Evaluation of three methods for the characterisation of the membraneâsolution interface: streaming potential, membrane potential and electrolyte conductivity inside pores

Filtration and separation performances of microfiltration, ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes can be greatly affected by the charge (or electrical potential) on their surface. These surface properties can be characterised in terms of potential in the Outer Helmholtz Plane (Ψd). A theoretical analysis of electrical and electrokinetic phenomena (electrolyte conductivity inside pores λpore, membrane potential Em and streaming potential SP) occurring in charged capillaries was developed in the framework of the linear thermodynamics of irreversible processes with the aim of studying the variation of SP, Em and λpore as a function of Ψd for various pore sizes and electrolyte concentrations. From these results, the accuracy on the determination of Ψd from experimental measurements of λpore, Em and SP could be estimated and a ‘method limitation’ diagram was constructed using the constraints of pore size and surface charge.

[1]  A. Szymczyk,et al.  Membrane potential in charged porous membranes , 1999 .

[2]  M. Guiver,et al.  Tangential flow streaming potential measurements : Hydrodynamic cell characterization and zeta potentials of carboxylated polysulfone membranes , 1998 .

[3]  W. Bowen,et al.  Electrokinetic effects in membrane pores and the determination of zeta-potential , 1998 .

[4]  M. Nyström,et al.  Streaming potential as a tool in the characterization of ultrafiltration membranes , 1989 .

[5]  G. Hagmeyer,et al.  Modelling the salt rejection of nanofiltration membranes for ternary ion mixtures and for single salts at different pH values , 1998 .

[6]  A. Szymczyk,et al.  Characterisation of surface properties of ceramic ultrafiltration membranes by studying diffusion-driven transport and streaming potential☆ , 1998 .

[7]  Menachem Elimelech,et al.  Measuring the zeta (electrokinetic) potential of reverse osmosis membranes by a streaming potential analyzer , 1994 .

[8]  J. Laîné,et al.  The streaming potential method for the characterization of ultrafiltration organic membranes and the control of cleaning treatments , 1997 .

[9]  M. Nyström,et al.  Fouling and retention of nanofiltration membranes , 1995 .

[10]  A. Szymczyk,et al.  Characterisation of surface properties of ceramic membranes by streaming and membrane potentials , 1998 .

[11]  Anthony Szymczyk,et al.  An application of the space charge model to the electrolyte conductivity inside a charged microporous membrane , 1999 .

[12]  G. Capannelli,et al.  Properties of polyvinylidene fluoride membranes at low degrees of sulphonation and their characterization by concentration potential coupled with A.C. impedance measurements , 1983 .

[13]  David Hasson,et al.  Utilization of the Donnan effect for improving electrolyte separation with nanofiltration membranes , 1996 .

[14]  F. A. Morrison,et al.  Electrokinetic Energy Conversion in Ultrafine Capillaries , 1965 .

[15]  A. Fane,et al.  Evaluation of electroosmosis and streaming potential for measurement of electric charges of polymeric membranes , 1996 .

[16]  F. Tejerina,et al.  Streaming potential and phenomenological coefficients in nuclepore membranes , 1988 .

[17]  J. Lyklema,et al.  On surface conduction and its role in electrokinetics. , 1998 .

[18]  G. Jonsson,et al.  Electrokinetic characterization of a microporous non-commercial polysulfone membrane: phenomenological coefficients and transport parameters , 1998 .

[19]  Szymczyk,et al.  Electrokinetic Phenomena in Homogeneous Cylindrical Pores. , 1999, Journal of colloid and interface science.

[20]  N. Nikolov,et al.  An electrical model for the relaxation of streaming potential across a charged membrane , 1993 .

[21]  C. Causserand,et al.  Modification of clay cake permeability by adsorption of protein , 1997 .

[22]  J. C. Fair,et al.  Reverse Electrodialysis in Charged Capillary Membranes , 1971 .

[23]  Resistance to fouling accomplished by modification of ultrafiltration membranes , 1990 .

[24]  W. Richard Bowen,et al.  A theoretical basis for specifying nanofiltration membranes : Dye/salt/water streams , 1998 .

[25]  Maaret Kulovaara,et al.  Fractionation of model proteins using their physiochemical properties , 1998 .

[26]  P. Aimar,et al.  Influence of surface interaction on transfer during colloid ultrafiltration , 1996 .

[27]  A. Larbot,et al.  Salt filtration on gamma alumina nanofiltration membranes fired at two different temperatures , 1997 .

[28]  A. Larbot,et al.  Importance of Electrostatic Interactions for the Selectivity of Micro and Mesoporous Ceramic Membranes , 1997 .

[29]  J. F. Osterle,et al.  Membrane transport characteristics of ultrafine capillaries. , 1968, The Journal of chemical physics.

[30]  J. Schurz,et al.  Characterization of polymer surfaces by means of electrokinetic measurements , 1988 .

[31]  A. Szymczyk,et al.  Comparison of two electrokinetic methods – electroosmosis and streaming potential – to determine the zeta-potential of plane ceramic membranes , 1998 .

[32]  C. Guizard,et al.  Experimental determination of four characteristics used to predict the retention of a ceramic nanofiltration membrane , 1997 .

[33]  Norman Epstein,et al.  Theory of electrokinetic flow in fine cylindrical capillaries at high zeta-potentials , 1975 .

[34]  A. Larbot,et al.  Potassium titanyl phosphate membranes: surface properties and application to ionic solution filtration , 1998 .

[35]  J. Benavente,et al.  Effect of adsorbed protein on the hydraulic permeability, membrane and streaming potential values measured across a microporous membrane , 1998 .