Homogenization of the Dense Composite Membranes …
59
conditions in the real industry application. Decrease in the membrane thickness with
maintaining mechanical stability is also one possible direction for research.
Conclusion
The mixing properties of the different polymers, zeolite powders and additives
suitable for the construction of the mixed matrix membranes were studied in this
paper. Materials suitable for the construction of the dense mixed matrix membranes
were tested. Two different polymers (PEBAX and Polyactive); five different zeolite
powders (ITR, IWS, OWE, and CFI), and two different additives (n-C14-TMABr
and DMAP) were tested. By the observation of the membranes that were synthesized, it was observed that the addition of the n-C14-TMABr improves the contact
between the hydrophobic polymer chains and highly charged zeolite particles. The
membranes synthesized with this additive did not contain any pinholes, zeolite particles agglomerates, or voids on the contact area between zeolite and polymer. On the
other hand, the presence of DMAP did not improve the properties of the membranes.
The main focus was to obtain the membrane with the good carbon dioxide permeability and selectivity of carbon dioxide versus hydrogen. Obtained values for the
carbon dioxide permeability was 120 Barrer for PEBAX based membranes and 110
Barrer for Polyactive based membranes, while the selectivity for carbon dioxide
versus hydrogen was between eight and nine for all membranes. The permeability
obtained for the membranes that are synthesized with three-dimensional pores are
slightly higher in comparison with systems with one- and two-dimensional pores
membranes. The possible reason for this behavior might be the orientation of the
pores in the bulk of the membrane that can influence the diffusion path of the carbon
dioxide molecule.
References
1. Desideri U, Corbelli R (1998) CO 2 capture in small size cogeneration plants: technical and
economic considerations. Energy Convers Manag 39:857–867
2. Rao AB, Rubin ES (2002) A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of aminebased CO 2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. Environ Sci Technol
36:4467–4475
3. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1997) Kyoto
4. Meisen A, Xiaoshan S (1997) Research and development issues in CO 2 capture. Energy Convers
Manag 38:37–42
5. Koros WJ, Fleming GK (1993) Membrane-based gas separation. J Membr Sci 83:1–80
6. Nunes SP, Peinemann KV (2006) Membrane technology in the chemical industry, 2nd edn.
Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, pp 53–150
7. Ghosal K, Freeman BD (1994) Gas separation using polymer membranes: an overview. Polym
Adv Technol 5:673–697
8. Baker RW (2002) Future directions of membrane gas separation technology. Ind Eng Chem
Res 41:1393–1411
59
conditions in the real industry application. Decrease in the membrane thickness with
maintaining mechanical stability is also one possible direction for research.
Conclusion
The mixing properties of the different polymers, zeolite powders and additives
suitable for the construction of the mixed matrix membranes were studied in this
paper. Materials suitable for the construction of the dense mixed matrix membranes
were tested. Two different polymers (PEBAX and Polyactive); five different zeolite
powders (ITR, IWS, OWE, and CFI), and two different additives (n-C14-TMABr
and DMAP) were tested. By the observation of the membranes that were synthesized, it was observed that the addition of the n-C14-TMABr improves the contact
between the hydrophobic polymer chains and highly charged zeolite particles. The
membranes synthesized with this additive did not contain any pinholes, zeolite particles agglomerates, or voids on the contact area between zeolite and polymer. On the
other hand, the presence of DMAP did not improve the properties of the membranes.
The main focus was to obtain the membrane with the good carbon dioxide permeability and selectivity of carbon dioxide versus hydrogen. Obtained values for the
carbon dioxide permeability was 120 Barrer for PEBAX based membranes and 110
Barrer for Polyactive based membranes, while the selectivity for carbon dioxide
versus hydrogen was between eight and nine for all membranes. The permeability
obtained for the membranes that are synthesized with three-dimensional pores are
slightly higher in comparison with systems with one- and two-dimensional pores
membranes. The possible reason for this behavior might be the orientation of the
pores in the bulk of the membrane that can influence the diffusion path of the carbon
dioxide molecule.
References
1. Desideri U, Corbelli R (1998) CO 2 capture in small size cogeneration plants: technical and
economic considerations. Energy Convers Manag 39:857–867
2. Rao AB, Rubin ES (2002) A technical, economic, and environmental assessment of aminebased CO 2 capture technology for power plant greenhouse gas control. Environ Sci Technol
36:4467–4475
3. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (1997) Kyoto
4. Meisen A, Xiaoshan S (1997) Research and development issues in CO 2 capture. Energy Convers
Manag 38:37–42
5. Koros WJ, Fleming GK (1993) Membrane-based gas separation. J Membr Sci 83:1–80
6. Nunes SP, Peinemann KV (2006) Membrane technology in the chemical industry, 2nd edn.
Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH, pp 53–150
7. Ghosal K, Freeman BD (1994) Gas separation using polymer membranes: an overview. Polym
Adv Technol 5:673–697
8. Baker RW (2002) Future directions of membrane gas separation technology. Ind Eng Chem
Res 41:1393–1411