Omniphobic hollow fiber membranes for vacuum membrane

Subscriber access provided by Oregon Health & Science University Library

Energy and the Environment

Omniphobic hollow fiber membranes for vacuum membrane distillation Kang Jia Lu, Jian Zuo, Jian Chang, Hong Nan Kuan, and Tai-Shung Chung Environ. Sci. Technol., Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.8b00766 • Publication Date (Web): 21 Mar 2018 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on March 21, 2018

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 27

Environmental Science & Technology

1

Omniphobic hollow fiber membranes for

2

vacuum membrane distillation

3 4

Kang Jia Lua, Jian Zuob, Jian Changa, Hong Nan Kuana, Tai-Shung Chunga,*

5 6 7 8 9 10

a

Department of Chemical & Biomolecular Engineering,

National University of Singapore, 4 Engineering Drive 4, Singapore 117585 b

Singapore Institute of Technology, 10 Dover Drive, Singapore 138683

11 12 13 14

* Corresponding author. Tel.: 65 6516 6645; fax: 65 6779 1936.

15

E-mail address: [email protected] (T. S. Chung)

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


23

Abstract

24

Management of produced water from shale gas production is a global challenge. Vacuum

25

membrane distillation (VMD) is considered as a promising solution because of its various

26

advantages. However, low surface tension species in produced water can easily deposit on the

27

membrane surface and cause severe fouling or wetting problems. To solve the problems, an

28

omniphobic polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) hollow fiber membrane has been developed via

29

silica nanoparticle deposition followed by a Teflon® AF 2400 coating in this study. The

30

resultant membrane shows good repellency towards various liquids with different surface

31

tensions and chemistries, including water, ethylene glycol (EG), cooking oil and ethanol. It

32

also exhibits stable performance in 7-h VMD tests with a feed solution containing up to 0.6

33

mM of SDS. In addition, the effects of surface energy, surface morphology as well as

34

nanoparticle size on membrane omniphobicity have been systematically investigated. This

35

work may provide valuable guidance to molecularly design omniphobic VMD membranes for

36

produced water treatment.

37 38

Key words: omniphobic surface; vacuum membrane distillation (VMD); silica nanoparticle;

39

Teflon® AF 2400 coating

40


Page 2 of 27

Page 3 of 27


41

TOC Art 60 nm

250 nm

PVDF

PVDF

hydrophobic

omniphobic

42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56


400 nm

Teflon® AF 2400 coating


57

1. Introduction

58

Because of the explosive increase in global energy demand, shale gas is gaining worldwide

59

attention as one of the most promising alternative energy sources.1–3 Nevertheless,

60

environmental concerns associated with shale gas production have never ceased.4–6 One of the

61

biggest environmental issues is the management of produced water generated during shale gas

62

production. It is challenging to treat the produced water owing to its complex physicochemical

63

composition and high total dissolved solid (TDS) concentration.7 Membrane distillation (MD)

64

is one of the emerging technologies showing promise to treat and recycle the produced water.4

65 66

MD is a thermally driven membrane separation process that involves the transport of water

67

vapor across a hydrophobic membrane.8–12 Thanks to the special driven force – vapor pressure

68

difference, MD has a theoretical 100% rejection towards non-volatile species.13,14 More

69

importantly, MD is not sensitive to feed concentrations.15–19 This unique property distinguishes

70

MD from other membrane processes and makes it especially suitable for the treatment of high

71

salinity produced water. Moreover, MD process can leverage the elevated temperature of

72

produced water to drive the process, which will significantly lower the energy cost of MD 4.

73

Among the four common MD configurations – namely, direct contact membrane distillation

74

(DCMD), air gas membrane distillation (AGMD), sweeping gas membrane distillation (SGMD)

75

and vacuum membrane distillation (VMD), VMD is selected in this current study for a

76

potentially higher permeation flux and an improved thermal efficiency.20–22 Despite all the

77

above-mentioned advantages, it is still challenging to use VMD to treat produced water. One of

78

the major reasons is that the high content of low surface tension species in produced water can

79

cause severe fouling and wetting issues.23–25

80


Page 4 of 27

Page 5 of 27


81

A potential solution is to develop an omniphobic membrane, which has strong repellency

82

towards various chemicals with a wide range of surface tensions. Successful deisgns of

83

omniphobic surfaces have been reported by Tsujii et al., Tuteja et al. and Hensel et al., and these

84

valuable studies reveal that a surface should have a re-entrant morphology and low surface

85

tension in order to achieve the onmiphobic status.26–29 To apply the concept of omniphobic

86

surface on membrane applications, several pioneering works have been conducted. Elimelech

87

et al. grafted silica nanoparticles (SiNPs) onto the membrane surface followed by a

88

fluoroalkylsilane coating. The resultant membranes exhibit excellent anti-wetting ability in

89

treating surfactant added brine solutions via DCMD.30–33 Woo et al. developed an omniphobic

90

polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) membrane by electospinning and CF4 plasma modification.

91

The membranes were tested for AGMD with surfactant added real RO brine as the feed solution

92

and showed stable performance.34

93 94

The current study aims to simplify the fabrication of omniphobic membranes and to

95

systematically investigate the effects of surface energy and surface morphology on membrane

96

performance. Lu et al. have reported a facile method to lower the membrane surface energy by

97

Teflon® AF 2400 coating.35 Compared with the conventional silanization or plasma treating

98

method, it is much easier to conduct the Teflon® AF 2400 coating. In addition, the surface

99

energy could be lowered with minimal changes of the membrane morphology by carefully

100

tuning the coating conditions. As a result, one can study the effects of membrane surface energy

101

and surface morphology separately. Moreover, the effects of nanoparticle size on membrane

102

omniphobicity will also be studied, which is rarely reported before. The omniphobic treatment

103

will be conducted on PVDF hollow fibers and the resultant membranes will be tested in VMD

104

with sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) added brine solutions as feeds.

105



106

2. Materials and methods

107

2.1 Dope preparation and membrane fabrication

108

Hollow fiber membranes were fabricated via a non-solvent induced phase separation (NIPS)

109

method. In order to achieve superior mechanical properties, dual-layer membranes consisting

110

of a hydrophobic PVDF outer layer and a hydrophilic polyetherimide (PEI) inner substrate

111

were designed and prepared. Spinning conditions and dope formulations were summarized in

112

Table S1. The information of the materials used can be found in the supporting information.

113

Detailed information about the dope preparation and the hollow fiber spinning procedure can

114

be found elsewhere.36

115 116

2.2 Syntheses of silica nanoparticles

117

Silica nanoparticles with different particle sizes were prepared by the Stöber method according

118

to the formula shown in Table S2. Pre-determined amounts of ammonia hydroxide and water

119

were well mixed in 100 mL of anhydrous ethanol, followed by the addition of tetraethyl

120

orthosilicate (TEOS). The reactions then occurred at room temperature. Subsequently, the

121

mixtures were centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 30 min. The obtained silica nanoparticles were

122

washed with isopropanol (IPA) for three times to remove the unreacted reagents and finally

123

dried in an oven at 80 °C for 24 h.

124 125

2.3 Omniphobic modification of membranes

126

The procedure of the omniphobic modification is illustrated in Figure 1. Before any treatment,

127

one end of the fiber was sealed with epoxy to minimize the diffusion of treating solutions into

128

the lumen side of the hollow fiber. The fiber was firstly reacted with a 7.5 M sodium hydroxide

129

(NaOH) solution at 50 °C for 1 h to generate hydroxyl groups on the membrane surface.

130

Afterwards, the treated fiber was thoroughly washed by de-ionized (DI) water and ethanol, and


Page 6 of 27

Page 7 of 27


131

then completely dried in open air. In the next step, the fiber was immersed in an ethanol solution

132

comprising 1.5 wt% 3-Triethoxysilylpropylamine (APTES) for 1 h in order to render positive

133

charge onto the membrane surface. The optimization of the alkaline treatment condition and

134

APTES treatment duration can be found in the supporting information. The membrane was

135

then transferred to a DI water solution containing 0.5 wt% silica nanoparticles for 1 h followed

136

by complete drying in open air. To lower the surface energy of the membrane, it was dip-coated

137

in a HT-70 Galden heat transfer fluid consisting of 0.025 wt% Teflon® AF 2400 for 30 s. The

138

special solvent has a low boiling temperature of 70°C. It evaporated away quickly within a few

139

seconds, leaving Teflon® AF 2400 on the membrane surface.

140

Membranes are denoted as D-PVDF-x-T where x (= 60, 250 or 400) represents the diameters

141

(nm) of nanoparticles and T means the Teflon® coating. D-PVDF-60 refers to the membrane

142

coated with 60 nm nanoparticles only while D-PVDF-T represents the membrane coated with

143

Teflon® AF 2400 only.

144

145 146

Figure 1. The diagram of the coating procedure

147



148

2.4 Characterizations

149

Surface scans of the pristine, silica nanoparticle and Teflon® coated hollow fiber membranes

150

were performed by an X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS). Membrane morphology and

151

topology were observed by a field-emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM) and an

152

atomic force microscopy (AFM), respectively. Membranes’ surface porosities, mean and

153

maximum pore sizes were analyzed with the help of ImageJ software (NIH) using FESEM

154

images as discussed elsewhere.37 Membranes’ overall pore size distributions were measured

155

by a CFP-1500 AE capillary flow porometer (PMI, Vista, CA). Overall porosities were

156

obtained by calculating the dry/wet mass differences by immersing the membranes in IPA.

157

Dynamic contact angles of hollow fibers in four liquids (DI water, ethylene glycol (EG),

158

cooking oil and ethanol) and surface tension values of the liquids were measured by a

159

tensiometer. To verify the stability of the silica nanoparticle coating, the FESEM pictures of

160

the outer membrane surfaces after VMD tests were taken. The VMD permeate solutions were

161

collected and the concentrations of silicon have been tested using an iCAP 6200 ICP

162

spectrometer. Details of the characterization methods can be found in the support information.

163 164

2.5 VMD tests

165

VMD tests were conducted using a laboratory setup depicted in Figure 2. Before testing,

166

hollow fiber membranes were firstly assembled into a module with an average length of 10 cm

167

and mounted onto the setup. The initial feed solution was model seawater of 3.5 wt.% NaCl.

168

After the first 60 min operation, SDS was added into the feed solution at an incremental rate

169

of 0.2 mM for every 2 hours. The final SDS concentration was 0.6 mM. The surface tension

170

values of the 3.5 wt.% NaCl solutions containing 0.2, 0.4 and 0.6 mM SDS were measured to

171

be 34.7, 30.2, 25.8 mM/m, respectively. The feed solution was controlled at 70 ⁰C using a

172

heater (F12, Julabo) and circulated to the shell side of membranes at a flow rate of 0.2 L/min,


Page 8 of 27

Page 9 of 27


173

while the lumen side was maintained at around 20 mBar with the aid of a vacuum pump. Vapor

174

permeate on the lumen side was condensed by liquid nitrogen. The mass and conductivity of

175

the permeate were measured by an accurate balance (A & D, GR-200) and a conductivity meter

176

(Lab 960, Schott), respectively. VMD tests for each sample were repeated for three times and

177

the average data were recorded.

178

179 180

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the VMD set-up

181 182

The flux of the membrane was calculated by the following equation: 𝐽𝐽 =

183

∆𝑤𝑤

𝐴𝐴×𝑡𝑡

(1)

185

where ∆𝑤𝑤 (kg) is the permeate mass collected during time t (h); A (m2) is the total area of the

186

the following equation:

184

187 188

outer membrane surface; t (h) is the test duration. The membrane rejection was obtained from

𝛽𝛽 = (1 −

𝐶𝐶𝑝𝑝

𝐶𝐶𝑓𝑓

) × 100

(2)

where 𝐶𝐶𝑝𝑝 and 𝐶𝐶𝑓𝑓 are the salt concentrations of the permeate and feed solutions, respectively. ACS Paragon Plus Environment


189

3. Results and discussions

190

3.1 Engineering re-entrant structures with a low surface energy

191

To examine the nanoparticle attachment and Teflon® AF 2400 coating, XPS survey spectra

192

were taken for D-PVDF, D-PVDF-60 and D-PVDF-60-T and Figure 3 shows the results. The

193

pristine PVDF surface exhibits two major emissions at 680 eV and 280 eV which are assigned

194

to binding energies of F 1s and C 1s respectively.38 From the spectrum of the silica nanoparticle

195

coated membrane, these two peaks diminish, while peaks for O 1s (525 eV), Si 2s (145 eV), Si

196

2p (96 eV) emerge.39 When Teflon® AF 2400 is applied, the F 1s emission reappears, indicating

197

the successful coating. It is interesting to notice that weak peaks for Si 2s and Si 2p could still

198

be observed after the Teflon® AF 2400 coating. This is ascribed to the fact that the coating

199

layer thickness is thinner than the XPS depth limit of 10 nm with the designated coating

200

condition.35 This is critical in order to ensure the surface morphology is not affected so that the

201

effects of surface morphology and surface energy can be studied separately.

202

Figure 3. XPS spectra of D-PVDF, D-PVDF-60 and D-PVDF-60-T membrane surfaces


Page 10 of 27

Page 11 of 27


203

Figure 4 displays the FESEM pictures of the outer membrane surfaces. A comparison between

204

Figure 4 (A) and 4 (B) indicates that the membrane morphology does not change much after

205

the Teflon® AF 2400 coating. The porosity, average pore size and maximum pore size of D-

206

PVDF and D-PVDF-T in Table 1 also show great similarity. The same conclusion can be drawn

207

by comparing Figure 4C and 4D. Interestingly, the texture of silica nanoparticles is not affected

208

by the Teflon® coating because of the use of a very diluted coating solution and a short coating

209

duration. Figure 4 (D) to 4 (F) exhibit the surfaces coated by SiNPs with sizes of 60, 250 and

210

400 nm respectively. The synthesized SiNPs have narrow size distributions and cover the entire

211

membrane surfaces uniformly. The successful attachment of SiNPs can also be supported by

212

AFM images of the outer membrane surfaces as shown in Figure S3.

213 214

Figure 4. FESEM pictures of the outer membrane surfaces (A) D-PVDF, (B) D-PVDF-T, (C)

215

D-PVDF-60, (D) D-PVDF-60-T, (E) D-PVDF-250-T, (F) D-PVDF-400-T

216 217



218

Table 1. Surface and overall porosities and pore sizes of membranes

219 220

3.2 Effects of surface energy and morphology on membrane omniphobicity

221

Figure 5 depicts the contact angles of various solutions on the pristine and modified membranes.

222

Comparing the pristine membrane with the Teflon® AF 2400 coated membrane, the latter

223

exhibits higher contact angles for all the liquids. As mentioned in the previous section, the

224

morphology and pore size distribution for both membranes are of great similarity. Therefore,

225

the major cause for the difference in contact angle between D-PVDF and D-PVDF-T is the

226

surface chemistry. Teflon® AF 2400 has a perfluorinated structure, which brings extra fluorine

227

to the membrane substrate. As shown in Table 2, the fluorine to carbon ratio on the membrane

228

surface increases from 0.8 to 1.37 after the Teflon® coating that would successfully lower the

229

surface energy. The motivation of lowering surface energy can be partially explained by the

230

Young’s equation: cosθ = (𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆 − 𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 )/𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿 where θ is the equilibrium contact angle; 𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆 , 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿

232

and 𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 are the surface tensions of solid, liquid and solid/liquid interface, respectively.40 The

233

interaction forces between the two contacting materials are of the same kind.26 Under this

231

234

solid/liquid interfacial tension can be approximated by 𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 = 𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆 + 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿 − 2�𝛾𝛾𝑆𝑆 𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿 when the 𝛾𝛾 condition, the Young’s equation could be reduced to the following form cosθ = 2� 𝑆𝑆�𝛾𝛾𝐿𝐿 − 1. ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 12 of 27

Page 13 of 27


235

Therefore, coating membranes with a low surface energy material will be beneficial for

236

obtaining large contact angles towards low surface tension liquids.

237 238

Other than the effects of low membrane surface tension, Figure 5 also proves that the

239

nanoparticle coating has significant influences on membrane omniphobicity. The nanoparticle

240

coated membrane exhibits much larger contact angles for all types of liquids than the

241

membrane coated with Teflon® AF 2400 only. Since both D-PVDF-T and D-PVDF-60-T have

242

Teflon® AF 2400 on the outmost layer, they should exhibit similar outer surface chemistry.

243

Therefore, the imparities in their contact angles are mainly resulted from their different surface

244

morphologies. Thus, the effects of surface roughness and structure on omniphobicity have been

245

investigated.

246 247

Figure S3 and Table 2 show that the surface roughness of D-PVDF-T is close to that of D-

248

PVDF-60-T. Even though the nanoparticles introduce some extra roughness, they also fill and

249

cover some of surface pores because the maximum surface pore size of D-PVDF-T is 551 nm

250

as shown Table 1 and Figure 4. As a result, the overall roughness of the membrane remains

251

similar after being coated with 60 nm nanoparticles and the higher contact angles of D-PVDF-

252

60-T are mainly due to the re-entrant surface structure created by the nanoparticles. A

253

qualitative analysis by Tuteja et al. reveals that the net force on the liquid-vapor interface is

254

directed away from the solid surface for a re-entrant textured surface.27,41 Therefore, the liquid

255

will be prevented from penetrating into the solid texture and forming a composite solid-liquid-

256

vapor interface. Such composite interface, equivalent to a Cassie state,42,43 exhibits apparently

257

high contact angles even if low surface tension liquids are applied.

258 259



260 261

Figure 5. Contact angles of various solutions on D-PVDF, D-PVDF-T and D-PVDF-60-T

262 263

Table 2. Surface roughnesses and F/C atomic ratios of membrane surfaces

264 265 266

3.3 Effects of surface energy and morphology on VMD performance

267

Figure 6 displays the change of normalized fluxes during 7-h VMD tests. In the first hour of

268

tests when the feed solution contains only 3.5 wt% sodium chloride, all the membranes exhibit

269

stable fluxes. At the beginning of the second hour, 0.2 mM SDS is added to the feed solution.


Page 14 of 27

Page 15 of 27


270

The flux of the pristine membrane increases dramatically upon the SDS addition. This can be

271

attributed to the adsorption of hydrophobic tails of SDS onto the membrane surface, leaving

272

the hydrophilic heads pointing outwards. The hydrophilic heads will assist water absorption

273

and result in a significant increase in flux.24 From the fourth hour, the SDS concentration is

274

increased to 0.4 mM. At the same time, the flux of the pristine membrane experiences an

275

obvious decline. The flux of the pristine membrane continues decreasing when the SDS

276

concentration increases to 0.6 mM. At the end of the 7-h test, the flux drops to only one-half

277

of the initial value. The flux decline is possibly due to membrane partial wetting caused by

278

SDS adsorption and scaling. In the early stage of the partial wetting, which is also referred as

279

surface wetting. Liquid penetration takes place but the water bridge is not formed. The

280

membrane contains stagnant liquid water that has poor mass and convective heat transfer. The

281

severe mass and temperature polarization leads to a low driving force and flux. On the other

282

hand, since no pore is completely wet, there is no pathway for the salt to the permeate solution.

283

Thus, the conductivity of the distillate remains unchanged. In fact, the rejections of all the three

284

membranes are higher than 99.5% over the tests; therefore, they are not displayed in Figure 6.

285

The flux of the Teflon® AF 2400 coated membrane is stable for the first two hours and starts

286

to decline from the third hour onwards at a slower rate compared to that of the pristine

287

membrane. The sudden increase of the flux was not observed for the Teflon® AF 2400 coated

288

membrane, possibly due to the weaker attraction with SDS compared to the PVDF membrane.

289

The attractive London dispersion force between the membrane surface and the hydrocarbon

290

tail of the SDS is positively related to the geometric mean of the dispersion force components

291

of the surface energy values of SDS and the membrane material.44 For PVDF and Teflon® the

292

dispersion components of the surface energies are 23.3 and 18.4 mN/m,45 respectively.

293

Therefore, the attractive force between SDS and PVDF surface is stronger than that between

294

SDS and Teflon® AF 2400 coating. The flux of the nanoparticle and Teflon® AF 2400 coated



295

membrane D-PVDF-60-T remains stable over the entire test. The superb performance is due to

296

its excellent repellency towards the low surface tension feed.

297 298

Figure 6. Performances of D-PVDF, D-PVDF-T, D-PVDF-60-T with the SDS addition in

299

feed solutions. Average fluxes of D-PVDF, D-PVDF-T and D-PVDF-60-T are 24.9, 18.3 and

300

14.6 kg m-2 h-1, respectively

301 302

3.4 Effects of silica nanoparticle size on membrane omniphobicity

303

The positive effects of nanoparticle coating on membrane omniphobicity has been discussed

304

in previous sections. In this section, the effects of different nanoparticle sizes on membrane

305

omniphobicity are explored. As shown in Figure 4, the synthesized nanoparticles are of uniform

306

sizes and completely cover the membrane outer surfaces. However, the number density of

307

nanoparticles per unit area and the particle-particle gap among them vary with their sizes. The

308

number density of 60 nm nanoparticles is obviously higher than those of 250 nm and 400 nm

309

ones, while the gap between particles is wider for larger nanoparticles. The effects of

310

nanoparticle size on membrane omniphobicity are reflected in Figure 7. For liquids with high

311

surface tensions such as water and EG, D-PVDF-250-T and D-PVDF-400-T exhibit similar


Page 16 of 27

Page 17 of 27


312

repellency as D-PVDF-60-T, if not higher. However, for liquids with surface tensions, the

313

membrane coated with 60 nm nanoparticles shows stronger repellency.

314 315

As discussed in section 3.3, a Cassie state with a composite solid-liquid-vapour interface is the

316

key to achieve omniphobicity. In the Cassie model, the apparent contact angle θ* is closely

317 318

related to the fraction of solid in contact with the liquid 𝜙𝜙𝑠𝑠 (0 D-PVDF-400-T. Membranes with


Page 18 of 27

Page 19 of 27


353

larger silica nanoparticles have smaller mass transfer resistance. The lowest flux of D-PVDF-

354

400-T is possibly due to the partial wetting resulted from the unstable solid-liquid-vapor

355

interface. All three membranes have rejections higher than 99.5% over the entire tests;

356

therefore, they are not displayed in Figure 8.

357

Figure 8. Performances of D-PVDF-60-T, D-PVDF-250-T and D-PVDF-400-T with the SDS

358

addition in feed solutions. Average fluxes of D-PVDF-60-T, D-PVDF-250-T and D-PVDF-

359

400-T are 14.6, 16.2 and 11.9 kg m-2 h-1, respectively

360 361

3.6 Stability of the nanoparticle coating

362

In order to investigate the stability of the nanoparticle layers as well as the possible

363

contamination of the permeate, we measured the silica concentrations in permeate solutions

364

and took pictures of membranes after VMD tests. Figure 9 and Figure S6 show no obvious

365

damage to the nanoparticle layers after VMD tests. Silica content in all the permeate solutions

366

are lower than 0.3 ppm as shown in Table 3, which are much lower than the Singapore drinking

367

water quality of 3.62 ppm.48



368 369

Figure 9. FESEM images of outer surfaces of (A) D-PVDF-T (B) D-PVDF-60-T (C) D-

370

PVDF-250-T (D) D-PVDF-400-T after VMD tests

371 372

Table 3. Silicon concentration in the distillates

373 374 375

Supporting Information

376

Materials; optimization of the alkaline treatment condition; optimization of APTES treatment

377

duration; characterizations; mass transfer resistance

378


Page 20 of 27

Page 21 of 27


379

Acknowledgements

380

The authors would like to thank Singapore National Research Foundation under its Energy

381

Innovation Research Programme for supporting the project entitled, “Using Cold Energy from

382

Re-gasification of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) for Novel Hybrid Seawater Desalination

383

Technologies” (Grant number: R-279-000-456-279). Miss Kangjia Lu would also like to thank

384

Dr. Dieling Zhao, Dr. Lin Luo and Dr. Gang Han for their valuable advices and kind support.

385 386

387

List of abbreviations and symbols 𝐽𝐽

Permeation flux

∆𝑊𝑊

Change in the permeate mass

Α

Effective membrane area

𝑡𝑡

Test duration

𝐶𝐶𝑝𝑝

Permeate concentration

𝐽𝐽0

Permeation flux for pristine membrane

𝛽𝛽

Separation factor

𝐶𝐶𝑓𝑓

Feed concentration

388

References

389

(1)

Dong, D.; Wang, Y.; Li, X.; Zou, C.; Guan, Q.; Zhang, C.; Huang, J.;Wang, S.; Liu, H.;

390

Bai, W.;Liang, F.; Lin, W.; Zhao, Q.; Liu, D.; Zhen Q. Breakthrough and prospect of

391

shale gas exploration and development in China. Natl. Gas Ind. B 2016, 3, 12–26.

392 393

(2)

U.S. Energy Information Administration. Technically recoverable shale oil and shale gas resources China. 2015.



394

(3)

395 396

U.S. Energy Information Administration. Annual energy outlook 2017 with projections to 2050. 2017.

(4)

Shaffer, D. L.; Arias Chavez, L. H.; Ben-Sasson, M.; Romero-Vargas Castrillón, S.;

397

Yip, N. Y.; Elimelech, M. Desalination and reuse of high-salinity shale gas produced

398

water: Drivers, technologies, and future directions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2013, 47

399

(17), 9569–9583.

400

(5)

Gregory, K. B.; Vidic, R. D.; Dzombak, D. A. Water management challenges

401

associated with the production of shale gas by hydraulic fracturing. Elements 2011, 7

402

(3), 181–186.

403

(6)

Olmstead, S. M.; Muehlenbachs, L. A; Shih, J. S.; Chu, Z.; Krupnick, A. J. Shale gas

404

development impacts on surface water quality in Pennsylvania. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci.

405

USA 2013, 110 (13), 4962–4967.

406

(7)

Ahmadun F. R.; Pendashteh, A.; Abdullah, L. C.; Biak, D. R. A.; Madaeni, S. S.;

407

Abidin, Z. Z. Review of technologies for oil and gas produced water treatment. J.

408

Hazard. Mater. 2009, 170 (2–3), 530–551.

409

(8)

Meng, S.; Ye, Y.; Mansouri, J.; Chen, V. Fouling and crystallisation behaviour of

410

superhydrophobic nano-composite PVDF membranes in direct contact membrane

411

distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 2014, 463, 102–112.

412

(9)

Francis, L.; Ghaffour, N.; Alsaadi, A. A.; Amy, G. L. Material gap membrane

413

distillation: A new design for water vapor flux enhancement. J. Memb. Sci. 2013, 448,

414

240–247.

415

(10) Singh, D.; Sirkar, K. K. High temperature direct contact membrane distillation based

416

desalination using PTFE hollow fibers. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2014, 116, 824–833.


Page 22 of 27

Page 23 of 27

417


(11) Gryta, M.; Tomaszewska, M.; Grzechulska, J.; Morawski, A.W. Membrane distillation

418

of NaCl solution containing natural organic matter. J. Memb. Sci. 2001, 181 (2), 279–

419

287.

420 421 422 423 424

(12) Lawson, K. W.; Lloyd, D. R. Membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 1997, 124 (1), 1– 25. (13) Alklaibi, A. M.; Lior, N. Membrane-distillation desalination: Status and potential. Desalination 2005, 171 (2), 111–131. (14) Lu, K. J.; Zuo, J.; Chung, T. S. Novel PVDF membranes comprising n-butylamine

425

functionalized graphene oxide for direct contact membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci.

426

2017, 539 (May), 34–42.

427

(15) Sanmartino, J.A.; Khayet, M.; García-Payo, M.C.; El-Bakouri, H.; Riaza. A. Treatment

428

of reverse osmosis brine by direct contact membrane distillation: chemical

429

pretreatment approach. Desalination 2017, 420, 79–90.

430

(16) Zhao, D.; Zuo, J.; Lu, K. J.; Chung, T. S. Fluorographite modified PVDF membranes

431

for seawater desalination via direct contact membrane distillation. Desalination 2017,

432

413 (September), 119–126.

433

(17) Zhu, J.; Jiang, L.; Matsuura, T. New insights into fabrication of

434

hydrophobic/hydrophilic composite hollow fibers for direct contact membrane

435

distillation. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2015, 137, 79–90.

436 437 438 439

(18) Alkhudhiri, A.; Darwish, N.; Hilal, N. Membrane distillation: A comprehensive review. Desalination 2012, 287, 2–18. (19) Al-Obaidani, S.; Curcio, E.; Macedonio, F.; Profio, G. D.; Al-Hinai, H.; Drioli, E. Potential of membrane distillation in seawater desalination: Thermal efficiency,



440 441 442 443 444 445 446

sensitivity study and cost estimation. J. Memb. Sci. 2008, 323 (1), 85–98. (20) Li, B.; Sirkar, K. K. Novel membrane and device for vacuum membrane distillationbased desalination process. J. Memb. Sci. 2005, 257 (1–2), 60–75. (21) Mericq, J. P.; Laborie, S.; Cabassud, C. Vacuum membrane distillation of seawater reverse osmosis brines. Water Res. 2010, 44 (18), 5260–5273. (22) Wang, P.; Chung, T. S. Exploring the spinning and operations of multibore hollow fiber membranes for vacuum membrane distillation. AIChE 2014, 60 (3), 1078–1090.

447

(23) Li, X.; García-Payo, M. C.; Khayet, M.; Wang, M.; Wang, X. Superhydrophobic

448

polysulfone/polydimethylsiloxane electrospun nanofibrous membranes for water

449

desalination by direct contact membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 2017, 542 (April),

450

308–319.

451

(24) Chew, N. G. P.; Zhao, S.; Loh, C. H.; Permogorov, N.; Wang, R. Surfactant effects on

452

water recovery from produced water via direct-contact membrane distillation. J.

453

Memb. Sci. 2017, 528 (October 2016), 126–134.

454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461

(25) Gryta, M.; Karakulski, K. The application of membrane distillation for the concentration of oil-water emulsions. Desalination 1999, 121 (1), 23–29. (26) Tsujii, K.; Yamamoto, T.; Onda, T.; Shibuichi, S. Super oil-repellent surfaces. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1997, 36 (9), 1011–1012. (27) Tuteja, A.; Choi, W.; Mabry, J. M.; McKinley, G. H.; Cohen, R. E. Robust omniphobic surfaces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2008, 105 (47), 18200–18205. (28) Hensel, R.; Neinhuis, C.; Werner, C. The springtail cuticle as a blueprint for omniphobic surfaces. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2016, 45 (2), 323–341.


Page 24 of 27

Page 25 of 27


462

(29) Hensel, R.; Finn, A.; Helbig, R.; Braun, H. G.; Neinhuis, C.; Fischer, W. J.; Werner, C.

463

Biologically inspired omniphobic surfaces by reverse imprint lithography. Adv. Mater.

464

2014, 26 (13), 2029–2033.

465

(30) Boo, C.; Lee, J.; Elimelech, M. Engineering surface energy and nanostructure of

466

microporous films for expanded membrane distillation applications. Environ. Sci.

467

Technol. 2016, 50 (15), 8112–8119.

468

(31) Lee, J.; Boo, C.; Ryu, W. H.; Taylor, A. D.; Elimelech, M. Development of

469

omniphobic desalination membranes using a charged electrospun nanofiber scaffold.

470

ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8 (17), 11154–11161.

471

(32) Lin, S.; Nejati, S.; Boo, C.; Hu, Y.; Osuji, C. O.; Elimelech, M. Omniphobic

472

membrane for robust membrane distillation. Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2014, 1 (11),

473

443–447.

474

(33) Boo, C.; Lee, J.; Elimelech, M. Omniphobic polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF)

475

membrane for desalination of shale gas produced water by membrane distillation.

476

Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50 (22), 12275–12282.

477

(34) Woo, Y. C.; Chen, Y.; Tijing, L. D.; Phuntsho, S.; He, T.; Choi, J. S.; Kim, S. H.;

478

Shon, H. K. CF4 plasma-modified omniphobic electrospun nanofiber membrane for

479

produced water brine treatment by membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 2017, 529

480

(February), 234–242.

481 482 483 484

(35) Lu, K. J.; Zuo, J.; Chung, T. S. Tri-bore PVDF hollow fibers with a super-hydrophobic coating for membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 2016, 514, 165–175. (36) Zuo, J.; Chung, T. S.; O’Brien, G. S.; Kosar, W. Hydrophobic/hydrophilic PVDF/Ultem® dual-layer hollow fiber membranes with enhanced mechanical



485

properties for vacuum membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 2016, 523 (July 2016),

486

103–110.

487

(37) Mierzwa, J. C.; Vecitis, C. D.; Carvalho, J.; Arieta, V.; Verlage, M. Anion dopant

488

effects on the structure and performance of polyethersulfone membranes. J. Memb.

489

Sci. 2012, 421–422, 91–102.

490

(38) Li, Q.; Bi, Q. Y.; Zhou, B.; Wang, X. L. Zwitterionic sulfobetaine-grafted

491

poly(vinylidene fluoride) membrane surface with stably anti-protein-fouling

492

performance via a two-step surface polymerization. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2012, 258 (10),

493

4707–4717.

494

(39) Hu, X. L.; Hou, G. M.; Zhang, M. Q.; Rong, M. Z.; Ruan, W. H.; Giannelis, E. P. A

495

new nanocomposite polymer electrolyte based on poly(vinyl alcohol) incorporating

496

hypergrafted nano-silica. J. Mater. Chem. 2012, 22 (36), 18961.

497 498 499

(40) Young, T. An Essay on the Cohesion of Fluids. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London 1805, 95 (0), 65–87. (41) Tuteja, A.; Choi, W.; Ma, M.; Mabry, J. M.; Mazzella, S. A.; Rutledge, G. C.;

500

McKinley, G. H.; Cohen, R. E. Designing Superoleophobic Surfaces. Science 2007,

501

318, 1618–1622.

502

(42) Cassie, A. B. D.; Baxter, S. Wettability of porous surfaces,. 1944, 5, 546–551.

503

(43) Zisman, W. A. Relation of the equilibrium contact angle to liquid and solid

504

constitution. Adv. Chem. Ser. 1964, 1–51. DOI: 10.1021/ba-1964-0043.ch001

505

(44) Fowkes, F. M. Attractive Forces At Interfaces. Ind. Eng. Chem. 1964, 56 (12), 40–52.

506

(45) Solid surface energy data (SFE) for common polymers. Retrieved on 7th Feb 2018

507

from http://www.surface-tension.de/solid-surface-energy.htm.


Page 26 of 27

Page 27 of 27


508

(46) Koishi, T.; Yasuoka, K.; Fujikawa, S.; Ebisuzaki, T.; Zeng, X. C. Coexistence and

509

transition between Cassie and Wenzel state on pillared hydrophobic surface. Proc.

510

Natl. Acad. Sci. 2009, 106 (21), 8435–8440.

511

(47) Murakami, D.; Jinnai, H.; Takahara, A. Wetting transition from the cassie-baxter state

512 513

to the wenzel state on textured polymer surfaces. Langmuir 2014, 30 (8), 2061–2067. (48)

Singapore drinking water quality. 2015, 1-7. Retrieved on 8th Feb 2018 from

514

https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/Our%20Drinking%20Water%20Quality%202015.

515

pdf


Omniphobic hollow fiber membranes for vacuum membrane

Recommend Documents