| Literature DB >> 33171847 |
Nur Diyana Suzaimi1, Pei Sean Goh1, Ahmad Fauzi Ismail1, Stanley Chinedu Mamah1,2, Nik Ahmad Nizam Nik Malek3, Jun Wei Lim4, Kar Chun Wong1, Nidal Hilal5.
Abstract
Forward osmosis (FO) has been recognized as the preferred alternative membrane-based separation technology for conventional water treatment technologies due to its high energy efficiency and pEntities:
Keywords: FO substrate; blending; electrospinning; fabrication and modification; fouling mitigation; internal concentration polarization; surface coating; template-assisted technique; thin film composite
Year: 2020 PMID: 33171847 PMCID: PMC7695145 DOI: 10.3390/membranes10110332
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1A conceptual illustration of the (a) membrane orientations AL-FS (active layer facing the feed) and AL-DS (substrate layer facing the feed) with a concentration polarization (CP) profile and (b) membrane fouling in forward osmosis (FO) membrane at different orientations.
Figure 2Summary of the pro and cons of substrate modifications of on polyamide thin film composite (TFC) membranes.
Figure 3Schematic illustration representing strategies for substrate fabrication and modification; (a) electrospinning nanofiber; (b) blending technique; (c) surface coating; (d) template-assisted fabrication; (e) layer-by-layer assembly; (f) double-skinned membrane.
Figure 4(a) SEM images of the polysulfone (PSf) nanofiber substrate (i) top surface and (ii) cross-sectional dense polyamide (PA) layer [43]. (b) Surface topologies of polyacrylonitrile (PAN) nanofiber substrates prepared at different rotating speeds of 500, 1000, 1500, and 2000 rpm [150]. (c) FO performance of the prepared TFC flat sheet and nanofiber membranes [51].
Figure 5(a) Chemical structure of disulfonated poly(arylene ether sulfone) multiblock copolymer. (b) Water flux of membranes at different multiblock copolymer contents using water as feed and NaCl as draw solution. (c) Mechanical properties of substrate with 0 wt %, 12.5 wt %, and 25 wt % multiblock copolymer [120]
Figure 6The effect of different structures of substrates on PA layer formation (a1,a2) and formation foulants layer on the membrane surfaces (b1–b4) [79]. (c) Water flux behavior and (d) rejection of heavy metals from synthetic wastewater using different membranes [159].
Figure 7(a) Conceptual images of templating approach by preloading layered-double hydroxide (LDH) inside PSf. (b) Membrane with 7.5 wt % LDH etched with HCl exhibited the best of flux and NaCl rejection [180].
Figure 8(a) Illustration of carbon nanotube (CNT) interlayer developing a channel for water transport on the PES substrate and the comparison of water flux [182]. (b) Fabrication route of graphene oxide (GO)/multiwalled CNT (MWCNT) interlayer on polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) nanofibrous substrates [184].
Figure 9(a) Water flux recovery of single-skinned and double-skinned TFC membranes over a period of 480 min [189]. (b) Schematic of sandwich-like CNT-PES-CNT with cross-sectional SEM images of (i) CNT top layer and (ii) CNT back layer [31].
Overview of the efficiency of different substrate modifications for FO desalination application.
| Substrate | Modifying Agent | Rejection (%) | Flux (LMH) | S-Parameter (µm) | Reference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before | After | AL-FS | AL-DS | AL-FS | AL-DS | |||
|
| ||||||||
| PSf nanofiber | PAN | 95.35 | 97.12 | - | 38.3 | 340 | - | [ |
| PAN nanofiber | Membrane alignment | 93.2 | 90.3 | 50.7 | 62.9 | 86.4 | - | [ |
|
| ||||||||
| PSf flat sheet | Sulfonated PSf 45 | - | - | 39.00 | 69.44 | 114.0 | [ | |
| PES flat sheet | Sulfonated PES | 93.2 | 91.1 | 35.1 | 42.1 | 245.0 | [ | |
| PSf flat sheet | 2.5 wt % sulfonated PSf | 96.01 | 95.12 | 25.53 | 48.37 | 337.0 | [ | |
| PVDF flat sheet | 3 wt % perfluoro-sulfonic acid | 15.18 | 92.23 | 27.0 | 54.4 | 334.6 | [ | |
| PSf flat sheet | 25 wt % disulfonated poly (arylene ether sulfone) multiblock copolymer | 99.41 | 98.95 | 40.9 | 74.4 | 186.0 | 397.0 | [ |
|
| ||||||||
| PSf flat sheet | PEG-400 | 97.0 | 96.5 | 47.4 | - | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet | PSf-mPEG500 | 96.0 | 96.0 | 16.50 | [ | |||
| CAT flat sheet | 2 wt % PVB | 90.7 | 86.6 | 16.8 | 27.5 | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet, | 3 wt % LiCl | 94.3 | 95.3 | 6.71 | 7.29 | [ | ||
|
| ||||||||
| PES flat sheet | MWCNT | 90.32 | 90.68 | 11.98 | - | [ | ||
| PVDF flat sheet | SiO2@MWNTs | 78.2 | 96.3 | 22.1 | 29.5 | [ | ||
| CTA flat sheet | 0.5 wt % CNF | 80.0 | 84.0 | 15.6 | 15.8 | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet | 0.33% INT | 58.0 | 83.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet | 0.5% protonated carbon nitride | 98.0 | 94.5 | 4.24 | 11.0 | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet | 0.5 wt % TiO2/GO | 96.0 | 94.4 | 24.0 | 30.0 | [ | ||
| PES flat sheet | 0.2 wt % Fe3O4 | 96.3 | 93.2 | 17.5 | 21.9 | [ | ||
| PES flat sheet; | MOF-5 | 97.47 | 97.37 | 32.74; | - | [ | ||
|
| ||||||||
| PSf flat sheet | 7.5 wt % LDH-HCl | 93.8 | 92.4 | 20.1 | 47.2 | - | - | [ |
| PSf flat sheet | 5 wt % SiO2-HF | 97.1 | 94.5 | 60.8 | ≈70.0 | 132.28 | - | [ |
|
| ||||||||
| PE flat sheet | PDA | 98.1 | 97.4 | 40.7 | 43.2 | [ | ||
| PES flat sheet | PAA5/CaCO3 | >90 | >90 | 52.0 | 62.0 | [ | ||
| PSf flat sheet | PDA/ 0.5 GO interlayer | 92.8 | 98.0 | 24.30 | - | [ | ||
| PES flat sheet | CNT interlayer | - | - | - | 38.0 | [ | ||
|
| ||||||||
| PES flat sheet | Crosslinked PEI-PAA LbL | - | - | 22.48 | - | - | - | [ |
| PES flat sheet | GO-CNTs | - | 70.2 | 9.0 | - | - | - | [ |
| PSf flat sheet | Double-skinned 0.05 wt % CNT | - | - | 8.8 | 12.4 | [ | ||
Performance and modification comparison of substrate modifications for wastewater treatment
| Substrate | Modifying Method/Agent | Application | Retention (%) | Flux (LMH) | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FO mode | |||||
| PSf nanofiber | Electrospinning | Antibiotic wastewater | Antibiotics: 98.1–99.7 | 48.98 | [ |
| PSf flat sheet | 5 % SPEEK | High salinity wastewater | NaCl: | 28.3 | [ |
| PSf flat sheet | 4% PEG 400 | Synthetic, industrial wastewater | Pb2+, Cd2+, Cr2+: | 34.4 | [ |
| 20.4 wt % PESU | - | Organic pollutant wastewater | Aniline, phenol, nitrobenzene | 20.6, 14.1, | [ |
| SPES flat sheet | PVP | Domestic wastewater | NH4+, PO43-, TOC: | [ | |
| PES flat sheet | Double-skinned/ zwitterionic brush | Oily wastewater | Oil: 99.0 | 13.7 | [ |
| PES flat sheet | Coating/PDA/SWCNT interlayer | Salinity gradient recovery | BSA: 98.0 | 18.1 | [ |