Improvement in nano-hybrid membrane PES–nanosilica performance using ultra violet irradiation and acetone–ethanol immersion for produced water treatment

  • T. D. KusworoEmail author
  • N. Aryanti
  • Qudratun
  • D. P. Utomo
  • Widayat
Original Paper


This research was performed primarily to investigate the effect of membrane immersion in hydrophilic solvents (mixture of acetone–ethanol). Special emphasis was focused on the study of membrane morphology toward performance of nano-hybrid polyethersulfone (PES)–nanosilica membrane for produced water treatment. In this research, nano-hybrid PES–nanosilica membranes with immersion and without immersion were prepared using dry-/wet-phase inversion technique. The prepared membranes were immersed in the mixture of acetone–ethanol at various mass ratios of 1:5 and 1:8. The immersion of membranes allowed the alteration of membrane morphology to be more hydrophilic. The scanning electron microscope (SEM) result and Fourier transform infra red spectroscopy analysis confirmed that membrane immersed in acetone–ethanol significantly enhanced the hydrophilicity of the membrane by increasing the number of hydrophilic-specific functional group. The SEM surface images indicated the good compatibility between the PES and nanosilica for immersed membrane. Nano-hybrid membrane immersed in the acetone–ethanol of 1:8 performed best as shown by the flux and rejection enhancement. Comparing to the pure PES performance, the permeate flux and rejection of nano-hybrid membrane PES–nanosilica increased to 5 and 39%, respectively. On the other hand, immersed nano-hybrid membrane in acetone–ethanol of 1:8 with combination of UV irradiation increased the permeate water flux and rejection to 21 and 15%, respectively. In addition, the immersion in the acetone–ethanol displayed better antifouling behavior. The research results revealed the improvement in membrane performance for produced water treatment after being immersed in acetone–ethanol and UV-irradiated.


Acetone–ethanol Nano-hybrid membrane Nanosilica Polyethersulfone Produced water Ultraviolet 



The authors would thank to Waste Water Treatment Laboratory of University of Diponegoro for the supporting facilities.


  1. Ahmed I, Idris A, Khan MS, Chowdhury S, Akhtar J (2014) Effect of acetone on physical properties of PES membrane. Appl Mech Mater 625:545–548. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akbari A, Yegani R, Pourabbas B, Behboudi A (2016) Fabrication and study of fouling characteristics of HDPE/PEG grafted silica nanoparticles composite membrane for filtration of Humic acid. Chem Eng Res Des 109:282–296. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alzahrani S, Mohammad AW, Hilal N, Abdullah P, Jaafar O (2013a) Comparative study of NF and RO membranes in the treatment of produced water—part I: assessing water quality. Desalination 315:18–26. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alzahrani S, Mohammad AW, Hilal N, Abdullah P, Jaafar O (2013b) Comparative study of NF and RO membranes in the treatment of produced water II: toxicity removal efficiency. Desalination 315:27–32. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alzahrani S, Mohammad AW, Abdullah P, Jaafar O (2013c) Potential tertiary treatment of produced water using highly hydrophilic nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes. J Environ Chem Eng 1(4):1341–1349. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. ASTM D5907-03 (2003) Standard test method for filterable and nonfilterable matter in water. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA.
  7. Bennion DB, Bennion DW, Thomas FB, Bietz RF (1998) Injection water quality—a key factor to successful waterflooding. J Can Pet Technol. Google Scholar
  8. Davey CJ, Low ZX, Wirawan RH, Patterson DA (2017) Molecular weight cut-off determination of organic solvent nanofiltration membranes using poly (propylene glycol). J Membr Sci 526:221–228. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Geens J, Van der Bruggen B, Vandecasteele C (2004) Characterisation of the solvent stability of polymeric nanofiltration membranes by measurement of contact angles and swelling. Chem Eng Sci 59(5):1161–1164. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ghandashtani MB, Ashtiani FZ, Karimi M, Fouladitajar A (2015) A novel approach to fabricate high performance nano-SiO2 embedded PES membranes for microfiltration of oil-in-water emulsion. Appl Surf Sci 349:393–402. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Homayoonfal M, Akbari A, Mehrnia MR (2010) Preparation of polysulfone nanofiltration membranes by UV-assisted grafting polymerization for water softening. Desalination 263(1):217–225. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hua TJ, Peng-fei G, Zhi-yuan Z, Wen-hui L, Zhong-qiang S (2008) Preparation and performance evaluation of a Nafion-TiO2 composite membrane for PEMFCs. Int J Hydrogen Energy 33(20):5686–5690. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hwang KJ, Chen FF (2009) Interpretation of particle fouling in submerged membrane filtration by blocking models. 淡江理工學刊 12(1):9–16. Google Scholar
  14. Jin LM, Yu SL, Shi WX, Yi XS, Sun N, Ge YL, Ma C (2012) Synthesis of a novel composite nanofiltration membrane incorporated SiO2 nanoparticles for oily wastewater desalination. Polymer 53(23):5295–5303. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kochan J, Wintgens T, Hochstrat R, Melin T (2009) Impact of wetting agents on the filtration performance of polymeric ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination 241(1–3):34–42. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Konruang S, Chittrakarn T, Sirijarukul S (2014) Surface modification of asymmetric polysulfone membrane by UV irradiation. J Teknol Sci Eng 70(2):55–60. Google Scholar
  17. Kumar S, Guria C, Mandal A (2015) Synthesis, characterization and performance studies of polysulfone/bentonite nanoparticles mixed-matrix ultra-filtration membranes using oil field produced water. Sep Purif Technol 150:145–158. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kusworo TD, Ismail AF, Mustafa A, Budiyono (2013) Studies of thermal annealing on suppression of plasticization of the asymmetric hollow fiber mixed matrix membranes. World Appl Sci J 28(1):9–19. Google Scholar
  19. Kusworo TD, Aryanti N, Firdaus MMH, Sukmawati H (2015) Surface modification of cellulose acetate membrane using thermal annealing to enhance produced water treatment. In: Nur H, Budiman A, Iskandar F, Ismadji S (eds) AIP conference proceedings, 1699(1):040014.
  20. Kusworo TD, Widayat, Pradini AW, Armeli YP (2015) Surface modification of ultra thin PES–zeolite using thermal annealing to increase flux and rejection of produced water treatment. In: Nur H, Budiman A, Iskandar F, Ismadji S (eds.) AIP conference proceedings, 1699 (1):040015.
  21. Kusworo TD, Aryanti N, Anggita RA, Setyorini TAD, Utomo DP (2017a) Surface modification and performance enhancement of polyethersulfone (PES) membrane using combination of ultra violet irradiation and thermal annealing for produced water treatment. J Environ Sci Technol 10(1):35–43. Google Scholar
  22. Kusworo TD, Utomo DP, Aryanti N (2017b) Synergistic effect of UV irradiation and thermal annealing to develop high performance polyethersulfone-nano silica membrane for produced water treatment. J Environ Chem Eng 5(4):3290–3301. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lin J, Ye W, Zhong K, Shen J, Jullok N, Sotto A, Van der Bruggen B (2016) Enhancement of polyethersulfone (PES) membrane doped by monodisperse Stöber silica for water treatment. Chem Eng Process Process Intensif 107:194–205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lu X, Peng Y, Qiu H, Liu X, Ge L (2017) Anti-fouling membranes by manipulating surface wettability and their anti-fouling mechanism. Desalination 413:127–135. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Luo N, Zhong H, Yang M, Yuan X, Fan Y (2016) Modifying glass fiber surface with grafting acrylamide by UV-grafting copolymerization for preparation of glass fiber reinforced PVDF composite membrane. J Environ Sci 39:208–217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Madaeni SS, Rahimpour A, Barzin J (2004). Effects of acetone on morphology and performance of polysulfone ultrafiltration membranes for milk concentration. In: 9th Iranian chemical engineering congressGoogle Scholar
  27. Marconnet C, Houari A, Seyer D, Djafer M, Coriton G, Heim V, Di Martino P (2011) Membrane biofouling control by UV irradiation. Desalination 276(1):75–81. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mondal S, Wickramasinghe SR (2008) Produced water treatment by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes. J Memb Sci 322(1):162–170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Motta A, Borges C, Esquerre K, Kiperstok A (2014) Oil produced water treatment for oil removal by an integration of coalescer bed and microfiltration membrane processes. J Memb Sci 469:371–378. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Panda SR, De S (2013) Role of polyethylene glycol with different solvents for tailor-made polysulfone membranes. J Polym Res 20(7):179. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Panda SR, De S (2014) Preparation, characterization and performance of ZnCl2 incorporated polysulfone (PSF)/polyethylene glycol (PEG) blend low pressure nanofiltration membranes. Desalination 347:52–65. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ran F, Li J, Lu Y, Wang L, Nie S, Song H, Zhao C (2014) A simple method to prepare modified polyethersulfone membrane with improved hydrophilic surface by one-pot: the effect of hydrophobic segment length and molecular weight of copolymers. J Mater Sci Eng C 37:68–75. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rohani R, Hyland M, Patterson D (2011) A refined one-filtration method for aqueous based nanofiltration and ultrafiltration membrane molecular weight cut-off determination using polyethylene glycols. J Membr Sci 382(1):278–290. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sarfraz M, Ba-Shammakh M (2016) Synergistic effect of adding graphene oxide and ZIF-301 to polysulfone to develop high performance mixed matrix membranes for selective carbon dioxide separation from post combustion flue gas. J Memb Sci 514:35–43. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Seman MA, Khayet M, Ali ZB, Hilal N (2010) Reduction of nanofiltration membrane fouling by UV-initiated graft polymerization technique. J Memb Sci 355(1):133–141. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Singh S, Khulbe KC, Matsuura T, Ramamurthy P (1998) Membrane characterization by solute transport and atomic force microscopy. J Membr Sci 142(1):111–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Shahruddin MZ, Othman NH, Alias NH, Ghani SNA (2015) Desalination of produced water using bentonite as pre-treatment and membrane separation as main treatment. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 195:2094–2100. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shukla R, Cheryan M (2002) Performance of ultrafiltration membranes in ethanol–water solutions: effect of membrane conditioning. J Membr Sci 198(1):75–85. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Silva MSFD (2007). Polyimide and polyetherimide organic solvent nanofiltration membranes. Doctoral dissertation, Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia - Universidade Nova de LisboaGoogle Scholar
  40. Tian B, Wang XY, Zhang LN, Shi FN, Zhang Y, Li SX (2016) Preparation of PVDF anionic exchange membrane by chemical grafting of GMA onto PVDF macromolecule. Solid State Ionics 293:56–63. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tolwinska HM, Wencel A, Figaszewski Z, (2006) The Effect of Hydrophilization of Polypropylene Membranes with Alcohols on Their Transport Properties. J Macromol Sci 35:857–865. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Water Environment Federation, (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater. American Public Health Association (APHA), Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  43. Zhao Y, Yuan Q (2006) Effect of membrane pretreatment on performance of solvent resistant nanofiltration membranes in methanol solutions. J Memb Sci 280(1):195–201. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zsirai T, Al-Jaml AK, Qiblawey H, Al-Marri M, Ahmed A, Bach S, Judd S (2016) Ceramic membrane filtration of produced water: impact of membrane module. Sep Purif Technol 165:214–221. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Islamic Azad University (IAU) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. D. Kusworo
    • 1
    Email author
  • N. Aryanti
    • 1
  • Qudratun
    • 2
  • D. P. Utomo
    • 1
  • Widayat
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringUniversity of DiponegoroSemarangIndonesia
  2. 2.Nano Center IndonesiaSouth TangerangIndonesia

Personalised recommendations