390/membranes8030056
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Material properties and performance of the polymer membranes upon low-pressure plasma gas treatments (continued on the following three pages).
| Entry | Plasma Treatment | Plasma Conditions | Membrane | Flux | Salt Rejection (%) | Water Contact Angle(°) | Surface Charge (pH) | Roughness RMS (nm) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ar | 10, 50, or 80 W RF power; 0.2 mbar; 1, 5, 15, or 30 min | RO PA Hydrophilic BW30 TFC (Dow Filmtec Corp.) | Raised by 22% (10–50 W) and then dropped by 76% (80 W; 30 min) compared to control 45 | 98 (control) to 97 (10–50 W; 1–15min), ~60% (50 W; 30 min), ~6% (80 W; 30 min) 1 | Declined ~15 with increasing power density and time from 60 | Negative charge from pH 3 to 8 for both control and modified | Declined to ~40 (80 W; 30 min) from 60 (control) | [ |
| 2 | He | 10 or 80 W RF power; 0.2 mbar; 1, 2 or 5 min | RO PA Hydrophilic BW30 TFC (Dow Filmtec Corp.) | Raised by 66% (10 W, 5 min); by 25% (80 W, 5 min) compared to pristine RO PA 30 | Maintained at 98% 1 | 47 (PA control) to 10 (5 min 10 W) | NR | 63 (PA control) to 58 (10W, 2 min); to ~40 (80 W, 5 min) | [ |
| 3 | O2 | 30 W RF power; 10 cm3/min O2 vapor flow rate; 0.1 mbar; 0–10 min. | UF PP Hydrophobic Laboratory synthesized | Increased 30% after 1 min, and 15% after 4 min, compared to its control 350 | NR 2 | 128 (control) to 72 after 9 min treatment | NR | NR | [ |
| 4 | O2 | 25 W RF power; 0.1 mbar; 1–5 min. | MF PP Hydrophobic Osmonics, Germany | Increased >50% after 5 min, compared to its control 243 | NR | 135 to 20 after 5 min treatment | NR | NR | [ |
| 5 | O2 or Ar | 100 W; 20 kHz frequency; 0.13 mbar; 0–6 min. | RO PA Hydrophilic Laboratory synthesized | Increased more than 2.5 times its control (20) after 3 min O2 plasma; whilst only 4% higher than its control after 3 min Ar plasma | NR | 77 (Control, laboratory synthesized) to 70 after 2 min, and to 44 after 6 min O2 plasma; to 69 after 6 min Ar plasma | NR | NR | [ |
| 6 | CO2 | 5, 10, and 20 W RF power; 0.2 mbar; 10–300 s | UF PSf Hydrophobic US Filter, Inc. | Increased 2.3-fold compared to control (175) modified at 10 W | NR | 94 (control) declined to 47 (10 s), to 15 (30 s), and to 0 (60 s and 180 s) at 10 W 3 | NR | NR | [ |
| 7 | CO2 | 20 and 35 W RF power; 0.2 mbar; 0.5–15 min | UF PES Hydrophobic Millipore Corporation | NR | NR | 66 (control) to 0, with the water drop, disappears within 25 s (35 W, 30 s) and 75 s (20 W, 30 s) | NR | NR | [ |
| 8 | H2O | 25 W RF power; 0.5 mbar; 2 min | UF PSf Hydrophobic US Filter, Inc. | NR | NR | 86 (control) to 0 | NR | NR | [ |
| 9 | H2O | 25 W RF power; 0.5 mbar; 2–4 min | UF PES and PE Hydrophobic Millipore Corporation | Increased 28.3% for PES (compared to its control 4856) and 28.4% for PE (compared to its control 421) | NR | 63 (control) to 0 for PES, 123 to 0 for PE 3 | NR | NR | [ |
| 10 | H2O | 25 W RF power; 0.7 mbar; 2 min | MF PC and PET Hydrophobic Sterlitech Corporation | Increased from 25 (control) to 68 for PC, and raised from 20 to 45 for PET | NR | 97 (control) to 38 for PC, 59 (control) to 27 for PET | NR | NR | [ |
| 11 | H2O | 10 and 80 W RF power; 0.2 mbar; 1, 2, and 5 min | RO PA Hydrophilic BW30 TFC Dow Filmtec Corporation | Declined by >50% compared to pristine RO PA 30 | 98–84% (80W) 1 | Declined to ~11 (modified –10 W) ~20 (modified –80 W) from 47 (control) | Negative charged from pH 3 to 8 for both control and modified | Declined to 58 (10 W), ~36 (80 W) from 63 (control) after 2 min | [ |
| 12 | NH3 | 30 W RF power; 0.1 mbar; 0–8 min. | UF PP Hydrophobic Laboratory synthesized | Two times higher than control (350) for 1 min-treated sample, 20% higher 8 min treated samples | NR | 128 (control) to 54 after 8 min | NR | NR | [ |
| 13 | NH3 | 30 W RF power; 0.1 mbar; 4 min. | UF PP Hydrophobic Laboratory synthesized | NR | NR | 128 (control) to 71 under 10 Pa; to 90 under 104 Pa | NR | NR | [ |
| 14 | NH3 | 450 V Pulsed DC power supply; 20 kHz; 0.12 mbar; 9.6 cm3/min; three duty cycles (Dt), 30%, 50%, and 70%; 0–8 min | UF PAN Hydrophobic Laboratory synthesized | 32% higher than PAN (control ca. 55) after 1 h oil-water filtration test 4 | NR | 89 (control) to 29 (8 min, 30% Dt), to 13 (8 min, 70% Dt) | NR | NR | [ |
| 15 | NH3, NH3/Ar | 60 W microwave power; 125 Hz frequency and 25% of duty cycle; 1 mbar; 10 cm3/min Ar flow rate; 0–10 min. | UF PSf Hydrophobic (Amoco, CO., US) | NR | NR | 87 (control) to 46 (not specified in the study) | NR | NR | [ |
| 16 | NH3, NH3/O2 | 15–120 (25) W RF power; 0.07–0.53 mbar; 2–25 (3) min | UF PES Hydrophobic Millipore Inc. | 70% (25 W, 3 min, 3:5 NH3/O2) higher than PES (control ca. 260) after 30 min PW filtration | NR | 66 (control) to 0 (25 W, 3 min, 3:5 NH3/O2) | NR | NR | [ |
1 2 h 2000 ppm NaCl solution under 15 bar, 25 °C; 2 NR: not report; 3 Water drop applied to the surface disappeared within 2 s; 4 Permeate flux for 500 mg/Loil-water emulsions under 276 kPa.
Figure 1SEM images of the UF PP membranes (a) pristine, (b) 4 min, (c) 9 min, and MF PP membranes (d) pristine, (e) 3 min, (f) 5 min treatment with O2 plasma. The length of the scale bars in SEM images (d–f) is 2 µm. Reprinted from [25], Copyright (2018), with permission from John Wiley and Sons, and from [26], Copyright (2018), with permission from Elsevier.
Membrane performance of the amine-enriched PP and PSf membrane under different plasma polymerization conditions (numerical data are extracted from [13]).
| Constant Conditions | Variable Conditions | PP Membranes | PSf Membranes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water Flux | Salt Rejection (%) | Water Flux | Salt Rejection (%) | ||
| 10 W/0.8 sccm | pristine | 15.5 | 0 | 15.2 | 0 |
| After 60 min | 0.1 | 92 | 0.5 | 95 | |
| 0.8 sccm/30 min | 10 W | ~0.7 | ~88 | ~1.5 | 85 |
| 50 W | 0.2 | ~88 | ~1.55 | 88 | |
| 10 W/60 min | 0.8 sccm | 0.1 | 92 | 0.5 | 95 |
| 1.8 sccm | 5.5 | 20 | ~2.75 | 30 | |
Material properties and performance of the polymer membranes upon low-pressure plasma polymerizations (continued on the following three pages).
| Entry | Plasma Polymerization Treatment | Plasma Conditions | Application | Flux | Salt/Solute Rejection (%) | Water Contact Angle(°) | Surface Charge - IEP (pH) | Roughness RMS (nm) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Allylamine | 10–50 W RF power; monomer flow rate = 0.6–1.8 sccm (standard cm3/min); 1–60 min; | MF PP (Hoechst-Celanese Co.) and UF PSf Laboratory synthesized Hydrophobic | Declined 91% for PP, and 96% for PSf (10 W, 0.8 sccm, 50 min), compared to its control 15.5 | Salt rejection of PP and PSf increased 90% and 86% from 0%, respectively 1 | NR 2 | NR | NR | [ |
| 2 | Allylamine | 10–50 W RF power; reactor pressure at 0.053, 0.093 and 0.133 mbar; 10–30 min | MF PP Hydrophobic (Hoechst-Celanese Co.) | Increased by ~38.5% (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 10 min), compared to its control 48 | 89.8% of BSA rejection at pH 7 (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 10 min) 3 | 108 (PP control) declined 38 (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 30 min) | Negative charged at pH 7 | NR | [ |
| 3 | 1-vinyl(imidazole) with Ar | 1 W/L AC power; 0.07 mbar; 1.60 mL/min; 5, 9, and 15 min; | RO PA Hydrophilic BW30 TFC (Dow Filmtec Corp.) | Statistically stable compared to its control 44.2 | 96 to 97 4 | NR | Positively charged from pH 3 to 7 and IEP changed from pH 3.5 to ~7 | Reduced by 30% from 24 (control) to 17 (15 min) | [ |
| 4 | Acrylic acid | 10–50 W RF power; reactor pressure at 0.053, 0.093, and 0.133 mbar; 10–30 min; | MF PP Hydrophobic (Hoechst-Celanese Co.) | Increased by ~50.0% (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 10 min), compared to its control 48 | 96.2% of BSA rejection at pH 7 (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 10 min) 3 | 108 (PP control) declined 25 (5 W, 5.332 Pa, and 30 min) | Negatively charged at pH 7 | NR | [ |
| 5 | Acrylic acid | 20 W RF power; 25 mL/min (monomer vapor flow rate); 10 min | UF PC(TE) Hydrophobic (Poretics, USA) | NR | NR | Decreased from 71.8 to 36.4 (10 min) | NR | NR | [ |
| 6 | MA with Ar | 1 W/L AC power; 0.07 mbar; 1.60 mL/min; 5, 9, and 15 min; | RO PA Hydrophilic BW30 TFC (Dow Filmtec Corp.) | Declined by 33% and 18% after 9 and 15 min, compared to its control 44.2 | 96.8 to 97.5 4 | NR | Negative from pH 3 to 8 | NR | [ |
| 7 | Triglyme Polyethylene glycol (PEG)—like monomers | 1 W RF power; monomer flow rate: 0.4 sscm at 80–90 °C; 10, 15, 30, 60, and 120 s; | RO PA Hydrophilic SW30HR TFC (Dow Filmtec Corp.) | 10–15% decline compared to control, compared to its control 44.2 5 | Maintained ~98 5 | 32 (control) to 7 (modified 120 s) | _ | 62 (control) to 89 (modified 60 s) | [ |
| 8 | HMDSO, TMMOS, and MTMOS with Ar | 30 W RF power; Ar flow rate 10 sscm; 1.5 mbar; 0–20 min; | SiO2–ZrO2 intermediate layer Laboratory synthesized | High H2 permeance of 6.5 × 107 mol/(m2 s Pa) with an H2/SF6 selectivity of 410 at 200 °C | NR | NR | NR | NR | [ |
| 9 | Heptane (C7F16) and Ar | 30, 50, 70 W RF power; 0.03 mbar; monomer flow rate: 5 sccm; heated at 30 °C; 0.03 mbar; 30, 60, 90 s; | PFSA used in proton exchange membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) | Methanol permeability: decreased from 2.42 to 0.033 (10−6 cm2/s) 6 | NR | 86.9 increased to 117.3 (70 W, 90 s, 400 mTorr) | NR | 11.8 increased to 80.2 (70 W, 90 s, 400 mTorr) | [ |
| 10 | Perfluorohexane (C6F14) and Ar | 0.018–0.064 W, 75 kHz discharged; 0.13–0.53 mbar; 5 min; distance between the electrodes is 39 mm; | MF PET-TM (0.4 µm, Sterlitech) | Pure water flux: 3.5–3.6 (its control ~3); Apple juice flux: 2.8–2.9 (its control ~2–2.2) | Sugar rejection: 98–100% | Increased from ca. 48 to 105 | NR | Decreased from ca.33 to 14 nm as the degree of deposition increased from 30.3 to 102 µg/cm2 | [ |
| 11 | Tetrafluoromethane (CF4) | 50–400 W RF power; monomer flow rate = 18 sccm (standard cm3/min); 1–60 min; | UF PES Hydrophilic (Nanjing, China Altrateck Co., Ltd.) | 66.7 (control is not given) | 100% | Increased from 60 to 125 (modified at 200 W for 40 min) | NR | NR | [ |
1 2000 ppm NaCl solution flowed at a rate of 240 mL/min under 30 bar; 2 NR: not report; 3 2 h with BSA solution at a concentration of 1 g/L; 4 2000 ppm NaCl solution under 15 bar, 25 °C; 5 Dead-end filtration with 200 mL of 30 g NaCl/L, stirring at 600 rpm; 6 With 5 M MeOH, 25 °C.
Figure 2Surface charge analysis of the PA RO TFC membranes deposited with plasma polymerized (a) VIM and (b) MA. Reproduced from [54], Copyright (2018), with permission from Elsevier.
The plasma parameters used as variable and constant in three experiment series [78].
| Experience Series | Variables | Constants | WCA (Dropped from 137°) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Series 1 | Duration | RF Power | Argon Plow Rate | Gap Between Pubstrates and Glow | |
| 0–150, 30 s interval | 100 W | 10 slm | 5 mm | 19° after 150 s | |
| Series 2 | Argon Flow Rate | Plasma Power | Duration | Gap between Substrates and Glow | |
| 0–10, 1 slm interval | 100 W | 150 s | 5 mm | 22° at 10 slm | |
| Series 3 | Gap Between Substrates and Glow | Duration | Plasma Power | Argon Flow Rate | |
| 5.0, 7.5, 10, and 12.5 mm | 150 s | 100 W | 10 slm | 23° at 10 mm | |
Elemental composition of films fabricated by AP-PECVD with different working gases. Data extracted from [67], Copyright (2018), with permission from Elsevier.
| Control | Working Gas Component | Elemental Composition (%) | Elemental Ratio | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Si 2p | C 1s | O 1s | N 1s | C/Si | O/Si | ||
| HMDSO | - | - | - | - | 3.0 | 0.5 | |
| SiO2 | - | - | - | - | - | 2 | |
| Pure Ar | 32.3 | 3.6 | 64.1 | - | 0.11 | 1.98 | |
| O2/Ar (5.0 vol.%) | 31.9 | 3.2 | 64.9 | - | 0.10 | 2.04 | |
| N2/Ar (5.0 vol.%) | 29.3 | 20.2 | 46.0 | 4.5 | 0.69 | 1.57 | |
Figure 3Single gas permeances of the composited membranes prepared by AP-PECVD with different working gases as a function of the kinetic diameter of the permeating molecules. Reprinted from [67], Copyright (2018), with permission from Elsevier.
Material properties and performance of the polymer membranes upon the atmospheric pressure plasma processes including gas and polymerization (continued on the following two pages).
| Entry | Plasma Treatment | Plasma Conditions | Application | Membrane Performance | Water Contact Angle (°) | Pore Size/Porosity | Roughness RMS | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ar Gas | 100 W RF powered two-rotating double-pipe type plasma jets; | PVDF-HFP Laboratory synthesized Hydrophobic | For DSSC, the electrolyte update rate is 26.9% higher than the pristine PVDF, 10.8 ± 0.8 g/g | 137 declined to 21.3 ± 2.1 at 100 W, 10 slm, 5 mm gap, after 150 s | Increased from 0.6 to 0.7 µm; the porosity increased from 73.6 to 86.0%, compared to pristine control | NR 1 | [ |
| 2 | AA with Ar/O2 or He/O2
| 30 kV AC powered plasma jet; Ar or He flow rate: 0.7 m3 h−1; O2 flow rate 0.1 m3 h−1; 1–20 min; AA heating temperature: 60 °C | MF PP | As a separator in the lithium-ion battery (LIB), the columbic efficiency maintained at about 99.0% and 99.5% upon 20 min treatment, respectively, compared to the pristine PP (97.5%) | 112 (PP control) declined to 63 and 39 upon 20-min Ar/O2/AA and He/O2/AA, respectively | Increased from 57.8 (control) to 180 nm upon 20-min Ar/O2/AA, but decreased to 10 nm upon 20 min He/O2/AA | Decreased from 68.91 (control)to 52.73 nm and 46.16 nm after 10 min Ar/O2/AA and He/O2/AA plasma, respectively | [ |
| 3 | MA with Ar and C2H2
| 8 W plasma DBD; 5.0–6.6 kHz; 95kPa; MA flow rate: 0.06–0.33; C2H2 flow rate: 2–3 sccm; 5 or 10 min; cap between top and bottom electrodes is 1.6 mm | Silicon (c-Si) wafers | The carboxyl-enriched films were stable when deposited at MA:C2H2 = 0.037, with a thickness of 544 nm | NR | NR | NR | [ |
| 4 | HMDSO with pure Ar or O2/Ar or N2/Ar | 6 kV DBD plasma jet; 50 kHz; Ar or He flow rate: 0.7 m3 h−1; O2 flow rate 0.1 m3 h−1; Flow rate of pure Ar or a mixture of Ar with O2 (5.0 vol.%) or N2 (0.25–10.0 vol.%): 5.0 L min−1; 20 min; gap between substrates and discharge nozzle: 2.0 mm; HMDSO heating temperature: 40 °C | Tubular porous α-alumina substrates (SiO2-ZrO2) | The He permeance of the HMDSO/N2/Ar deposited films was 0.52 × 10−7, which is lower than that of 1.50 × 10−7 mol m−2 s−1 Pa−1, achieved by HMDSO/O2/Ar prepared films; HMDSO/N2/Ar films also provided highest permeance ratio of He/H2 as 1.6 | NR | NR | NR | [ |
| 5 | TEGDME with He | 8–13 W AC powered plasma DBD; 15–50 kHz frequency; the total flow of TEGDME/He aerosol and He carrier gas: 8–10 slm; flow rate of He via aerosol: 3.15 slm; 5 min; 4 mm interelectrode gap | Glass substrates | NR | Static WCA is 52 for the film deposited at 27 kHz and 57 at 36 kHz; static WCA of control is not given | NR | NR | [ |
| 6 | Oleate-capped ZnO NPs in | 0.28 ± 0.02 W cm−2 AC powered plasma DBD; 105 Pa; total flow of He: 8000 sccm; flow rate of He via aerosol: 2800 sccm; 10 min; 4 mm interelectrode gap | Borosilicate glass slides, CaF2 substrates, carbon-coated Cu grids for TEM | NR | Advancing WCA and receding WCA increased from 113 to 170 and from 64 to 168, respectively | NR | The roughness of the films prepared from pure | [ |
1 NR: not report.