Strategy of Development on Zeolite Membrane for Forward Osmosis Operation; Effects of Structural Parameter of Support Layer and Si/Al Ratio of ZSM-5 Layer on Water Flux

References

• Araki S, Yamashita R, Li K, Yamamoto H. 2021. Preparation and gas permeation properties of all-silica CHA zeolite hollow fiber membranes prepared on amorphous-silica hollow fibers. J Membr Sci. 634:119338. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Azadi F, Karimi-Jashni A, Zerafat MM, Saadat S. 2021. Fabrication, optimization, and performance of a novel double-skinned Al2O3. TiO2 ceramic nanocomposite membrane for forward osmosis application. Environ Technol Innov. 22:101423. doi: 10.1016/j.eti.2021.101423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bui N-N, Arena JT, McCutcheon JR. 2015. Proper accounting of mass transfer resistances in forward osmosis: Improving the accuracy of model predictions of structural parameter. J Membr Sci. 492:289–302. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2015.02.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cath TY, Childress AE, Elimelech M. 2006. Forward osmosis: principles, applications, and recent developments. J Membr Sci. 281:70–87. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2006.05.048.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi J, Ghosh S, Lai Z, Tsapatsis M. 2006. Uniformly a-oriented MFI zeolite films by secondary growth. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 45:1154–1158. doi: 10.1002/anie.200503011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung T-S, Luo L, Wan CF, Cui Y, Amy G. 2015. What is next for forward osmosis (FO) and pressure retarded osmosis (PRO). Sep Purif Technol. 156:856–860. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.10.063.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EL-Bourawi MS, Khayet M, Ma R, Ding Z, Li Z, Zhang X. 2007. Application of vacuum membrane distillation for ammonia removal. J Membr Sci. 301:200–209. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2007.06.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elyassi B, Jeon MY, Tsapatsis M, Narasimharao K, Basahel SN, Al-Thabaiti S. 2016. Ethanol/water mixture pervaporation performance b-oriented silicalite-1 membranes made by gel-free secondary growth. AIChE J. 62:556–563. doi: 10.1002/aic.15124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emadzadeh D, Lau WJ, Matsuura T, Rahbari-Sisakht M, Ismail AF. 2014. A novel thin film composite forward osmosis membrane prepared from PSf–TiO2 nanocomposite substrate for water desalination. Chem Eng J. 237:70–80. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2013.09.081.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goh P S, Ismail A F, Ng B C, Abdullah M S. 2019. Recent progresses of forward osmosis membranes formulation and design for wastewater treatment. Water 11:2043. doi: 10.3390/w11102043.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruber MF, Johnson CJ, Tang CY, Jensen MH, Yde L, Hélix-Nielsen C. 2011. Computational fluid dynamics simulations of flow and concentration polarization in forward osmosis membrane systems. J Membr Sci. 379:488–495. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2011.06.022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iskander SM, Zou S, Brazil B, Novak JT, He Z. 2017. Energy consumption by forward osmosis treatment of landfill leachate for water recovery. Waste Manag. 63:284–291. doi: 10.1016/j.wasman.2017.03.026.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang J, Peng L, Wang X, Qiu H, Ji M, Gu X. 2019. Effect of Si/Al ratio in the framework on the pervaporation properties of hollow fiber CHA zeolite membranes. Micropor Mesopor Mater. 273:196–202. doi: 10.1016/j.micromeso.2018.07.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kahrizi M, Gonzales PR, Kong L, Matsuyama H, Lu P, Lin J, Zhao S. 2022. Significant roles of substrate properties in forward osmosis membrane performance: A review. Desalination. 528:115615. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2022.115615.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim W-J, Heldman DR. 2021. A mathematical estimation of the structural parameter for prediction of Forward Osmosis (FO) performance. J Water Process Eng. 39:101719. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2020.101719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lai Z, Bonilla G, Diaz I, Nery JG, Sujaoti K, Amat MA, Kokkoli E, Terasaki O, Thompson RW, Tsapatsis M, et al. 2003. Microstructural optimization of a zeolite membrane for organic vapor separation. Science. 300:456–460. doi: 10.1126/science.1082169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li L, Yang J, Li J, Wang J, Lu J, Yin D, Zhang Y. 2016. High performance ZSM-5 membranes on coarse macroporous α-Al2O3 supports for dehydration of alcohols. AIChE J. 62:2813–2824. doi: 10.1002/aic.15234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loeb S, Titelman L, Korngold E, Freiman J. 1997. Effect of porous support fabric on osmosis through a Loeb-Sourirajan type asymmetric membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 129:243–249. doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00354-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manickam SS, McCutcheon JR. 2017. Understanding mass transfer through asymmetric membranes during forward osmosis: a historical perspective and critical review on measuring structural parameter with semi-empirical models and characterization approaches. Desalination. 421:110–126. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2016.12.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Min B, Yang S, Korde A, Kwon YH, Jones CW, Nair S. 2019. Continuous zeolite MFI membranes fabricated from 2D MFI nanosheets on ceramic hollow fibers. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 58:8201–8205. doi: 10.1002/anie.201903554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park MJ, Gonzales RR, Abdel-Wahab A, Phuntsho S, Shon HK. 2018. Hydrophilic polyvinyl alcohol coating on hydrophobic electrospun nanofiber membrane for high performance thin film composite forward osmosis membrane. Desalination. 426:50–59. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2017.10.042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rastgar M, Shakeri A, Bozorg A, Salehi H, Saadattalab V. 2017. Impact of nanoparticles surface characteristics on pore structure and performance of forward osmosis membranes. Desalination. 421:179–189. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2017.01.040.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakai M, Kaneko T, Sasaki Y, Sekigawa M, Matsukata M. 2020. Formation process of columnar grown (101)-oriented silicalite-1 membrane and its separation property for xylene isomer. Crystals. 10:949. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100864.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sakai M, Seshimo M, Matsukata M. 2019. Hydrophilic ZSM-5 membrane for forward osmosis operation. J. Water Process Eng. 32:100864. doi: 10.3390/membranes11060382.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tiraferri A, Yip NY, Straub AP, Castrillon SR-V, Elimelech M. 2013. A method for the simultaneous determination of transport and structural parameters of forward osmosis membranes. J Membr Sci. 444:523–538. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.05.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ueno K, Negishi H, Okuno T, Saito T, Tawarayama H, Ishikawa S, Miyamoto M, Uemiya S, Sawada Y, Oumi Y. 2017. High-performance silicalite-1 membranes on porous tubular silica supports for separation of ethanol/water mixtures. Sep Purif Technol. 187:343–354. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.06.071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Xu T. 2015. Anchoring hydrophilic polymer in substrate: an easy approach for improving the performance of TFC FO membrane. J Membr Sci. 476:330–339. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.11.025.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wenten IG, Khoiruddin K, Reynard R, Lugito G, Julian H. 2021. Advancement of forward osmosis (FO) membrane for fruit juice concentration. J Food Eng. 290:110216. doi: 10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2020.110216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wong MCY, Martinez K, Ramon GZ, Hoek EMV. 2012. Impacts of operating conditions and solution chemistry on osmotic membrane structure and performance. Desalination. 287:340–349. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2011.10.013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang S, Kwon YH, Koh D-Y, Min B, Liu Y, Nair S. 2019. Highly selective SSZ-13 zeolite hollow fiber membranes by ultraviolet activation at near-ambient temperature. Chem Nano Mat. 5:61–67. doi: 10.1002/cnma.201800272.
   Google Scholar
• Yasukawa M, Higa M, Matsuyama H. 2014. Development of analysis method for forward osmosis hollow fiber membrane performance. Bull Soc Sea Water Sci. 68:94–101. doi: 10.11457/swsj.68.94.
   Google Scholar
• You S, Lu J, Tang CY, Wang X. 2017. Rejection of heavy metals in acidic wastewater by a novel thin-film inorganic forward osmosis membrane. Chem Eng J. 320:532–538. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2004.12.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Shen L, Guan C-Y, Liu C-X, Lang W-Z, Wang Y. 2018. Construction of SiO2@MWNTs incorporated PVDF substrate for reducing internal concentration polarization in forward osmosis. J Membr Sci. 564:328–341. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2018.07.043.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang X, Shen L, Lang W-Z, Wang Y. 2017. Improved performance of thin-film composite membrane with PVDF/PFSA substrate for forward osmosis process. J Membr Sci. 535:188–199. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2017.04.038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong P, Fu X, Chung T-S, Weber M, Maletzko C. 2013. Development of thin-film composite forward osmosis hollow fiber membranes using direct sulfonated polyphenylenesulfone (sPPSU) as membrane substrates. Environ Sci Technol. 47:7430–7436. doi: 10.1021/es4013273.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou L, Wang T, Nguyen QT, Li J, Long Y, Ping Z. 2005. Cordierite-supported ZSM-5 membrane: Preparation and pervaporation properties in the dehydration of water–alcohol mixture. Sep Purif Technol. 44:266–270. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2004.12.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhou M, Korelskiy D, Ye P, Grahn M, Hedlund J. 2014. A uniformly oriented MFI membrane for improved CO2 separation. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl. 53:3492–3495. doi: 10.1002/anie.201311324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zito PF, Brunetti A, Caravella A, Drioli E, Barbieri G. 2019. Water vapor permeation and its influence on gases through a zeolite-4A membrane. J Membr Sci. 574:154–163. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2018.12.065.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar