Advertisement

Biomedical Applications of Anisotropic Membranes

  • Michael J. Lysaght
  • Cheryl A. Ford
Part of the Polymer Science and Technology book series (PST, volume 6)

Abstract

In 1966, Michaels and his co-workers developed a series of anisotropic, ultrafiltration-grade membranes constructed from refractory thermoplastic materials (1,2). Broadly speaking, the membranes were freely permeable to salts, sugars, and other low molecular weight species but retentive for intermediate and high molecular weight solutes. They were fully wet-dry reversible. Filtration rates were 50 to 500 GSFD at 50 psi, orders of magnitude higher than had been achieved with desalination grade membranes. As a consequence, practically useful separations could be achieved with snail cells and convenient laboratory accessories. Problems of concentration polarization were soon identified and quantified, and this troublesome phenomenon was controlled through proper hardware design (3). By 1970, these membranes were available in hollow fiber form with that geometry’s intrinsic advantages of packing density and fluid management (4).

Keywords

Hollow Fiber Vital Solute Burst Strength Flat Sheet Membrane Anisotropic Membrane 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Michaels, A. S. Chemical Engineering Progress, 64 (12), 31, 1968.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blatt, W. F., et al. Analytical Biochemistry, 18 (1), 81, 1967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Porter, M. C. IandEC Product Research and Development, 11, 234, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cross, R. A. AIChE Symposium Series, 68 (120), 15, 1972.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bradley, D., et al. Polymer Engineering and Science, 11 (4), 284, 1971.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lysaght, M. J. Electrochemical Society Symposium (Columbus), 57, 1970.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Desaulniers, C. W., et al. U.S. Patent 3,632, 404, 1972.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Porter, M. C. and Michaels, A. S. Chemical Technology, Part 1, January 1971, 56; Part 2, April 1971, 248; Part 3, July 1971, 440; Part 4, October 1971, 633; Part 5, January 1972, 57.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Strathmann, H. Chemie-Ingenieur Technik, 42 (17), 1095, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bixler, H. J., et al. 1969 National AIChE Meeting, Cleveland.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Charm, S. E., et al. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, XIII, 185, 1971.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Thomson, A. R. Process Biochemistry, 35, September 1971.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Livoti, L. G., Henderson, L. W., et al. Asaio Transactions XIX, 119, 1973.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hamilton, R., Henderson, L. W., et al. Asaio Transactions XVII, 259, 1971.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lysaght, M. J. NIH Report AK-2–2279, 1973.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lysaght, M. J., et al. FAST Transactions, 2, 1973.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cross, R. A. NIH Report 71–2367, 1972.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Knazek, R. A., et al. Science, 178, 65, 1972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robertson, C. R. 1973 National AIChE Meeting, Detroit.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1974

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael J. Lysaght
    • 1
  • Cheryl A. Ford
    • 1
  1. 1.Amicon CorporationLexingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations