Tuning the primary selective nanochannels of MOF thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membranes for efficient removal of hydrophobic endocrine disrupting compounds

doi:10.1007/s11783-021-1474-7

Front. Environ. Sci. Eng.

2022, Vol. 16

Issue (4) : 40 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-021-1474-7

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Tuning the primary selective nanochannels of MOF thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membranes for efficient removal of hydrophobic endocrine disrupting compounds

Ruobin Dai¹, Hongyi Han¹, Yuting Zhu², Xi Wang², Zhiwei Wang¹(

)

¹. State Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse, Shanghai Institute of Pollution Control and Ecological Security, School of Environmental Science and Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
². Tongji Architectural Design (Group) Co., Ltd., Environmental Engineering Branch, Shanghai 200092, China

Download: PDF(2399 KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks

Abstract

• PA layer properties tune the primary nanochannels in MIL-101(Cr) TFN NF membranes.

• The dense PA layer induced transition of primary nanochannels of TFN NF membranes.

• Nanochannels around MOF contributed to the improved flux with a loose PA structure.

• Nanochannels in MOFs dominated the separation performance with a dense PA structure.

Metal organic framework (MOF) incorporated thin-film nanocomposite (TFN) membranes have the potential to enhance the removal of endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs). In MOF-TFN membranes, water transport nanochannels include (i) pores of polyamide layer, (ii) pores in MOFs and (iii) channels around MOFs (polyamide-MOF interface). However, information on how to tune the nanochannels to enhance EDCs rejection is scarce, impeding the refinement of TFN membranes toward efficient removal of EDCs. In this study, by changing the polyamide properties, the water transport nanochannels could be confined primarily in pores of MOFs when the polyamide layer became dense. Interestingly, the improved rejection of EDCs was dependent on the water transport channels of the TFN membrane. At low monomer concentration (i.e., loose polyamide structure), the hydrophilic nanochannels of MIL-101(Cr) in the polyamide layer could not dominate the membrane separation performance, and hence the extent of improvement in EDCs rejection was relatively low. In contrast, at high monomer concentration (i.e., dense polyamide structure), the hydrophilic nanochannels of MIL-101(Cr) were responsible for the selective removal of hydrophobic EDCs, demonstrating that the manipulation of water transport nanochannels in the TFN membrane could successfully overcome the permeability and EDCs rejection trade-off. Our results highlight the potential of tuning primary selective nanochannels of MOF-TFN membranes for the efficient removal of EDCs.

Keywords Porous metal organic framework Thin-film nanocomposite membrane Primary selective nanochannels Nanofiltration Endocrine disrupting compounds

Corresponding Author(s): Zhiwei Wang

Issue Date: 13 July 2021

Cite this article:

Ruobin Dai,Hongyi Han,Yuting Zhu, et al. Tuning the primary selective nanochannels of MOF thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membranes for efficient removal of hydrophobic endocrine disrupting compounds[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2022, 16(4): 40.

URL:

https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/10.1007/s11783-021-1474-7
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fese/EN/Y2022/V16/I4/40

Fig.1 Characterization of the synthesized MIL-101(Cr): (a) SEM image, (b) measured XRD pattern and simulated pattern using Diamond 3.2, (c) FTIR spectrum with vertical lines showing bands at 3428, 1613, 1510, and 1394 cm⁻¹, and (d) N₂ adsorption-desorption curves. All characterization techniques for the MIL-101(Cr) were conducted after activation by overnight vacuum-drying at 120°C.

Fig.2 SEM characterization of (a–d) the TFC and (e–h) MOF-TFN membranes synthesized at four PIP monomer concentrations (corresponding to C1, C2, C3 and C4). All membranes before SEM characterization were sputter coated with Au and Pd. The accelerating voltage for the measurements is 5 kV.

Fig.3 ATR-FTIR (a) and XPS spectra (b) of TFC membranes, and ATR-FTIR (c) and XPS spectra (d) of TFN membranes synthesized with the four different monomer concentrations. Vertical lines in Figs. 3(a) and (c) show bands at 1404 cm⁻¹. Elemental chromium was detected in the XPS spectra of TFN membranes, whose peak was highlighted in Fig. 3(d).

Tab.1 Elemental ratios and cross-linking degrees of TFC and TFN membranes based on XPS results. Before calculation of cross-linking degrees of TFN membranes, the interference of MOF on O/N was excluded according to the chemical formula of MIL-101(Cr)

Fig.4 Zeta potentials of (a) the TFC and (b) TFN membranes, (c) schematic of polyamide layer structural changes with increasing monomer concentrations. Water contact angles of (d) the TFC and (e) TFN membranes under the four different monomer concentrations, and (f) a chemical reaction describing interfacial polymerization. Note: The zeta potential of MIL-101(Cr) is also presented in the Fig. 4(b) for comparison, and membrane characterizations were performed in triplicate.

Fig.5 GNPs-TEM characterization and corresponding schematics of primary water transport pathways of MOF-TFN membranes with different monomer concentrations: (a) C1 of 0.5 wt%, (b) C2 of 1.0 wt%, (c) C3 of 1.5 wt% and (d) C4 of 2.0 wt% PIP in water. The GNP solution (1.0 × 10¹² particles/mL) was dosed into a dead-end filtration cell for dynamic filtration under 5.0 bar pressure. The accelerating voltage of TEM characterization is 120 kV.

Fig.6 Pure water permeability of (a) the TFC and (b) TFN membranes, rejection of multiple salts of (c) the TFC and (d) TFN membranes, and dextrose rejection of (e) the TFC and (f) TFN membranes across the four monomer concentrations. The cross-flow velocity for all performance evaluations was 20 cm/s. The water temperature and applied pressure was 25°C and 8 bar, respectively. The salt concentration in the feed was 10 mmol/L and the dextrose concentration was 40 mg/L (as TOC). All experiments were performed in triplicate.

Fig.7 (a) Incremental factors calculated from data of Fig. 6, (b) schematic of multiple water transport pathways, and (c) schematic of water transport and resistance changes for TFN membranes across the increase in monomer concentrations. W1, W2 and W3 denote water transport nanochannels of polyamide (W1), inside MIL-101(Cr) (W2) and around MIL-101(Cr) (W3), respectively, while R1, R2 and R3 indicate the resistance of the corresponding nanochannels (W1, W2 and W3).

Fig.8 EDCs rejection rates of (a) the TFC and (b) TFN membranes across four monomer concentrations. The cross-flow velocity for all performance evaluations was 20 cm/s. The water temperature and applied pressure was 25°C and 8 bar, respectively. The EDCs concentration in the feed was 200 μg/L. All experiments were performed in triplicate.

Fig.9 EDCs sorption by (a) the TFC and (b) TFN membranes across four monomer concentrations. The EDCs sorption was measured by extracting EDCs from membranes after a cross-filtration test using a 50% methanol solution. All experiments were performed in triplicate.

1	C Boo, Y Wang, I Zucker, Y Choo, C O Osuji, M Elimelech (2018). High performance nanofiltration membrane for effective removal of perfluoroalkyl substances at high water recovery. Environmental Science & Technology, 52(13): 7279–7288 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b01040
2	M Costa, C B Klein (2006). Toxicity and carcinogenicity of chromium compounds in humans. Critical Reviews in Toxicology, 36(2): 155–163 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408440500534032
3	R Dai, H Guo, C Y Tang, M Chen, J Li, Z Wang (2019). Hydrophilic selective nanochannels created by metal organic frameworks in nanofiltration membranes enhance rejection of hydrophobic endocrine-disrupting compounds. Environmental Science & Technology, 53(23): 13776–13783 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.9b05343
4	R Dai, X Wang, C Y Tang, Z Wang (2020). Dually charged MOF-Based thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membrane for enhanced removal of charged pharmaceutically active compounds. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(12): 7619–7628 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c00832
5	G Ferey (2005). A chromium terephthalate-based solid with unusually large pore volumes and surface area. Science, 309(5743): 2040–2042 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1116275
6	H Guo, Y Deng, Z Tao, Z Yao, J Wang, C Lin, T Zhang, B Zhu, C Y Tang (2016). Does hydrophilic polydopamine coating enhance membrane rejection of hydrophobic endocrine-disrupting compounds. Environmental Science & Technology Letters, 3(9): 332–338 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.estlett.6b00263
7	H Guo, Y Deng, Z Yao, Z Yang, J Wang, C Lin, T Zhang, B Zhu, C Y Tang (2017a). A highly selective surface coating for enhanced membrane rejection of endocrine disrupting compounds: Mechanistic insights and implications. Water Research, 121: 197–203 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2017.05.037
8	H Guo, Z Yao, Z Yang, X Ma, J Wang, C Y Tang (2017b). A one-step rapid assembly of thin film coating using green coordination complexes for enhanced removal of trace organic contaminants by membranes. Environmental Science & Technology, 51(21): 12638–12643 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b03478
9	J G Hering, K M Ingold (2012). Water resources management: What should be integrated? Science, 336(6086): 1234–1235 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1218230
10	Y K Hwang, D Y Hong, J S Chang, S H Jhung, Y K Seo, J Kim, A Vimont, M Daturi, C Serre, G Férey (2008). Amine grafting on coordinatively unsaturated metal centers of MOFs: Consequences for catalysis and metal encapsulation. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 120(22): 4212–4216 https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.200705998
11	Y Kang, M Obaid, J Jang, I S Kim (2019). Sulfonated graphene oxide incorporated thin film nanocomposite nanofiltration membrane to enhance permeation and antifouling properties. Desalination, 470: 114125 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2019.114125
12	K Kimura, S Toshima, G Amy, Y Watanabe (2004). Rejection of neutral endocrine disrupting compounds (EDCs) and pharmaceutical active compounds (PhACs) by RO membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 245(1–2): 71–78 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.07.018
13	W J Lau, S Gray, T Matsuura, D Emadzadeh, J Paul Chen, A F Ismail (2015). A review on polyamide thin film nanocomposite (TFN) membranes: History, applications, challenges and approaches. Water Research, 80: 306–324 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2015.04.037
14	J R Li, J Sculley, H C Zhou (2012). Metal–organic frameworks for separations. Chemical Reviews, 112(2): 869–932 https://doi.org/10.1021/cr200190s
15	M Li, S Liang, Y Wu, M Yang, X Huang (2020). Cross-stacked super-aligned carbon nanotube/activated carbon composite electrodes for efficient water purification via capacitive deionization enhanced ultrafiltration. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 14(6): 107
16	Y Li, T S Chung, C Cao, S Kulprathipanja (2005). The effects of polymer chain rigidification, zeolite pore size and pore blockage on polyethersulfone (PES)-zeolite A mixed matrix membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 260(1–2): 45–55 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2005.03.019
17	D Liu, J Cabrera, L Zhong, W Wang, D Duan, X Wang, S Liu, Y Xie (2021). Using loose nanofiltration membrane for lake water treatment: A pilot study. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 15(4): 69
18	J Luo, Y Wan (2013). Effects of pH and salt on nanofiltration: A critical review. Journal of Membrane Science, 438: 18–28 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2013.03.029
19	Y Luo, W Guo, H H Ngo, L D Nghiem, F I Hai, J Zhang, S Liang, X C Wang (2014). A review on the occurrence of micropollutants in the aquatic environment and their fate and removal during wastewater treatment. Science of the Total Environment, 473–474: 619–641 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.12.065
20	D Ma, G Han, S B Peh, S B Chen (2017). Water-stable metal–organic framework UiO-66 for performance enhancement of forward osmosis membranes. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 56(44): 12773–12782 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b03278
21	F A Pacheco, I Pinnau, M Reinhard, J O Leckie (2010). Characterization of isolated polyamide thin films of RO and NF membranes using novel TEM techniques. Journal of Membrane Science, 358(1–2): 51–59 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.04.032
22	M Ranocchiari, J A Bokhoven (2011). Catalysis by metal–organic frameworks: fundamentals and opportunities. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics, 13(14): 6388–6396 https://doi.org/10.1039/c0cp02394a
23	T A Roepke, M J Snyder, G N Cherr (2005). Estradiol and endocrine disrupting compounds adversely affect development of sea urchin embryos at environmentally relevant concentrations. Aquatic Toxicology (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 71(2): 155–173 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2004.11.003
24	D Roilo, P N Patil, R S Brusa, A Miotello, S Aghion, R Ferragut, R Checchetto (2017). Polymer rigidification in graphene based nanocomposites: Gas barrier effects and free volume reduction. Polymer, 121: 17–25 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2017.06.010
25	I Sadeghi, J Kronenberg, A Asatekin (2018). Selective transport through membranes with charged nanochannels formed by scalable self-assembly of random copolymer micelles. ACS Nano, 12(1): 95–108 https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b07596
26	A I Schäfer, L D Nghiem, T D Waite (2003). Removal of the natural hormone estrone from aqueous solutions using nanofiltration and reverse osmosis. Environmental Science & Technology, 37(1): 182–188 https://doi.org/10.1021/es0102336
27	M A Shannon, P W Bohn, M Elimelech, J G Georgiadis, B J Mariñas, A M Mayes (2008). Science and technology for water purification in the coming decades. Nature, 452(7185): 301–310 https://doi.org/10.1038/nature06599
28	S Sorribas, P Gorgojo, C Téllez, J Coronas, A G Livingston (2013). High flux thin film nanocomposite membranes based on metal–organic frameworks for organic solvent nanofiltration. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 135(40): 15201–15208 https://doi.org/10.1021/ja407665w
29	E Steinle-Darling, E Litwiller, M Reinhard (2010). Effects of sorption on the rejection of trace organic contaminants during nanofiltration. Environmental Science & Technology, 44(7): 2592–2598 https://doi.org/10.1021/es902846m
30	S Szoke, G Patzay, L Weiser (2003). Characteristics of thin-film nanofiltration membranes at various pH-values. Desalination, 151(2): 123–129 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(02)00990-6
31	Z Tan, S Chen, X Peng, L Zhang, C Gao (2018). Polyamide membranes with nanoscale Turing structures for water purification. Science, 360(6388): 518–521 https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aar6308
32	C Y Tang, Z Yang, H Guo, J J Wen, L D Nghiem, E Cornelissen (2018). Potable water reuse through advanced membrane technology. Environmental Science & Technology, 52(18): 10215–10223 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.8b00562
33	A R D Verliefde, E R Cornelissen, S G J Heijman, E M V Hoek, G L Amy, B V Bruggen, J C van Dijk (2009). Influence of solute−membrane affinity on rejection of uncharged organic solutes by nanofiltration membranes. Environmental Science & Technology, 43(7): 2400–2406 https://doi.org/10.1021/es803146r
34	S Wang, L Bromberg, H Schreuder-Gibson, T A Hatton (2013). Organophophorous ester degradation by Chromium(III) terephthalate metal–organic framework (MIL-101) chelated to N,N-Dimethylaminopyridine and related aminopyridines. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces, 5(4): 1269–1278 https://doi.org/10.1021/am302359b
35	X Wu, X Cui, W Wu, J Wang, Y Li, Z Jiang (2019). Elucidating ultrafast molecular permeation through well-defined 2D nanochannels of lamellar membranes. Angewandte Chemie International Edition, 58(51): 18524–18529 https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.201912570
36	S Xu, L Liu, Y Wang (2017). Network cross-linking of polyimide membranes for pervaporation dehydration. Separation and Purification Technology, 185: 215–226 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2017.05.037
37	S Yang, K Zhang (2020). Few-layers MoS2 nanosheets modified thin film composite nanofiltration membranes with improved separation performance. Journal of Membrane Science, 595: 117526 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117526
38	J Yin, E S Kim, J Yang, B Deng (2012). Fabrication of a novel thin-film nanocomposite (TFN) membrane containing MCM-41 silica nanoparticles (NPs) for water purification. Journal of Membrane Science, 423–424: 238–246 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2012.08.020
39	H Zhang, J Hou, Y Hu, P Wang, R Ou, L Jiang, J Z Liu, B D Freeman, A J Hill, H Wang (2018). Ultrafast selective transport of alkali metal ions in metal organic frameworks with subnanometer pores. Science Advances, 4(2): eaaq0066 https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaq0066
40	R Zhang, Y Liu, M He, Y Su, X Zhao, M Elimelech, Z Jiang (2016). Antifouling membranes for sustainable water purification: Strategies and mechanisms. Chemical Society Reviews, 45(21): 5888–5924 https://doi.org/10.1039/C5CS00579E

[1]

FSE-21057-OF-DRB_suppl_1

Download

[1]	Danyang Liu, Johny Cabrera, Lijuan Zhong, Wenjing Wang, Dingyuan Duan, Xiaomao Wang, Shuming Liu, Yuefeng F. Xie. Using loose nanofiltration membrane for lake water treatment: A pilot study[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2021, 15(4): 69-.
[2]	Nathalie Tanne, Rui Xu, Mingyue Zhou, Pan Zhang, Xiaomao Wang, Xianghua Wen. Influence of pore size and membrane surface properties on arsenic removal by nanofiltration membranes[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2019, 13(2): 19-.
[3]	Yang-ying Zhao, Fan-xin Kong, Zhi Wang, Hong-wei Yang, Xiao-mao Wang, Yuefeng F. Xie, T. David Waite. Role of membrane and compound properties in affecting the rejection of pharmaceuticals by different RO/NF membranes[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2017, 11(6): 20-.
[4]	Yong YU,Laosheng WU. *Determination and occurrence of endocrine disrupting compounds, pharmaceuticals and personal care products in fish (Morone saxatilis)*[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(3): 475-481.
[5]	Xue JIN,Jiangyong HU. Role of water chemistry on estrone removal by nanofiltration with the presence of hydrophobic acids[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(1): 164-170.
[6]	Xiaomao WANG,Hongwei YANG,Zhenyu LI,Shaoxia YANG,Yuefeng XIE. Pilot study for the treatment of sodium and fluoride-contaminated groundwater by using high-pressure membrane systems[J]. Front. Environ. Sci. Eng., 2015, 9(1): 155-163.
[7]	Zhun MA,Meng WANG,Xueli GAO,Congjie GAO. Charge and separation characteristics of nanofiltration membrane embracing dissociated functional groups[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2014, 8(5): 650-658.
[8]	Xiaowei WANG, Wenjun LIU, Weifang MA, Desheng LI, . Arsenic (V) removal from groundwater by GE-HL nanofiltration membrane: effects of arsenic concentration, pH, and co-existing ions[J]. Front.Environ.Sci.Eng., 2009, 3(4): 428-433.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed