Influence of membrane support layer hydrophobicity on water flux in osmotically driven membrane processes

Osmotically driven membrane processes, such as forward osmosis (FO) and pressure-retarded osmosis (PRO), rely on the utilization of large osmotic pressure differentials across semi-permeable membranes to generate water flux. Previous investigations on these two processes have demonstrated how asymmetric membrane structural characteristics, primarily of the support layers, impact water flux performance. In this investigation we demonstrate that support layer hydrophilicity or wetting plays a crucial role in water flux across asymmetric semi-permeable membranes. The results show that the polyester (PET) non-woven and polysulfone supports typically present in thin-film composite (TFC) reverse osmosis (RO) membranes do not wet fully when exposed to water, thereby resulting in a marked decrease in water flux. A cellulosic RO membrane exhibited modestly higher water fluxes due to its more hydrophilic support layer. Removal of the PET layers from the cellulosic and TFC RO membranes resulted in an increased water flux for the cellulosic membrane and very little change in flux for the TFC membrane. Pretreatment with hydraulic pressure (RO mode), feed solution degassing, and use of surfactants were used to further elucidate the wetting mechanisms of the different support layers within each membrane. The importance of considering membrane support layer chemistry in further development of membranes tailored specifically for osmotically driven membrane processes is discussed.

[1]  C. D. Moody,et al.  Forward osmosis extractors , 1976 .

[2]  R. Pashley.  Effect of Degassing on the Formation and Stability of Surfactant-Free Emulsions and Fine Teflon Dispersions , 2003 .

[3]  C. D. Moody,et al.  Drinking water from sea water by forward osmosis , 1976 .

[4]  Gershon Wolansky,et al.  Apparent contact angles on rough surfaces: the Wenzel equation revisited , 1999 .

[5]  Abraham Marmur,et al.  Soft contact: measurement and interpretation of contact angles. , 2006, Soft matter.

[6]  Robert L McGinnis,et al.  Desalination by ammonia–carbon dioxide forward osmosis: Influence of draw and feed solution concentrations on process performance , 2006 .

[7]  Klaus-Viktor Peinemann,et al.  Membranes for Power Generation by Pressure Retarded Osmosis , 2008 .

[8]  J. McCutcheon,et al.  Influence of concentrative and dilutive internal concentration polarization on flux behavior in forward osmosis , 2006 .

[9]  J. Bear.  Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media , 1975 .

[10]  R. Pashley,et al.  De-gassed water is a better cleaning agent. , 2005, The journal of physical chemistry. B.

[11]  Menachem Elimelech,et al.  A novel ammonia-carbon dioxide forward (direct) osmosis desalination process , 2005 .

[12]  Amy E. Childress,et al.  Forward osmosis: Principles, applications, and recent developments , 2006 .

[13]  Sidney Loeb.  One hundred and thirty benign and renewable megawatts from Great Salt Lake? The possibilities of hydroelectric power by pressure-retarded osmosis with spiral module membranes: Desalination, 141 (2001) 85–91 , 2002 .

[14]  Jesús Carrera,et al.  On the use of apparent hydraulic diffusivity as an indicator of connectivity , 2006 .

[15]  Richard E. Kravath,et al.  Desalination of sea water by direct osmosis , 1975 .

[16]  S. Loeb,et al.  Internal polarization in the porous substructure of a semipermeable membrane under pressure-retarded osmosis , 1978 .

[17]  A. Marmur.  Contact Angles in Constrained Wetting , 1996 .

[18]  Michael Flynn,et al.  Membrane contactor processes for wastewater reclamation in space Part I. Direct osmotic concentration as pretreatment for reverse osmosis , 2005 .

[19]  How Yong Ng,et al.  Concentration of brine by forward osmosis: Performance and influence of membrane structure , 2008 .

[20]  Sidney Loeb,et al.  One hundred and thirty benign and renewable megawatts from Great Salt lake? The possibilities of hydroelectric power by pressure-retarded osmosis , 2001 .

[21]  J. McCutcheon,et al.  Internal concentration polarization in forward osmosis: role of membrane orientation , 2006 .

[22]  S. Loeb.  Energy production at the Dead Sea by pressure-retarded osmosis: challenge or chimera? , 1998 .