article · Membranes
This study investigates the modification of polyethersulfone (PES) membranes with 1 wt% titanium dioxide (TiO<sub>2</sub>), zirconium dioxide (ZrO<sub>2</sub>) and a nanocomposite of TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>. The aim was to efficiently remove Rhodamine B (RhB) from water using a threefold approach of adsorption, filtration and photodegradation. Among the modified membranes (TiO<sub>2</sub>, ZrO<sub>2</sub> and TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>), the TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>-PES nanocomposite membrane showed a better performance in rejection of RhB than other membranes with the rejection efficiency of 96.5%. The TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>-PES membrane was found to possess a thicker selective layer and reduced mean pore radius, which contributed to its improved rejection. The TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub> nanocomposite membrane also showed high bulk porosity and a slightly lower contact angle of 69.88° compared to pristine PES with a value of 73°, indicating an improvement in hydrophilicity. Additionally, the TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>-PES nanocomposite membrane demonstrated a relatively lower surface roughness (Sa) of 8.53 nm, which offers the membrane antifouling properties. The TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub>-PES membrane showed flux recovery ratio (FRR), total fouling (R<sub>t</sub>), reversible fouling (R<sub>r</sub>) and irreversible fouling (R<sub>ir</sub>) of 48.0%, 88.7%, 36,8% and 52.9%, respectively. For the photocatalytic degradation performance, the removal efficiency of RhB followed this order TiO<sub>2</sub> > TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub> > ZrO<sub>2</sub> (87.6%, 85.7%, 67.8%). The tensile strength and elongation were found to be compromised with the addition of nanoparticles and nanocomposites. This indicates the necessity to further modify and optimise membrane fabrication to achieve improved mechanical strength of the membranes. At low pressure, the overall findings suggest that the TiO<sub>2</sub>/ZrO<sub>2</sub> nanocomposite has the potential to offer significant improvements in membrane performance (water flux) compared to other modifications.
This page summarises published work. The authoritative version sits with the publisher.
DOI: 10.3390/membranes14100222
Is something wrong with this record? Report it or request removal.
Discussion
Have you built on this work, tried to replicate it, or seen it applied in practice? Share what you know. Verified researchers and MARATTO™ domain experts can open a discussion, and any member can reply. Contributions are reviewed before they appear.
No discussion yet. Open the first thread.
New to MARATTO™? Create a free account.
