Colloidal adhesion to hydrophilic membrane surfaces

Colloidal adhesion to membrane surfaces is an important parameter in determining membrane fouling propensity and in optimizing membrane cleaning strategies. It has previously been demonstrated that acid–base interactions can significantly affect colloid–membrane interaction as a colloid approaches a membrane surface, however, the effect of acid–base interactions on adhesion has received less attention. In this investigation, the approach and adhesion of a silica and polystyrene colloid was measured on three commercially available hydrophilic water treatment membranes using an atomic force microscope and the colloid probe technique. It was found that the hydrophobic polystyrene colloid adhered more weakly to each membrane compared to the hydrophilic silica colloid. These results could not be resolved through classic DLVO analysis alone and were in direct contrast to the expected interaction based on the strong hydrophobic character of the polystyrene colloid. However, the results could be explained by considering the magnitude of the surface’s electron-acceptor ( γ + ) and electron-donor (γ − ) components. It is hypothesized that through hydrogen bonding with surface γ + and γ − groups, structured water layers exist to varying extents at the surfaces of the silica colloid and the hydrophilic membranes, and that their removal results in the formation of strong adhesive bonds between reciprocal γ + and γ − groups. Furthermore, even when surface roughness is substantial, γ + and γ − groups appear to play some role in determining the magnitude of the measured adhesion. The lack of such groups on the polystyrene colloid, and thus the lack of hydrogen bonding capacity, was responsible for its weaker adhesion with the membranes. © 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

[1]  Edward A. McBean,et al.  Statistical procedures for analysis of environmental monitoring data and risk assessment , 2000 .

[2]  P. Vekilov,et al.  Evidence for non-DLVO hydration interactions in solutions of the protein apoferritin. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[3]  J. H. Clint,et al.  Adhesion under water: surface energy considerations , 2001 .

[4]  H. Schönherr,et al.  Surface characterization of oxyfluorinated isotactic polypropylene films: scanning force microscopy with chemically modified probes and contact angle measurements , 1998 .

[5]  M. Morra,et al.  Surface Studies on a Model Cell-Resistant System , 1999 .

[6]  Mukul M. Sharma,et al.  The role of surface roughness and contact deformation on the hydrodynamic detachment of particles from surfaces , 1994 .

[7]  Menachem Elimelech,et al.  Influence of membrane surface properties on initial rate of colloidal fouling of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes , 2001 .

[8]  S. Bhattacharjee,et al.  DLVO interaction energy between spheroidal particles and a flat surface , 2000 .

[9]  S. Bhattacharjee,et al.  DLVO interaction between rough surfaces , 1998 .

[10]  J. Israelachvili Intermolecular and surface forces , 1985 .

[11]  D. Grasso,et al.  Prediction of colloid detachment in a model porous media: Thermodynamics , 1999 .

[12]  K. Kendall,et al.  Surface energy and the contact of elastic solids , 1971, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences.

[13]  J. Ralston,et al.  Adhesion of Iron Oxide to Silica Studied by Atomic Force Microscopy , 1996 .

[14]  N. Hilal,et al.  Atomic force microscope studies of membranes: Force measurement and imaging in electrolyte solutions , 1997 .

[15]  Zhaohui Li,et al.  Determination of contact angles and pore sizes of porous media by column and thin layer wicking , 1992 .

[16]  H. Jacobasch,et al.  Investigation of Adhesion Properties of Polymer Materials by Atomic Force Microscopy and Zeta Potential Measurements , 1996 .

[17]  S. Paria,et al.  Removal of surface adhered particles by surfactants and fluid motions , 2001 .

[18]  Amy E. Childress,et al.  Role of membrane surface morphology in colloidal fouling of cellulose acetate and composite aromatic polyamide reverse osmosis membranes , 1997 .

[19]  J. Škvarla Hydrophobic interaction between macroscopic and microscopic surfaces. Unification using surface thermodynamics , 2001 .

[20]  Higashitani,et al.  Adhesion between Silica Particle and Mica Surfaces in Water and Electrolyte Solutions. , 2000, Journal of colloid and interface science.

[21]  S. Bhattacharjee,et al.  Effect of Membrane Surface Roughness on Colloid−Membrane DLVO Interactions , 2003 .

[22]  Á. Delgado,et al.  Kinetics and interfacial interactions in the adhesion of colloidal calcium carbonate to glass in a packed-bed , 1998 .

[23]  Menachem Elimelech,et al.  Relating Nanofiltration Membrane Performance to Membrane Charge (Electrokinetic) Characteristics , 2000 .

[24]  James R. Smith,et al.  Mapping the Surface Heterogeneity of a Polymer Blend: An Adhesion-Force-Distribution Study Using the Atomic Force Microscope , 2000 .

[25]  C. V. Oss,et al.  Interfacial Forces in Aqueous Media , 1994 .

[26]  Timothy Senden,et al.  Surface chemistry and tip-sample interactions in atomic force microscopy , 1995 .

[27]  Jan Hupka,et al.  Adhesion between hydrocarbon particles and silica surfaces with different degrees of hydration as determined by the AFM colloidal probe technique , 2003 .

[28]  Menachem Elimelech,et al.  Influence of Crossflow Membrane Filter Geometry and Shear Rate on Colloidal Fouling in Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Separations , 2002 .

[29]  G. Dietler,et al.  Force-distance curves by atomic force microscopy , 1999 .

[30]  H. Butt,et al.  Measuring surface forces in aqueous electrolyte solution with the atomic force microscope , 1995 .

[31]  R. Horn,et al.  Double-Layer and Hydration Forces Measured between Silica Sheets Subjected to Various Surface Treatments , 1993 .

[32]  Tomasz Winnicki,et al.  Analysis of membrane fouling in the treatment of water solutions containing humic acids and mineral salts , 1999 .

[33]  D. Grasso,et al.  Prediction of colloid detachment in a model porous media: hydrodynamics , 2000 .

[34]  Douglas W. Fuerstenau,et al.  Mutual coagulation of colloidal dispersions , 1966 .

[35]  H. Christenson,et al.  Direct Measurements of the Force between Hydrophobic Surfaces in Water , 2001 .

[36]  J. H. Clint Adhesion and components of solid surface energies , 2001 .

[37]  Amy E. Childress,et al.  Membrane–Colloid Interactions: Comparison of Extended DLVO Predictions with AFM Force Measurements , 2002 .

[38]  Amy E. Childress,et al.  Assessing short-range membrane–colloid interactions using surface energetics , 2002 .

[39]  Sharma,et al.  Detachment of Particles from Surfaces: An AFM Study. , 2001, Journal of colloid and interface science.

[40]  Richard Bowen W,et al.  Atomic Force Microscopy Studies of Membranes: Effect of Surface Roughness on Double-Layer Interactions and Particle Adhesion. , 2000, Journal of colloid and interface science.

[41]  K. Nakamae,et al.  Adhesive ability and solvent solubility of propylene-butene copolymers modified with maleic anhydride , 1999 .

[42]  K. Gotoh,et al.  Adhesion interaction in water/n-alcohol mixtures between silanized silica and polymer particles , 1999 .

[43]  Richard M. Pashley,et al.  Direct measurement of colloidal forces using an atomic force microscope , 1991, Nature.

[44]  Jaeweon Cho,et al.  Predictive models and factors affecting natural organic matter (NOM) rejection and flux decline in ultrafiltration (UF) membranes , 2002 .