Fabrication of a Novel (PVDF/MWCNT/Polypyrrole) Antifouling High Flux Ultrafiltration Membrane for Crude Oil Wastewater Treatment

The present work deals with the fabrication of novel poly(vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF)/Multi-wall Carbon Nanotubes (MWCNT)/Polypyrrole (PPy) ultrafiltration membrane by phase inversion technique for the removal of crude oil from refinery wastewater. In situ polymerization of pyrrole with different concentrations of MWCNT ranging from 0.025 wt.% to 0.3 wt.% in PVDF prepared solutions. Measurement of permeability, porosity, contact angle, tensile strength, zeta potential, rejection studies and morphological characterization by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were conducted. The results showed that membrane with (0.05% MWCNT) concentration had the highest permeability flux (850 LMH/bar), about 17 folds improvement of permeability compared to pristine PVDF membrane. Moreover, membrane rejection of crude oil reached about 99.9%. The excellent performance of this nanocomposite membrane suggests that novel PVDF modification with polypyrrole had a considerable effect on permeability with high potential for use in the treatment of oily wastewater in the refinery industry

Cellulose Acetate Membranes: Fouling Types and Antifouling Strategies—A Brief Review

Cellulose acetate (CA) is a semisynthetic, biodegradable polymer. Due to its characteristics, CA has several applications, including water membranes, filament-forming matrices, biomedical nanocomposites, household tools, and photographic films. This review deals with topics related to the CA membranes, which are prepared using different techniques, such as the phase inversion technique. CA membranes are considered very important since they can be used as microfiltration membranes (MF), ultrafiltration membranes (UF), nanofiltration membranes (NF), reverse osmosis (RO) membranes, and forward osmosis (FO) membranes. Membrane fouling results from the accumulation of materials that the membrane rejects on the surface or in the membrane’s pores, lowering the membrane’s flux and rejection rates. There are various forms of CA membrane fouling, for instance, organic, inorganic, particulate fouling, and biofouling. In this review, strategies used for CA membrane antifouling are discussed and summarized into four main techniques: feed solution pretreatment, cleaning of the membrane surface, membrane surface modification, which can be applied using either nanoparticles, polymer reactions, surface grafting, or surface topography, and surface coating

Cellulose Acetate Membranes: Fouling Types and Antifouling Strategies—A Brief Review

Cellulose acetate (CA) is a semisynthetic, biodegradable polymer. Due to its characteristics, CA has several applications, including water membranes, filament-forming matrices, biomedical nanocomposites, household tools, and photographic films. This review deals with topics related to the CA membranes, which are prepared using different techniques, such as the phase inversion technique. CA membranes are considered very important since they can be used as microfiltration membranes (MF), ultrafiltration membranes (UF), nanofiltration membranes (NF), reverse osmosis (RO) membranes, and forward osmosis (FO) membranes. Membrane fouling results from the accumulation of materials that the membrane rejects on the surface or in the membrane’s pores, lowering the membrane’s flux and rejection rates. There are various forms of CA membrane fouling, for instance, organic, inorganic, particulate fouling, and biofouling. In this review, strategies used for CA membrane antifouling are discussed and summarized into four main techniques: feed solution pretreatment, cleaning of the membrane surface, membrane surface modification, which can be applied using either nanoparticles, polymer reactions, surface grafting, or surface topography, and surface coating

Diagnostic graphics produced for synergistic effect quantification of DOX/Dis/Hyd combination against MCF-7_DoxR cells.

(A) Dose -Fa curve for DOX alone and for DOX with (DOX/Dis/Hyd combination) at different concentration points (B) Table of IC50 of DOX, Dis, Hyd alone and combination (C) The fraction affected (Fa) versus combination index (CI) plot after treatment with DOX/Dis/Hyd combination, that most of CI values are < 1 for the range of 0.25–0.8 (D) The Fa-DRI plot for the non-constant ratios of DOX/Dis/Hyd combination.</p

Fig 7 -

IC50 values after treatment with DOX/Dis/Hid. The MCF-7_WT and MCF-7_DoxR cells were treated with DOX, Dis, Hyd and DOX/Dis/Hyd to assess the cytotoxicity levels (A) The dose-response curve for cells treated with Hyd and; (B) The dose-response curve for cells treated with Dis; (C)The dose-response curve for cells treated with DOX; (D) The dose-response curve for cells treated with DOX/Dis/Hyd in combination, the curve showing DOX IC50 with and without combination with Dis/Hyd (0.03/20 μM). All cytotoxicity values represent the average ± SD of three independent experiments.</p

Fig 4 -

A) Induced apoptosis of MCF-7_WT cells treated with Dis and Hyd alone and combined B) Induced apoptosis of MCF-7_DoxR cells treated with Dis and Hyd alone and combined.</p

Apoptosis Induced by DOX/Dis/Hyd single treatment and combinations.

A) and B) MCF-7_WT cells, C) and D) MCF-7_DoxR cells.</p

Fig 1 -

The chemical structures of disulfiram (A), hydralazine (B), and doxorubicin (C).</p

Diagnostic graphics produced for synergistic effect quantification of DOX/Dis/Hyd combination against MCF-7_WT cells.

(A) Dose -Fa curve for DOX alone and for DOX with (DOX/Dis/Hyd combination) at different concentration points (B) Table of IC50 of DOX, Dis, Hyd alone and combination (C) The fraction affected (Fa) versus combination index (CI) plot after treatment with DOX/Dis/Hyd combination, that most of CI values are <1 for the range of 0.5–0.95(D) The Fa-DRI plot for the non-constant ratios of DOX/Dis/Hyd combination.</p