Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 418

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Effect of Flux (Transmembrane Pressure) and Membrane Properties on Fouling and Rejection of Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membranes Treating Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Containing Wastewater

Tang, Chuyang Y., Fu, Q. Shiang, Criddle, Craig S., Leckie, James O.·2007·Environmental Science & Technology

Abstract

Perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) is an emergent contaminant of substantial environmental concerns. In this study, reverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) membranes were used to remove this toxic and persistent compound from PFOS-containing wastewater. Five RO membranes and three NF membranes were tested at a feed concentration of 10 ppm PFOS over 4 days, and the PFOS rejection and permeate flux performances were systematically investigated. PFOS rejection was well correlated to sodium chloride rejection. The rejection efficiencies for the RO membranes were > 99%, and those for the NF membranes ranged from 90-99%. Improvement in PFOS rejection, together with mild flux reduction (< 16%), was observed at longer filtration time. Such shifts in rejection and flux performance were probably due to the increased PFOS accumulation at longer duration, as shown by X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and liquid chromatograph and tandem mass spectrometry results. A fraction of PFOS molecules might be entrapped in the polyamide layer of the composite membranes, which hindered the further passage of both water and other PFOS molecules. In a similar fashion, PFOS rejection and fouling were enhanced for greater initial flux and/or applied pressure, where PFOS accumulation was promoted probably due to increased hydrodynamic permeate drag. Flux reduction was also shown to correlate to membrane roughness, with the rougher membranes tend to experience more flux reduction than the smoother ones.

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 · 10.1021/es062052f

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 418

Metadata

Authors
Tang, C. Y., Fu, Q. S., Criddle, C. S., & Leckie, J. O.
Venue
Environmental Science & Technology
Published
2007-02-15
Volume
41
Issue
6
Pages
2008-2014
ISSN
  • 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5851
OpenAlex
W2085509557
Cited by
418
References
1
FWCI
12.79
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: Effect of Flux (Transmembrane Pressure) and Membrane Properties on Fouling and Rejection of Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membranes Treating Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Containing Wastewater. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es062052f
The paper
Tang, C. Y., Fu, Q. S., Criddle, C. S., & Leckie, J. O. (2007). Effect of Flux (Transmembrane Pressure) and Membrane Properties on Fouling and Rejection of Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration Membranes Treating Perfluorooctane Sulfonate Containing Wastewater. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es062052f

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.