| Literature DB >> 35631886 |
Yixuan Tang1, Zhengwei Cai1, Xiaoxia Sun1, Chuanmei Chong1, Xinfei Yan1, Mingdi Li1, Jia Xu1.
Abstract
Water purification and water desalination via membrane technology are generally deemed as reliable supplementaries for abundant potable water. Electrospun nanofiber-based membranes (ENMs), benefitting from characteristics such as a higher specific surface area, higher porosity, lower thickness, and possession of attracted broad attention, has allowed it to evolve into a promising candidate rapidly. Here, great attention is placed on the current status of ENMs with two categories according to the roles of electrospun nanofiber layers: (i) nanofiber layer serving as a selective layer, (ii) nanofiber layer serving as supporting substrate. For the nanofiber layer's role as a selective layer, this work presents the structures and properties of conventional ENMs and mixed matrix ENMs. Fabricating parameters and adjusting approaches such as polymer and cosolvent, inorganic and organic incorporation and surface modification are demonstrated in detail. It is crucial to have a matched selective layer for nanofiber layers acting as a supporting layer. The various selective layers fabricated on the nanofiber layer are put forward in this paper. The fabrication approaches include inorganic deposition, polymer coating, and interfacial polymerization. Lastly, future perspectives and the main challenges in the field concerning the use of ENMs for water treatment are discussed. It is expected that the progress of ENMs will promote the prosperity and utilization of various industries such as water treatment, environmental protection, healthcare, and energy storage.Entities:
Keywords: electrospinning; electrospun nanofiber-based membranes (ENMs); membrane fabrication; nanofiber layer; water treatment
Year: 2022 PMID: 35631886 PMCID: PMC9144434 DOI: 10.3390/polym14102004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.967
Comparison of different fabrication techniques of fibers.
| Techniques | Technical Process | Materials | Benefits | Drawbacks | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electrospinning |
Polymer solution or melt flow and transform into polymer jet from spinneret under a high voltage electric field (usually 6 kV above); When the jet is extended and solvent is vaporized, the nanofibers in specific dimensions are collected by collectors | Polyester, polyamide, polyvinyl alcohol, polyacrylonitrile, polyurethane, polyp-benzoyl, p-phenylenediamine etc. |
High-productive; Simple for operation; Products with advantages of exceedingly porous, well interconnected, huge internal surface area, three-dimensional fibrous system and extraordinarily separation ability |
Vulnerable mechanical strength | [ |
| Dry spinning |
Polymer solution is extruded from spinneret and cooled down by hot air stream; Polymer trickles turn to fibers in solid state during solvent extraction | Cellulose acetate, polyolefin, polyvinyl chloride, vinylidene chloride spandex etc. |
Wide range of raw materials; Pollution-free and no solvent recovery problems |
Low yield | [ |
| Wet spinning |
Polymer solution is extruded from spinneret and then solidified into fibers through coagulating bath; Fibers are extruded and collected | Polyacrylonitrile, polyvinyl alcohol, polyvinyl chloride, viscose, polypyrrole, conductive polyaniline, inorganic nanofibers like carbon nanotubes etc. |
Uniform structure and high quality of fibers; Directional fibers can be collected; Possible to produce inorganic nanofibers for separation application |
Low speed in spinning; Short Fibers | [ |
| Emulsion spinning |
Polymer powder is dispersed in easy-spinning carrier solution; Carriers dissolve in high-temperature processing; Polymer powder is melted or sintered into successive fibers | Polytetrafluoroethylene, ceramic, silicon carbide, monox, chloroethylene etc. |
Specificality in the polymers unsuitable for dry spinning and wet spinning |
Presence of structural defects and impurities; Low structural stability; | [ |
| Melt spinning |
Polymer particles are heated, melt and extruded into spinneret; Polymer jet is impinged and cooled down by hot air stream to produce fine fibers; The fine fibers are collected in a collector screen | Polyolefin, polyamide, polyester, polyvinyl chloride etc. |
Simplicity and efficiency; No solvent recovery problems |
Requirements of high voltage electric field and temperature; None nano-sized fiber | [ |
| Phase separation spinning |
Polymer solution of two or multiple components is exposed to the gelation temperature to get the gel; Phase separation of solvent and polymer occur due to temperature and pressure changes; Nanofibers are generated and collected after solvent extraction and matrix drying | Polyacrylonitrile, poly (2, 6-dimethyl p-phenyl ether), polypropylene, polyvinyl alcohol |
Feasibility on the polymers difficult for electrospinning and melt blowing; Mass production; |
Limited range of polymer-solvent system; Difficult solvent recovery; Low structural stability; Rare polymers with good gelation ability | [ |
Figure 1(a) Preparation and application of ENMs; (b,c) ENMs schematic images of two roles of nanofiber layers: served as selective layer (b) and supporting substrate (c).
Figure 2Schematic representation of the ES process. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [27]. 2020, Elsevier.
Effects of different conditions on the nanofibers in electrospinning technique.
| Sorts | Factors | Influences | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Polymer | Concentration |
Viscosity and surface tension of polymer solution increase as the concentration increases; Diameters and pore sizes of nanofibers increase as the solution concentration increases; Instable nanofibers with a low linear density are produced by polymer solution at a low concentration | [ |
| Polymer molecular structure |
Smoother surfaces and a larger diameter are caused by a branched polymer compared with the linear polymer; Bead-free structures are manufactured by linear polymers | [ | |
| Polymer molecular weight |
Smoothness of nanofibers is increased as the polymer molecular weight increases | [ | |
| Viscosity |
Diameters and pore sizes of nanofibers increase as the polymer viscosity increases; The production of nanofibers is directly influenced | [ | |
| Conductivity |
Diameters decrease and pore sizes increase as the conductivity increases; Bead-formed fibers are caused by a higher conductivity | [ | |
| Surface tension |
Diameters decrease and pore sizes increase as the surface tension increases; Impurities are hard to avoid when surfactants are utilized to reduce the tension | [ | |
| Solvent volatility |
Wet fiber, molten fiber, or even negligible fiber collection are the result of solvent volatility; Highly volatile solutions may result in intermittent spinning due to polymer solidification at the tip of the spinneret; A proper solvent can make the produced fiber uniform and stable | [ | |
| Fabrication conditions | Electric potential |
Larger and faster tensile of the solution droplets as the voltage increases; Droplet splitting ability is enhanced, leading to a larger diameter of nanofibers | [ |
| Flow rate of polymer solution |
Diameters and the beads of nanofibers increase with the higher flow rate; Pore sizes vary due to the different flow rate | [ | |
| Distance between spinneret and collector |
Diameters of nanofibers reduce with the larger distance; Beads appear and the products turn unstable on account of the larger distance | [ | |
| Syringe Needle gauge |
Diameters increase and pore sizes decrease as the nozzle diameter increases; Productivity is enhanced by the smaller diameter of the needle | [ | |
| Collector |
Flat, cylindrical, and prismatic collectors are popular | ||
| Ambient conditions | Temperature |
Solvent volatilization and nanofiber solidification are accelerated by the increase in temperature; Electrical stretching of the fluid jet is early terminated by temperature increases; The instability of nanofibers is enhanced due to the decrease in solution viscosity and surface tension by temperature increases | [ |
| Humidity |
Thinner, less sticky and bead-formed structures are caused by the higher humidity, as well as larger diameters and pore sizes | [ | |
| Air velocity in the chamber |
Nanofibers are enabled to be collected on the collector layer by layer when increasing air flow rate, consistent with the spinning direction; Instability in the ES process is caused by the increased velocity of cross flow air | [ |
Figure 3(a) Schematic illustration of PVDF chains crosslinking induced by NH3·H2O and the 17-FAS grafting onto PVDF polymer chains; (b) FE-SEM images of PVDF ENMs through a fluorinated, self-roughened process and thermal treatment. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [72]. 2020, Elsevier.
Figure 4(a) SEM images for the top layer (a1,a4), bottom layer (a2,a5), and cross-section (a3,a6) of the prepared PVDF ENMs; (b) Permeate flux of PVDF ENMs (ESD1–7); (c) Rejection of Cd, Pb, Zn, Cu and Ni (c1–c5). Reprinted with permission from Ref. [73]. 2018, Elsevier.
Figure 5(a) SEM images of optimized fibers; (b1,b2) Flux data and rejection percentage as a function of time for the commercial and the synthesized membranes; Reprinted with permission from Ref. [82]. 2017, Elsevier. (c1–c3) SEM images of top surface, beads diameter and cross-section of the optimized PVDF/Al2O3 ENMs; (d1,d2) SEM images of beads without and with 30 wt% Al2O3 nanoparticles. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [83]. 2018, Elsevier.
Figure 6(a) Schematic diagrams and TEM images of S-PVDF/PVDF/GO nanofibers; (b) Water flux of PVDF ENMs with CNTs in different concentrations. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [101]. 2017, Elsevier.
Figure 7(a) Schematic illustration of vapor deposition fluorination; (b) Contact angles of DI water and other liquids on PVDF-HFP and PVDF-HFP-F membranes; (c) Conductivity and water flux verses time of the PVDF-HFP-F membrane in DCMD. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [120]. 2020, Elsevier.
Figure 8(a) Schematic diagram of the fabrication process of dual-layer ENMs; (b) permeance performance of the prepared ENMs; Reprinted with permission from Ref. [126]. 2017, Elsevier. (c) cross section SEM images of the optimized dual-layer ENMs; (d,e) permeating performance and stability test in different conditions of thermal and strain; Reprinted with permission from Ref. [128]. 2020, Elsevier. (f) cross-section SEM images and EDX analysis of the optimized dual-layer ENMs (CENM-5); (g,h) permeating performance of dual-layer ENMs. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [129]. 2017, Elsevier.
Figure 9(a) Schematic illustration and SEM images of Janus PAN/CNTs ENMs; (b) separation results by two sides of Janus PAN/CNTs0.5 ENMs; (c) pure water flux, O/W flux and water rejection by the pure PAN and PAN/CNTs ENMs; (d) spreading behaviors of water and oil droplet on two sides of PAN/CNTs0.5 ENMs. Reprinted with permission from Ref. [133]. 2017, Elsevier.
Figure 10(a) Schematic diagram of TFN C PVDF/PVA ENMs; (b) FESEM images of PVDF/PVA nanofiber layer and TFNC PVDF/PVA ENMs for top surface (b1,b2); (c) FO performance of commercial HTI-CTA (c1) and prepared TFNC PVDF/PVA ENMs (c2). Reprinted with permission from Ref. [148]. 2017, Elsevier.