Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 235

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ultra-thin double Janus nanofiltration membrane for separation of Li+ and Mg2+: “Drag” effect from carboxyl-containing negative interlayer

Guo, Changsheng, Li, Nan, Qian, Xiaoming, Shi, Jie, Jing, Miaolei, Teng, Kunyue, Xu, Zhiwei·2020·Separation and Purification Technology

Abstract

Abstract To explore nanofiltration (NF) membrane with high permeability and good separation for Li+ from salt-lake, a triple-layered ultra-thin double Janus NF membrane was prepared with polyethersulfone (PES) substrate membrane, a carboxylated cellulose nanocrystal (CNC-COOH) interlayer and an ultra-thin polyamide (PA) layer via interfacial polymerization of polyethylenimine and trimesoyl chloride. The interlayer contain a large number of carboxyl groups, which could improve not only the negative potential of interlayer, but also the positive potential of the PA layer because of the increase of unreacted NH2. In addition, the hydrophilic of interlayer was stronger than the PA layer. Therefore, the interlayer and the ultra-thin PA layer could construct a double Janus NF membrane with hydrophobic/hydrophilic, positive/negative charge. It was found that the content of carboxyl groups and unreacted amino groups on the surface of Janus PES/CNC-COOH/PA NF membrane was increased obviously. The thickness of Janus NF membrane PA layer was 60.29 nm, 55.56% thinner than that in traditional PES/PA NF membrane and 25.89% thinner than that in weak Janus PES/cellulose nanocrystal/PA NF membrane. The Janus NF membrane had a minimum average surface roughness of 6.21 nm, an effective pore diameter of 1.38 nm, and exhibited a positive surface charge with a highly hydrophilic nature. Under the Mg2+/Li+ ratio of 30 and 60, the Janus NF membrane exhibited the rejection difference between Mg2+ and Li+ reached to 74.35% and 83.96%, the water flux was 4.17 and 3.4 L/(m2·h·bar), respectively, and the separation factor SLi,Mg was 12.15 and 5.84, respectively.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.seppur.2019.05.009

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 4 references

Cited by

See all 235

Metadata

Authors
Guo, C., Li, N., Qian, X., Shi, J., Jing, M., Teng, K., & Xu, Z.
Venue
Separation and Purification Technology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-01
Volume
230
Pages
115567
ISSN
1383-5866 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2943177962
Cited by
235
References
4
FWCI
6.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ultra-thin double Janus nanofiltration membrane for separation of Li+ and Mg2+: “Drag” effect from carboxyl-containing negative interlayer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.05.009
The paper
Guo, C., Li, N., Qian, X., Shi, J., Jing, M., Teng, K., & Xu, Z. (2020). Ultra-thin double Janus nanofiltration membrane for separation of Li+ and Mg2+: “Drag” effect from carboxyl-containing negative interlayer. Separation and Purification Technology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2019.05.009

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.