The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Dissecting the Role of Substrate on the Morphology and Separation Properties of Thin Film Composite Polyamide Membranes: Seeing Is Believing
Abstract
Recent studies show that the surface morphology of a thin film composite (TFC) polyamide membrane depends strongly on its porous substrate. Nevertheless, the underlining mechanisms and the effects on membrane separation performance remain controversial. To dissect the exact role of pore properties, we synthesized TFC polyamide membranes on polycarbonate substrates with cylindrical track-etched pores (PCTE) of well-defined pore size ranging from 10 to 800 nm. Leaf-like roughness features were most prominent for polyamide films formed on substrates of intermediate pore sizes (80 and 100 nm). Smaller pores inhibited leaf-like features as a result of insufficient storage of m -phenylenediamine (MPD) monomers for the interfacial reaction, whereas larger pores resulted in diminished surface roughness due to the lack of confinement to the interfacially degassed nanobubbles. Substrate porosity plays a critical role on membrane water permeability, while smaller pores with greater pore density are favored to improve membrane rejection. TFC polyamide membranes prepared on sponge-like poly(ether sulfone) and polysulfone substrates exhibit better water permeability and salt rejection compared to the PCTE-TFC membranes thanks to the simultaneously enhanced confinement and MPD storage effects. The mechanistic insights gained in this study reveal the huge potential of substrate design toward high-performance TFC RO membranes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Yang, Z., Zhou, Z.-W., Guo, H., Yao, Z., Ma, X.-H., Song, X., Feng, S.-P., & Tang, C. Y. (2018) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b02425 · Cited by 437
Self-citation
Cited by
Yang, Z., Sun, P.-F., Li, X., Gan, B., Wang, L., Song, X., Park, H.-D., & Tang, C. Y. (2020) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c05377 · Cited by 577
Self-citationPeng, L. E., Yang, Z., Long, L., Zhou, S., Guo, H., & Tang, C. Y. (2022) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119871 · Cited by 388
Self-citationShao, S., Zeng, F., Long, L., Zhu, X., Peng, L. E., Wang, F., Yang, Z., & Tang, C. Y. (2022) · Environmental Science & Technology · doi:10.1021/acs.est.2c04736 · Cited by 355
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Peng, L. E., Yao, Z., Yang, Z., Guo, H., & Tang, C. Y.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2020-05-12
- Volume
- 54
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 6978-6986
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W3024835684
- Cited by
- 218
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.27
- 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
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.