CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 143Membrane Separation TechnologiesArsenic contamination and mitigationMembrane-based Ion Separation Techniques

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 27 of the 27 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Experimental study of arsenic removal by direct contact membrane distillation

Open access
Qu, Dan, Wang, Jun, Hou, Deyin, Luan, Zhaokun, Fan, Bin, Zhao, Changwei·2009·Journal of Hazardous Materials
DOI 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.042
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Arsenite (As(III)) and arsenate (As(V)) removal by direct contact membrane distillation (DCMD) were investigated with self-made polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) membranes in the present work. Permeability and ion rejection efficiency of the membrane were tested before the arsenic removal experiments. A maximum permeate flux 20.90 kg/m(2)h was obtained, and due to the hydrophobic property, the PVDF membrane had high rejection of inorganic anions and cations which was independent of the solution pH and the temperature. The experimental results indicated that DCMD process had higher removal efficiency of arsenic than pressure-driven membrane processes, especially for high-concentration arsenic and arsenite removal. The experimental results indicated that the permeate As(III) and As(V) were under the maximum contaminant limit (10 microg/L) until the feed As(III) and As(V) achieved 40 and 2000 mg/L, respectively. The 250 h simultaneous DCMD performance of 0.5mg/L As(III) and As(V) solution was carried out, respectively. The permeate arsenic was not detected during the process which showed the PVDF membrane had stable arsenic removal efficiency. Membrane morphology changed slightly after the experiments, however, the permeability and the ion rejection of the membrane did not change.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.042

Cites

27 of 27 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 143

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Qu, D., Wang, J., Hou, D., Luan, Z., Fan, B., & Zhao, C.
Affiliations
Chinese Academy of Sciences (CN)
Corresponding author
Luan, Zhaokun
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Hazardous Materials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-04
Volume
163
Issue
2-3
Pages
874-879
ISSN
0304-3894 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.07.042
OpenAlex
W2018723048
Cited by
143
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
FWCI
6.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Hazardous Materials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences OpenIR (Chinese Academy of Sciences) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Membrane Separation Technologies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Environmental Chemistry › Arsenic contamination and mitigation
  • Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Filtration and Separation › Membrane-based Ion Separation Techniques
Keywords
arsenic removal, direct contact membrane distillation, arsenite, arsenate, PVDF membranes, ion rejection, permeate flux, hydrophobic membranes, arsenic removal efficiency, membrane stability
MeSH terms
Arsenic, Filtration, Fluorocarbon Polymers, Ions, Membranes, Artificial, Permeability, Polyvinyls, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Arsenites

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review