Keywords : membrane
Applications of Helical Versus Straight Hollow Fiber Membranes: A Review
Engineering and Technology Journal,
2023, Volume 41, Issue 3, Pages 1-11
DOI:
10.30684/etj.2022.134743.1247

A Review of the Natural Gas Purification from Acid Gases by Membrane
Engineering and Technology Journal,
2022, Volume 40, Issue 3, Pages 441-450
DOI:
10.30684/etj.v40i3.1983

Study the Effect of Addition Silver Nanoparticle on Structure and Morphological Properties for PVDF Hollow Fiber
Engineering and Technology Journal,
2017, Volume 35, Issue 1B, Pages 33-36
DOI:
10.30684/etj.35.1B.7
In this research was the study of the impact of silver nanoparticles solution on the structure and properties of the morphological membrane fibrous hollow PVDF through a dip PVDF Hollow fiber membrane in silver nanoparticle solution preparation via using laser ablation method. The characteristics of membrane and silver Nano particle solution and was examined using X-ray diffraction (XRD)and Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM) also using laser particle size analyzer for Silver nanoparticles (AgNPs ) to measurement particle size to AgNPs.
The Influence of Operation Conditions on the Permeative Flux of (PVC/PS) Hollow Fiber Membrane
Engineering and Technology Journal,
2012, Volume 30, Issue 16, Pages 2767-2777
Membranes have gained an important place in chemical technology and are used
in a wide range of applications. This investigation has studied the effect of operating
conditions such as temperature, trans-membrane pressure and solute concentration
on the separation performance of (PVC/ PS) hollow fiber membrane, which was
prepared in the laboratory from 15% (PVC) and 2% (PS) using phase inversion
method. An attempt was done to investigate the ability of PVC/PS hollow fiber
membrane for ultrafiltration application. A (PVP) solute was used to measure (PVP)
rejection of prepared membrane.
The predicted flux was found to increase from (18.88 l/m2.hr) to 33.05 l/m2.hr)
when the operation temperature was increased from (10Ž) to (30Ž).While it
increased from (28.57 l/m2.hr) to (263.36 l/m2.hr) when the operation pressure was
increased from (1bar) to (3bar). It was also found to decrease from(17.97 l/m2.hr) to
(12.20 l/m2.hr) with increase solute concentration from (1000ppm) to (2500ppm).
The rejection efficiency was equal to (99.93%) when using (2500ppm) solute. This
is considered within UF range.