Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 26, Issue 2, pp 1181–1191 | Cite as

Study of polyamide thin film characteristics impact on permeability/selectivity performance and fouling behavior of forward osmosis membrane

  • Masoud Rastgar
  • Alireza ShakeriEmail author
  • Hasan Salehi
Water Industry: Water-Energy-Health Nexus


In recent years, forward osmosis (FO) has received considerable attention due to its huge potentials in water desalination. The thin film composite (TFC) membrane used in the FO desalination consists of a bottom support layer covered by an active layer on top. Polyamide (PA) is commonly employed as an active layer forming via interfacial polymerization between m-phenylenediamine (MPD) and trimesoyl chloride (TMC) monomers. In this study, the effects that the MPD and TMC concentrations could have on the performance and anti-fouling behavior of the obtained FO membrane have been investigated. Results showed that there is a trade-off relationship between the water flux and salt rejection, which by increasing MPD concentration, the water flux was reducedو while the salt rejection was enhanced. Also, by increasing the TMC concentration, an opposite trend was observed. Using 0.20 wt.% of TMC monomer, the highest water fluxes of 21.6 LMH and 29.3 LMH were achieved in two different membrane configurations. Furthermore, higher TMC concentration caused better anti-fouling property, when PA active layer of the membrane was in a high fouling potential environment.


Thin film composite Polyamide film Interfacial polymerization Forward osmosis Anti-fouling behavior 



We would like to acknowledge University of Tehran for received financial and instrumental supports.


  1. Ahmad AL, Ooi BS, Choudhury JP (2003) Preparation and characterization of co-polyamide thin film composite membrane from piperazine and 3,5-diaminobenzoic acid. Desalination 158:101–108. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baker RW (2012) Membrane technology and applications. Wiley, ChichesterCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baoxia MI, Elimelech M (2010) Gypsum scaling and cleaning in forward osmosis: measurements and mechanisms. Environ Sci Technol 44:2022–2028. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baroña GNB, Lim J, Choi M, Jung B (2013) Interfacial polymerization of polyamide-aluminosilicate SWNT nanocomposite membranes for reverse osmosis. Desalination 325:138–147. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berezkin AV, Khokhlov AR (2006) Mathematical modeling of interfacial polycondensation. J Polym Sci B Polym Phys 44:2698–2724. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bui N, Lind ML, Hoek EMV, McCutcheon JR (2011) Electrospun nanofiber supported thin film composite membranes for engineered osmosis. J Membr Sci 385–386:10–19. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cadotte JE, King RS, Majerle RJ, Petersen RJ (1981) Interfacial synthesis in the preparation of reverse osmosis membranes. J Macromol Sci Chem 15:727–755CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cath TY, Childress AE, Elimelech M (2006) Forward osmosis : principles, applications, and recent developments. J Membr Sci 281:70–87. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chou S, Shi L, Wang R et al (2010) Characteristics and potential applications of a novel forward osmosis hollow fiber membrane. Desalination 261:365–372. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Costa D, Jesus J, Branco D et al (2017) Extensive review of shale gas environmental impacts from scientific literature (2010–2015). Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:14579–14594. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Elimelech M, Phillip WA (2011) The future of seawater desalination: energy, technology, and the environment. Science 333(80):712–717. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geise GM, Park HB, Sagle AC et al (2011) Water permeability and water/salt selectivity tradeoff in polymers for desalination. J Membr Sci 369:130–138. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gu Y, Wang YN, Wei J, Tang CY (2013) Organic fouling of thin-film composite polyamide and cellulose triacetate forward osmosis membranes by oppositely charged macromolecules. Water Res 47:1867–1874. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoek EMV, Bhattacharjee S, Elimelech M (2003) Effect of membrane surface roughness on colloid-membrane DLVO interactions. Langmuir 19:4836–4847. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Humplik T, Lee J, Hern SCO et al (2011) Nanostructured materials for water desalination. Nanotechnology 22:292001–292020. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Khorshidi B, Thundat T, Fleck BA, Sadrzadeh M (2015) Thin film composite polyamide membranes: parametric study on the influence of synthesis conditions. RSC Adv 5:54985–54997. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Khorshidi B, Thundat T, Fleck BA, Sadrzadeh M (2016) A novel approach toward fabrication of high performance thin film composite polyamide membranes. Sci Rep 6:22069. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Klaysom C, Cath TY, Depuydt T, Vankelecom IFJ (2013) Forward and pressure retarded osmosis: potential solutions for global challenges in energy and water supply. Chem Soc Rev 42:6959. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lau WJ, Gray S, Matsuura T et al (2015) A review on polyamide thin film nanocomposite (TFN) membranes: history, applications, challenges and approaches. Water Res 80:306–324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Li D, Wang H (2010) Recent developments in reverse osmosis desalination membranes. J Mater Chem 20:4551. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu Y, Mi B (2012) Combined fouling of forward osmosis membranes: synergistic foulant interaction and direct observation of fouling layer formation. J Membr Sci 407–408:136–144. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lubchenco J (1998) Entering the century of the environment: a new social contract for science. Science 279(80):491–497. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Ma N, Wei J, Liao R, Tang CY (2012) Zeolite-polyamide thin film nanocomposite membranes: towards enhanced performance for forward osmosis. J Membr Sci 405–406:149–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mazlan NM, Marchetti P, Maples HA et al (2016) Organic fouling behaviour of structurally and chemically different forward osmosis membranes – a study of cellulose triacetate and thin film composite membranes. J Membr Sci 520:247–261. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mi B, Elimelech M (2008) Chemical and physical aspects of organic fouling of forward osmosis membranes. J Membr Sci 320:292–302. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nguyen TPN, Yun ET, Kim IC, Kwon YN (2013) Preparation of cellulose triacetate/cellulose acetate (CTA/CA)-based membranes for forward osmosis. J Membr Sci 433:49–59. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pal P, Chakrabortty S, Nayak J, Senapati S (2017) A flux-enhancing forward osmosis–nanofiltration integrated treatment system for the tannery wastewater reclamation. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24:15768–15780. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Perera DHN, Song Q, Qiblawey H, Sivaniah E (2015) Regulating the aqueous phase monomer balance for flux improvement in polyamide thin film composite membranes. J Membr Sci 487:74–82. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Petersen RJ (1993) Composite reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes. J Membr Sci 83:81–150. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Qi S, Quan C, Zhao Y, Tang CY (2012) Double-skinned forward osmosis membranes based on layer-by-layer assembly — FO performance and fouling behavior. J Membr Sci 405–406:20–29. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rastgar M, Shakeri A, Bozorg A et al (2017) Impact of nanoparticles surface characteristics on pore structure and performance of forward osmosis membranes. Desalination.
  32. Salehi H, Rastgar M, Shakeri A (2017) Anti-fouling and high water permeable forward osmosis membrane fabricated via layer by layer assembly of chitosan/graphene oxide. Appl Surf Sci 413:99–108. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Saren Q, Qiu CQ, Tang CY (2011) Synthesis and characterization of novel forward osmosis membranes based on layer-by-layer assembly. Environ Sci Technol 45:5201–5208. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shakeri A, Salehi H, Rastgar M (2017) Chitosan-based thin active layer membrane for forward osmosis desalination. Carbohydr Polym 174:658–668. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shannon M, Bohn PW, Elimelech M et al (2008) Science and technology for water purification in the coming decades. Nature 452:301–310. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shen L, Xiong S, Wang Y (2016) Graphene oxide incorporated thin-film composite membranes for forward osmosis applications. Chem Eng Sci 143:194–205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Song X, Liu Z, Sun DD (2011) Nano gives the answer: breaking the bottleneck of internal concentration polarization with a nanofiber composite forward osmosis membrane for a high water production rate. Adv Mater 23:3256–3260. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sorribas S, Gorgojo P, Téllez C et al (2013) High flux thin film nanocomposite membranes based on metal-organic frameworks for organic solvent nanofiltration. J Am Chem Soc 135:15201–15208. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wang L, Fang M, Liu J et al (2015) Layer-by-layer fabrication of high-performance polyamide/ZIF-8 nanocomposite membrane for Nanofiltration applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 7:24082–24093. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wen P, Chen Y, Hu X et al (2017) Polyamide thin film composite nanofiltration membrane modified with acyl chlorided graphene oxide. J Membr Sci 535:208–220. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Werber JR, Osuji CO, Elimelech M (2016) Materials for next-generation desalination and water purification membranes. Nat Rev Mater 1:16018. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xie M, Gray SR (2016) Gypsum scaling in forward osmosis: role of membrane surface chemistry. J Membr Sci 513:250–259. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xie W, Geise GM, Freeman BD et al (2012) Polyamide interfacial composite membranes prepared from m-phenylene diamine, trimesoyl chloride and a new disulfonated diamine. J Membr Sci 403–404:152–161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Yip NY, Elimelech M (2011) Performance limiting effects in power generation from salinity gradients by pressure retarded osmosis. Environ Sci Technol 45:10273–10282. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Yong Z, Sanchuan Y, Meihong L, Congjie G (2006) Polyamide thin film composite membrane prepared from m-phenylenediamine and m-phenylenediamine-5-sulfonic acid. J Membr Sci 270:162–168. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhang X, Tian J, Ren Z et al (2016) High performance thin- fi lm composite ( TFC ) forward osmosis ( FO ) membrane fabricated on novel hydrophilic disulfonated poly ( arylene ether sulfone ) multiblock copolymer / polysulfone substrate. J Membr Sci 520:529–539. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhao L, Chang PC-Y, Ho WSW (2013) High-flux reverse osmosis membranes incorporated with hydrophilic additives for brackish water desalination. Desalination 308:225–232. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Zhou Z, Lee JY, Chung TS (2014) Thin film composite forward-osmosis membranes with enhanced internal osmotic pressure for internal concentration polarization reduction. Chem Eng J 249:236–245. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhu J, Tian M, Hou J et al (2016) Surface zwitterionic functionalized graphene oxide for a novel loose nanofiltration membrane. J Mater Chem A 4:1980–1990. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Chemistry, College of ScienceUniversity of TehranTehranIran

Personalised recommendations