Effect of Hydration of Polyamide Membranes on the Surface Electrokinetic Parameters: Surface Characterization by X-Ray Photoelectronic Spectroscopy and Atomic Force Microscopy

✍ Scribed by M.J. Ariza; J. Benavente; E. Rodrı́guez-Castellón; L. Palacio

• Publisher: Elsevier Science
• Year: 2002
• Tongue: English
• Weight: 252 KB
• Volume: 247
• Category: Article
• ISSN: 0021-9797
• DOI: 10.1006/jcis.2001.8071

✦ Synopsis

The surface and the solid/liquid interface of two polyamide membranes, one experimental (B0) and one commercial (NF45), have been characterized by X-ray photoelectronic spectroscopy (XPS), atomic force microscopy (AFM), and zeta potential, respectively. The surface roughness, determined by AFM data analysis, is different for the two membranes, and results show that the commercial NF45 membrane presents a much lower roughness than the experimental B0 membrane. XPS data indicate that the surface of membrane NF45 is similar to that of pure polyamide, while membrane B0 contains a considerable amount of impurities. The homogeneity in depth of both membranes was also studied by determining the composition profile at different analysis angles. Streaming potential along the membrane surface or tangential streaming potential (TSP) measurements with NaCl solutions at different concentrations were carried out with both membranes to determine the zeta potential and the electrokinetic surface charge density, and a correlation between membrane surface and interface parameters is made. Some differences in atomic concentrations of membrane surface elements and X-ray photoelectronic spectra of the samples used in TSP measurements and after a drying process at 90 degrees C for 24 h can be observed when they are compared with those for fresh membranes. Electrokinetic parameters for membrane NF45 (TSP, zeta potential, and surface electrokinetic charge density) obtained from three different series of measurements strongly decrease as a result of membrane use, but for membrane B0 they are practically independent of the number of measurements. This difference in the electrokinetic behavior of the two membranes has been related to the hydration process of the surface for each sample studied by XPS and AFM.