Polyacrylic Acid Composite Membranes for Brackish Water Desalination

  • C. E. Milstead
  • M. Tagami


In recent years, considerable interest has developed concerning the use of membranes containing fixed charged groups for water desalination applications[1–6]. The transport properties of these charged membranes have been indicated to be qualitatively consistent with the Donnan ion exclusion mechanism[7]; i.e., salt rejection is a decreasing function of concentration, divalent coions are rejected better than monovalent coions, and monovalent counterions are rejected better than divalent counterions. Earlier studies in this laboratory[8] involved the preparation and properties of polyacrylic acid (PAA) films cast directly onto a finely porous support membrane composed of mixed cellulose esters, cellulose nitrate-cellulose acetate (CN-CA). These studies showed that in dilute salt solutions the PAA-CN-CA composite membranes exhibited a desalination performance comparable to asymmetric CA membranes of the Loeb-Sourirajan type[9]. In general, (1) water flux and salt rejection were increasing functions of pressure, (2) rejection was a function of feed concentration and charge on the counterion, and (3) the membrane properties were relatively independent of pH above about pH 6, with increasing water flux at lower pH values accompanied by declining NaCl rejection.


Water Flux Reverse Osmosis Polyacrylic Acid Membrane Performance Salt Rejection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    W. H. Baldwin, D. L. Holcomb, and J. S. Johnson, J. Polymer Sci., 3, Part A, 833 (1965).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    S. B. Sachs, E. Hoffer, and O. Kedem, Office of Saline Water Research and Development Progress Report No. 324 (Part II), May 1968.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. E. Marcinkowsky, K. A. Kraus, H. O. Phillips, J. S. Johnson, Jr., and A. J. Shor, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 88, 5744 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. A. Kraus, A. J. Shor and J. S. Johnson, Jr., Desalination, 1, 225 (1966); Desalination, 2, 243 (1967).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. S. Hoffman, M. Modell, and P. Pan, J. Appl. Polymer Sci., 13, 2223 (1969); J. Appl. Polymer Sci., 14, 285 (1970).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    S. B. Sachs, W. H. Baldwin, and J. S. Johnson, Desalination, 6, 215 (1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    F. G. Donnan, Z. Electrochem., 17, 572 (1911).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    H. K. Lonsdale, R. L. Riley, C. E. Milstead, L. D. LaGrange, A. S. Douglas, and S. B. Sachs, Office of Saline Water Research and Development Progress Report No. 577, March 1970.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    S. Loeb and S. Sourirajan, Advan. Chem. Series, 38, 117 (1963).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    A. S. Douglas, M. Tagami, and C. E. Milstead, Federal Water Quality Administration, Water Pollution Control Research Series ORD-17040EF006/70, (1970).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. T. Rozelle, J. E. Cadotte, R. D. Corneliussen, and E. E. Erickson, Office of Saline Water Research and Development Progress Report No. 359, October 1968.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1972

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. E. Milstead
    • 1
  • M. Tagami
    • 1
  1. 1.Gulf General Atomic CompanySan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations