Preparation and Characterization of Nanofiltration-Surfactant (NFS) Membrane for Dyes Removal
Nanofiltration-Surfactant (NFS) membrane was prepared via dry/wet phase inversion technique. A new formulation of dope solutions with the present of key materials that surfactant were developed. The role of surfactant for producing low pressure Nanofiltration-surfactant (NFS) membrane was also disco...
Saved in:
| Summary: | Nanofiltration-Surfactant (NFS) membrane was prepared via dry/wet phase inversion technique. A new formulation of dope solutions with the present of key materials that surfactant were developed. The role of surfactant for producing low pressure Nanofiltration-surfactant (NFS) membrane was also discovered. Two types of surfactant from different categories had been used which are sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) to investigated the effect on membrane performance as well as membrane properties. Addition of additive which is PEG 600 as pore former has been said to increase the membrane performance. Experimental data shows that, PEG 600 increase the water flux of about 214.72 L/m2h at 5 bar operating pressure of the least polymer concentration. Considering addition of surfactant will improve the membrane performance-properties, study on addition of different type of surfactant had also been discovered. In term of pure water permeation (PWP), addition anionic surfactant (SDS) in polymer solution gives high PWP from 127.36 L/m2h to 849.16 L/m2h. While, addition of cationic surfactant (CTAB) increase PWP up to 1370.33 L/m2h. In terms of permeation flux and rejection of salts, CTAB surfactant always show promising results with highest rejection of about 92%. Prior to testing, 3 types of dyes (methyl violet, methyl blue and acid orange) were used with three different concentrations (10ppm, 15ppm and 20ppm). SDS surfactant shows higher flux considering the structure of the membrane more porous and lower rejection of about 25.397 L/m2h and 50% respectively. Different with CTAB that shows opposite trends of low permeation flux, and high rejection of about 8.972 L/m2h and 99.9% respectively. Moreover, membranes were characterized by FTIR in order to determine the presence of surfactant in polymer solution as well as molecular orientation between materials used. To be in line with the experimental data, membrane structure was examined by SEM that shows significance different. Besides, thermal analysis of the membranes was studied using TGA analysis. Membrane without surfactant produced two stages of decomposition. Addition of surfactant show 3 stages of decomposition where the third stage show surfactant degradation. Thus, the highest polymer concentration with CTAB was the best polymer formulation of NFS membrane. |
|---|