Synthesis of Hydrophobic Ceramic Ultrafiltration Membrane and Performance Evaluation for Removal of Ciprofloxacin in Water

  • S. Banerjee
  • A. Jana
  • D. Mukherjee
  • S. GhoshEmail author
  • S. Chakrabarti
  • S. Majumdar
Conference paper


The pharmaceutical and personal care products (PPCPs) have recently been recognized as emerging pollutants in sewage water, industrial wastewater and even in groundwater. Remediation of such recalcitrant contaminants is essential since most of these components have adverse impact on the aquatic life, as well as, on human leading to endocrine disruption. The existing processes are often found as inadequate for the elimination of such contaminants which leads to contamination of surface water due to the discharge of such emerging contaminants from industrial and domestic effluents. In the present study, the efficiency of indigenously developed ceramic membranes with controlled pore size and surface property were investigated for PPCP removal. Ceramic ultrafiltration membrane was prepared on clay–alumina-based support tube using bentonite clay as coating layer. Hydrophobic surface modification was done on the ultrafiltration layer by polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). Ciprofloxacin (fluoroquinolone antibiotics) has been selected as a model component and its removal efficiency was studied from synthetic water using the developed membrane-based process. Effect of initial concentration of ciprofloxacin (0.1–1 mg/L) on rejection efficiency and permeate flux were studied with different operating pressure. Effect of time on the rejection efficiency and permeate flux were also observed for an initial concentration of 0.5 mg/L of ciprofloxacin. The prepared hydrophobic membrane showed encouraging results. Maximum rejection of ciprofloxacin was obtained to be >99% for an initial concentration of 1 mg/L at transmembrane pressure of 4.5 kg/cm2.


Pharmaceutical and personal care products Ciprofloxacin Ceramic membrane Bentonite coating layer Hydrophobic surface modification 



The financial support from the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India vide Grant No. DST/TM/WTI/2K15/105(G) dated 15 June 2016 is gratefully acknowledged. The authors acknowledge the Director, CSIR-CGCRI for granting permission in carrying out the study. Centre for Research in Nanoscience & Nanotechnology (CRNN), University of Calcutta is acknowledged for their support in providing facility for FESEM characterisation of the samples.


  1. 1.
    Nikolaou A, Meric S, Fatta D (2007) Occurrence patterns of pharmaceuticals in water and wastewater environments. Anal Bioanal Chem 387:1225–1234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Roma M, Weller M, Wentzell S (2011) Removal of ciprofloxacin from water using adsorption, UV photolysis and UV/H2O2 degradation. Project report. Worcester Polytechnic Institute, WorcesterGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Larsson DGJ (2014) Pollution from drug manufacturing review and perspectives, perspectives. Phil Trans R Soc B. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Polesel F, Lehnberg K, Dott W, Trapp S, Thomas KV, Plósz BG (2014) Factors influencing sorption of ciprofloxacin onto activated sludge: Experimental assessment and modelling implications. Chemosphere 119:105–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dolar D, Grosb M, Mozeb SR, Morenoc J, Comasc J, Rodab IR, Baecelob D (2012) Removal of emerging contaminants from municipal wastewater with an integrated membrane system, MBR-RO. J Hazard Mater 239–240:64–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin YL, Lee CH (2014) Elucidating the rejection mechanisms of PPCPs by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes. Ind Eng Chem Res 53:6798–6806CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hofs B, Ogier J, Vries D, Beerendonk EF, Cornelissen ER (2011) Comparison of ceramic and polymeric membrane permeability and fouling using surface water. Seperation Purif Technol 79:365–374CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Puhlfürß P, Voigt A, Weber R, Morbé M (2000) Microporous TiO2 membranes with a cut off < 500 Da. J Membr Sci 174:123–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ojajunia O, Saroja D, Cavallib G (2015) Removal of organic micropollutants using membrane-assisted processes: a review of recent progress. Environ Technol Rev 4(1):17–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jana A, Bhattacharya P, Guha S, Ghosh S, Majumdar S (2017) Application of a new ceramic hydrophobic membrane for providing CO2 in algal photobioreactor during cultivation of Arthrospira sp. Algal Res 27:223–234CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shahtalebi A, Sarrafzadeh MH, Montazer Rahmati MM (2011) Application of nanofiltration membrane in the separation of amoxicillin from pharmaceutical wastewater. J Environ Health Sci Eng 8:109–116Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yoona Y, Westerhoff P, Snyderc SA, Wertc EC, Yoond J (2007) Removal of endocrine disrupting compounds and pharmaceuticals by nanofiltration and ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination 202:16–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cerneauxa S, Struz˙yn´ska I, Kujawski Wojciech M, Persina M, Larbot A (2009) Comparison of various membrane distillation methods for desalination using hydrophobic ceramic membranes. J Membr Sci 337:55–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lin YL (2017) Effects of organic, biological and colloidal fouling on the removal of pharmaceuticals and personal care products by nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membranes. J Membr Sci 542:342–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. Banerjee
    • 1
  • A. Jana
    • 1
    • 2
  • D. Mukherjee
    • 1
    • 2
  • S. Ghosh
    • 1
    Email author
  • S. Chakrabarti
    • 3
  • S. Majumdar
    • 1
  1. 1.Ceramic Membrane DivisionCSIR-Central Glass and Ceramic Research InstituteKolkataIndia
  2. 2.CSIR-Central Glass and Ceramic Research Institute, Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR)KolkataIndia
  3. 3.Department of Chemical Engineering and Centre for Research in Nanoscience and NanotechnologyUniversity of CalcuttaKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations