Continuous separation, with microfluidics, of the components of a ternary mixture: from vacuum to purge gas pervaporation

  • Iwona ZiemeckaEmail author
  • Benoît Haut
  • Benoit Scheid
Research Paper


The general objective of this paper is to investigate the separation, with microfluidics, of the components of a ternary mixture, when using vacuum or purge gas pervaporation. The ternary mixture considered is a mixture of methanol (MeOH), water (H2O) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2). In a previous work (Ziemecka in Lab Chip 15:504–511, 2015), we presented the proof of concept of a microfluidic device, which was able to partially separate MeOH from the other components of such a mixture, by using vacuum pervaporation. Here, our goal is to optimize the operation of this device, by considering vacuum pervaporation, but also purge gas pervaporation. First, we provide a mathematical model of the device. This model is used to discuss the influence of the operating parameters on the device operation. To apply this model to the considered mixture, we determined the MeOH and H2O permeability coefficients of PDMS membranes prepared from different concentrations of the curing agent. The model is then successfully compared to experimental data. The model and the experiments show that high efficiencies can be reached for both vacuum and purge gas pervaporation, provided a fine-tuning of the operating parameters. For instance, a good efficiency of the vacuum pervaporation is reached at high temperature and low pressure. For purge gas pervaporation, it is reached for low temperature and high pressure.


Hydrogen peroxide Microfluidics Ternary mixture Separation Membrane Vacuum pervaporation Purge gas pervaporation 



We acknowledge Ir. Hugo Serrano Latorre for Fig. 7, Dr. Pierre Miquel for helpful discussions, Prof. Michel Luhmer for access to the NMR and Hervé Baudine for technical support. We thank the Solvay Company for its input in this project and the Brussels and Walloon regions for the financial support through the WBGreen-MicroEco project. B.S. thanks the F.R.S.-FNRS for financial support as well as BELSPO through the IAP 7/38-MicroMAST project.


  1. Bell C-M, Gerber FJ, Strathmann H (1988) Selection of polymers for pervaporation membranes. J Membr Sci 36:315–329CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bird RB, Stewart WE, Lightfoot EN (2007) Transport Phenomena. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bloomfield S, Dhaese PM (2013) Plant for hydrogen peroxide production and process using it, WO2013135491 A1.
  4. Boyd DA, Adleman JR, Goodwin DG, Psaltis D (2008) Chemical separations by bubble-assisted interphase mass-transfer. Anal Chem 80:2452–2456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Ciceri D, Perera JM, Stevens GW (2014) The use of microfluidic devices in solvent extraction. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 89:771–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. David RL (1986) Handbook of chemistry and physics, 67th edn. CRC Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Doedel EJ (2007) Auto07p continuation and bifurcation software for ordinary differential equations, Montreal Concordia UniversityGoogle Scholar
  8. Hartman RL, Sahoo HR, Yen BC, Jensen KF (2009) Distillation in microchemical systems using capillary forces and segmented flow. Lab Chip 9:1843–1849CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Inoue T, Kikutani Y, Hamakawa S, Mawatari K, Mizukami F, Kitamori T (2010) Reactor design optimization for direct synthesis of hydrogen peroxide. Chem Eng J 160:909–914CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ju WJ, Fu LM, Yang RJ, Lee CL (2012) Distillation and detection of SO2 using a microfluidic chip. Lab Chip 12:622–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lam KF, Cao E, Sorensen E, Gavriilidis A (2011) Development of multistage distillation in a microfluidic chip. Lab Chip 11:1311–1317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Laval C, Bouchaudy A, Salmon J-B (2016) Fabrication of microscale materials with programmable composition gradients. Lab Chip 16:1234–1242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. MacInnes JM, Ortiz-Osorio J, Jordan PJ, Priestman GH, Allen RWK (2010) Experimental demonstration of rotating spiral microchannel distillation. Chem Eng J 159:159–169CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Manatt SL, Manatt MRR (2004) On the analyses of mixture vapor pressure data: the hydrogen peroxide/water system and its excess thermodynamic functions. Chem Eur J 10:6540–6557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mata A, Fleischman AJ, Roy S (2005) Characterization of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) properties for biomedical micro/nanosystems. Biomed Microdevices 7:281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Taillet R, Febvre P, Villain L (2013) Dictionnaire de physique, 3rd ednGoogle Scholar
  17. Wootton RCR, de Mello AJ (2004) Continuous laminar evaporation: micron-scale distillation. Chem Commun 3:266–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Zhang YP, Kato S, Anazawa T (2010) Vacuum membrane distillation by microchip with temperature gradient. Lab Chip 10:899–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Zhang Y, Benes NE, Lammertink RGH (2016) Performance study of pervaporation in a microfluidic system for the removal of acetone from water. Chem Eng J 284:1342–1347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ziane N, Salmon J-B (2015) Solidification of a charged colloidal dispersion investigated using microfluidic pervaporation. Langmuir 31:7943–7952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ziane N, Guirardel M, Leng J, Salmon J-B (2015) Drying with no concentration gradient in large microfluidic droplets. Soft Matter 11:3637–3642CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ziemecka I, Haut B, Scheid B (2015) Hydrogen peroxide concentration by pervaporation of a ternary liquid solution in microfluidics. Lab Chip 15:504–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.TIPs - Fluid Physics, Ecole polytechnique de BruxellesUniversité libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations