134
S. Pakdel et al.
Fig. 17 Flux and salt rejection of PA membranes with different GO contents. The figure is adapted
with permission from Royal Society of Chemistry [108]
as represented by the water contact angle values obtained on each of the membrane
surface, is shown in Fig. 18. As is seen in Fig. 18, nRGO-incorporated Ps membranes
demonstrate more hydrophilic surface compared with PS ultrafiltration membrane.
In reality, the presence of oxygenated functionalities in nRGO supports the increase
of hydrophilic behavior of the skin surface of PS/nRGO composite membranes [38].
They also investigated the performance of the membranes in terms of pure water
Fig. 18 Variation in contact angles (water) of Ps ultrafiltration and Ps-nRGO composite membranes.
The figure is adapted with permission from Royal Society of Chemistry [105]
S. Pakdel et al.
Fig. 17 Flux and salt rejection of PA membranes with different GO contents. The figure is adapted
with permission from Royal Society of Chemistry [108]
as represented by the water contact angle values obtained on each of the membrane
surface, is shown in Fig. 18. As is seen in Fig. 18, nRGO-incorporated Ps membranes
demonstrate more hydrophilic surface compared with PS ultrafiltration membrane.
In reality, the presence of oxygenated functionalities in nRGO supports the increase
of hydrophilic behavior of the skin surface of PS/nRGO composite membranes [38].
They also investigated the performance of the membranes in terms of pure water
Fig. 18 Variation in contact angles (water) of Ps ultrafiltration and Ps-nRGO composite membranes.
The figure is adapted with permission from Royal Society of Chemistry [105]