两种商用纳滤膜分离抗生素的实验研究与模拟。

IF 3.3 4区 工程技术 Q2 CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL
Obinna Anike, Jiří Cuhorka, Nkechi Ezeogu, Petr Mikulášek
{"title":"两种商用纳滤膜分离抗生素的实验研究与模拟。","authors":"Obinna Anike, Jiří Cuhorka, Nkechi Ezeogu, Petr Mikulášek","doi":"10.3390/membranes14120248","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The widespread use of antimicrobial drugs has contributed to the increasing trace levels of contaminants in the environment, posing an environmental problem and a challenge to modern-day medicine seeking advanced solutions. Nanofiltration is one such breakthrough solution for the selective removal of antibiotics from wastewater due to their high efficiency, scalability, and versatility. This study examines the separation of antibiotics (sulfamethoxazole (SMX), trimethoprim (TMP), and metformin (MET), respectively) using commercially available membranes with an emphasis on AFC membranes (AFC 30 and AFC 80). Thus, we evaluate their efficacy, performance, and applicability in wastewater treatment processes. The data for characterizing the structural parameters of the NF membranes were determined from an uncharged organic solute rejection experiment, and the effect of various operating conditions on the retention of solutes was evaluated. All experimental data were collected using a laboratory-scale nanofiltration unit and HPLC, and rejection percentages were determined using analytical measurements. The results obtained allowed for the determination of the radius of the membrane pores using the Steric Hindrance Pore (SHP) model, resulting in values of 0.353 and 0.268 nm for the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes, respectively. Additionally, higher transmembrane pressure and feed flow were observed to lead to an increased rejection of antibiotics. AFC 30 demonstrated a rejection of 94% for SMX, 87% for TMP, and 87% for MET, while AFC 80 exhibited a rejection of 99.5% for SMX, 97.5% for TMP, and 98% for MET. The sieving effect appears to be the primary separation mechanism for AFC 30, as lower feed-flow rates were observed to intensify concentration polarization, thereby compromising rejection efficiency. On the contrary, AFC 80 experienced less concentration polarization due to its smaller pore sizes, effectively preventing pore clogging. Membrane performance was evaluated using the Spiegler-Kedem-Katchalsky model, based on irreversible thermodynamics, which effectively explained the mechanism of solute transport of antibiotics through the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes in the NF process.</p>","PeriodicalId":18410,"journal":{"name":"Membranes","volume":"14 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11676105/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Separation of Antibiotics Using Two Commercial Nanofiltration Membranes-Experimental Study and Modelling.\",\"authors\":\"Obinna Anike, Jiří Cuhorka, Nkechi Ezeogu, Petr Mikulášek\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/membranes14120248\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The widespread use of antimicrobial drugs has contributed to the increasing trace levels of contaminants in the environment, posing an environmental problem and a challenge to modern-day medicine seeking advanced solutions. Nanofiltration is one such breakthrough solution for the selective removal of antibiotics from wastewater due to their high efficiency, scalability, and versatility. This study examines the separation of antibiotics (sulfamethoxazole (SMX), trimethoprim (TMP), and metformin (MET), respectively) using commercially available membranes with an emphasis on AFC membranes (AFC 30 and AFC 80). Thus, we evaluate their efficacy, performance, and applicability in wastewater treatment processes. The data for characterizing the structural parameters of the NF membranes were determined from an uncharged organic solute rejection experiment, and the effect of various operating conditions on the retention of solutes was evaluated. All experimental data were collected using a laboratory-scale nanofiltration unit and HPLC, and rejection percentages were determined using analytical measurements. The results obtained allowed for the determination of the radius of the membrane pores using the Steric Hindrance Pore (SHP) model, resulting in values of 0.353 and 0.268 nm for the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes, respectively. Additionally, higher transmembrane pressure and feed flow were observed to lead to an increased rejection of antibiotics. AFC 30 demonstrated a rejection of 94% for SMX, 87% for TMP, and 87% for MET, while AFC 80 exhibited a rejection of 99.5% for SMX, 97.5% for TMP, and 98% for MET. The sieving effect appears to be the primary separation mechanism for AFC 30, as lower feed-flow rates were observed to intensify concentration polarization, thereby compromising rejection efficiency. On the contrary, AFC 80 experienced less concentration polarization due to its smaller pore sizes, effectively preventing pore clogging. Membrane performance was evaluated using the Spiegler-Kedem-Katchalsky model, based on irreversible thermodynamics, which effectively explained the mechanism of solute transport of antibiotics through the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes in the NF process.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18410,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Membranes\",\"volume\":\"14 12\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11676105/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Membranes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes14120248\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Membranes","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes14120248","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, PHYSICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

抗菌药物的广泛使用导致环境中微量污染物水平不断增加,这构成了一个环境问题,并对寻求先进解决方案的现代医学提出了挑战。纳滤因其高效率、可扩展性和多功能性而成为选择性去除废水中抗生素的一种突破性解决方案。本研究考察了使用市售膜分离抗生素(分别为磺胺甲恶唑(SMX)、甲氧苄啶(TMP)和二甲双胍(MET))的方法,重点研究了AFC膜(AFC 30和AFC 80)。因此,我们评估了它们在废水处理过程中的功效、性能和适用性。通过不带电的有机溶质截留实验,获得了表征纳滤膜结构参数的数据,并评价了不同操作条件对溶质截留的影响。所有实验数据均使用实验室规模的纳滤装置和高效液相色谱收集,并使用分析测量方法确定截留百分比。所得结果允许使用空间位阻孔(SHP)模型确定膜孔半径,得到AFC 30和AFC 80膜的值分别为0.353和0.268 nm。此外,观察到较高的跨膜压力和进料流量导致抗生素排斥反应增加。AFC 30对SMX的排斥率为94%,对TMP的排斥率为87%,对MET的排斥率为87%,而AFC 80对SMX的排斥率为99.5%,对TMP的排斥率为97.5%,对MET的排斥率为98%。筛分效应似乎是AFC 30的主要分离机制,因为观察到较低的进料流量会加剧浓度极化,从而影响分离效率。相反,AFC 80由于孔径较小,其浓度极化较少,有效地防止了孔隙堵塞。采用基于不可逆热力学的Spiegler-Kedem-Katchalsky模型对膜性能进行了评价,该模型有效地解释了抗生素在NF过程中通过AFC 30和AFC 80膜的溶质转运机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Separation of Antibiotics Using Two Commercial Nanofiltration Membranes-Experimental Study and Modelling.

The widespread use of antimicrobial drugs has contributed to the increasing trace levels of contaminants in the environment, posing an environmental problem and a challenge to modern-day medicine seeking advanced solutions. Nanofiltration is one such breakthrough solution for the selective removal of antibiotics from wastewater due to their high efficiency, scalability, and versatility. This study examines the separation of antibiotics (sulfamethoxazole (SMX), trimethoprim (TMP), and metformin (MET), respectively) using commercially available membranes with an emphasis on AFC membranes (AFC 30 and AFC 80). Thus, we evaluate their efficacy, performance, and applicability in wastewater treatment processes. The data for characterizing the structural parameters of the NF membranes were determined from an uncharged organic solute rejection experiment, and the effect of various operating conditions on the retention of solutes was evaluated. All experimental data were collected using a laboratory-scale nanofiltration unit and HPLC, and rejection percentages were determined using analytical measurements. The results obtained allowed for the determination of the radius of the membrane pores using the Steric Hindrance Pore (SHP) model, resulting in values of 0.353 and 0.268 nm for the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes, respectively. Additionally, higher transmembrane pressure and feed flow were observed to lead to an increased rejection of antibiotics. AFC 30 demonstrated a rejection of 94% for SMX, 87% for TMP, and 87% for MET, while AFC 80 exhibited a rejection of 99.5% for SMX, 97.5% for TMP, and 98% for MET. The sieving effect appears to be the primary separation mechanism for AFC 30, as lower feed-flow rates were observed to intensify concentration polarization, thereby compromising rejection efficiency. On the contrary, AFC 80 experienced less concentration polarization due to its smaller pore sizes, effectively preventing pore clogging. Membrane performance was evaluated using the Spiegler-Kedem-Katchalsky model, based on irreversible thermodynamics, which effectively explained the mechanism of solute transport of antibiotics through the AFC 30 and AFC 80 membranes in the NF process.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Membranes
Membranes Chemical Engineering-Filtration and Separation
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
16.70%
发文量
1071
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Membranes (ISSN 2077-0375) is an international, peer-reviewed open access journal of separation science and technology. It publishes reviews, research articles, communications and technical notes. Our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible. There is no restriction on the length of the papers. Full experimental and/or methodical details must be provided.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信