| Literature DB >> 36005654 |
Dengrong Lu1,2, Hongbo Liu1,2, Zhishu Tang1,2,3, Mei Wang1,4, Zhongxing Song1,2, Huaxu Zhu5,6, Dawei Qian5, Xinbo Shi1,2, Guolong Li1,2, Bo Li5,6.
Abstract
Due to the diversity and complexity of the components in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) extracts, serious membrane fouling has become an obstacle that limits the application of membrane technology in TCM. Pectin, a heteropolysaccharide widely existing in plant cells, is the main membrane-fouling substance in TCM extracts. In this study, a hydrophilic hybrid coating was constructed on the surface of a polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) ultrafiltration (UF) membrane co-deposited with polydopamine (pDA) and (3-Aminopropy) triethoxysilane (KH550) for pectin antifouling. Characterization analysis showed that hydrophilic coating containing hydrophilic groups (-NH3, Si-OH, Si-O-Si) formed on the surface of the modified membrane. Membrane filtration experiments showed that, compared with a matched group (FRR: 28.66%, Rr: 26.87%), both the flux recovery rate (FRR) and reversible pollution rate (Rr) of the pDA and KH550 coated membrane (FRR: 48.07%, Rr: 44.46%) increased, indicating that pectin absorbed on the surface of membranes was more easily removed. Based on the extended Derjaguin-Laudau-Verwey-Overbeek (XDLVO) theory, the fouling mechanism of a PVDF UF membrane caused by pectin was analyzed. It was found that, compared with the pristine membrane (144.21 kT), there was a stronger repulsive energy barrier (3572.58 kT) to confront the mutual adsorption between the coated membrane and pectin molecule. The total interface between the modified membrane and the pectin molecule was significantly greater than the pristine membrane. Therefore, as the repulsion between them was enhanced, pectin molecules were not easily adsorbed on the surface of the coated membrane.Entities:
Keywords: (3-Aminopropy) triethoxysilane; XDLVO theory; antifouling; pectin; polydopamine; ultrafiltration membrane
Year: 2022 PMID: 36005654 PMCID: PMC9415628 DOI: 10.3390/membranes12080740
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
The pure water flux and contact angle of different modified membranes reported in the literature.
| Modified Membrane | Sample | Pure Water Flux (L·m−2·h−1) | Contact Angle (°) | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HF-PVDF/pDA | HF-PVDF | 5670 (30 kPa) | 87.50 | [ |
| HF-PVDF/pDA | 637 (30 kPa) | 43.60 | ||
| CFs/PDA + TEOS | CFs | / | 71.50 | [ |
| CFs/PDA + TEOS | / | 41.89 | ||
| PES/pDA + PEI | PES | 45 (100 kPa) | 70.00 | [ |
| PES/pDA + PEI | 55 (100 kPa) | 50.00 | ||
| PVDF/pDA + TiO2 | PVDF | 135 (100 kPa) | 80.10 | [ |
| PVDF/pDA + TiO2 | 225 (100 kPa) | 47.05 | ||
| PSF/TiO2 + pDA + KH550 | PSF | 548 (100 kPa) | 66.50 | [ |
| PSF/TiO2 + pDA + KH550 | 275 (100 kPa) | 35.30 |
ns: HF, hollow fiber; CFs, carbon fibers; PSF, polysulfone film.
Figure 1Schematic illustration of the immobilization of pDA/KH550 coatings onto the fiber surface.
Figure 2The SEM and pictures of the top surface morphologies of pristine and coated membranes (a–c): low-resolution images (5 kx), (a–c): high-resolution images (20 kx)).
Figure 3The EDS of elements of pristine and coated membrane surfaces.
The weight of elements on the surface of pristine and modified membranes.
| Element | Weight (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| PVDF | PVDF/pDA | PVDF/pDA + KH550 | |
| C | 60.59 | 62.13 | 62.33 |
| N | / | 3.05 | 3.30 |
| O | 1.03 | 7.08 | 7.49 |
| F | 38.37 | 27.24 | 26.37 |
| Si | / | / | 0.51 |
Figure 4Comparison of the water contact angle of pristine PVDF and coated membranes.
Figure 5ATR-FTIR spectra of pristine PVDF and coated membranes.
Figure 6Relative flux of pectin solution (a), and flux of water at different stages (b).
Figure 7Comparison of fouling index under pectin solution UF test.
Figure 8Pectin rejection by the pristine and coated membranes under pectin solution.
Figure 9Particle size distribution of the pectin solution and penetrants.
Porosity and mean pore size of pristine and modified membranes.
| Sample | Porosity (%) | Mean Pore Size (nm) |
|---|---|---|
| PVDF | 53.11 | 40.18 |
| PVDF/pDA | 47.02 | 38.69 |
| PVDF/pDA + KH550 | 43.69 | 27.25 |
Contact angle and zeta potentials of membranes and pectin.
| Sample |
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PVDF | 82.82 ± 0.99 | 78.22 ± 1.61 | 50.42 ± 1.73 | −22.51 ± 0.14 |
| PVDF/pDA | 74.57 ± 2.68 | 59.38 ± 1.23 | 31.30 ± 5.10 | −28.51 ± 5.66 |
| PVDF/pDA + KH550 | 43.34 ± 5.05 | 36.80 ± 2.47 | 23.51 ± 1.95 | −31.45 ± 1.93 |
| Pectin | 58.74 ± 4.20 | 59.10 ± 2.40 | 41.51 ± 2.07 | −48.93 ± 2.05 |
ns: , g, is the contact angles of pure water, glycerin, and diiodomethane, respectively.
Surface tension of membranes and pectin.
| Sample | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| PVDF | 0.0220 | 8.2154 | 34.0387 | 0.1689 | 33.0717 |
| PVDF/pDA | 0.4425 | 5.2811 | 44.0964 | 3.0573 | 47.1537 |
| PVDF/pDA + KH550 | 1.1556 | 23.8494 | 46.6695 | 10.4994 | 57.1689 |
| Pectin | 0.1091 | 23.5819 | 38.8412 | 3.2082 | 42.0495 |
Interfacial energy between pectin and membranes.
| Sample |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| |
| PVDF | −3.6230 | −21.7788 | −0.0007 | −25.4225 |
| PVDF/pDA | −6.1637 | −11.7145 | −0.0009 | −17.8791 |
| PVDF/pDA + KH550 | −6.7608 | 24.2249 | −0.0002 | 17.4639 |
Figure 10Profiles of specific interactions between the pristine and coated membranes, and the contaminant, as a function of the separation distance (ns: ).