Highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane and its preparation process

Abstract

The present invention relates to ultrathin polymer nanofilms, composite membranes thereof, and methods for preparing the same. The composite membranes are produced by interfacial polymerization of diamine (or polyamine) monomers (or polymers) with trimesoyl chloride. After IP, a post-treatment process is developed in which the nascent nanofilm is washed with a sufficient volume of solvent and baked at room temperature for 10-30 seconds, followed by baking at 70-100°C for 1-10 minutes. This washing step removes the remaining TMC in the organic phase and stops further growth of the polyamide nanofilm. The ultrathin nanofilm composite membranes exhibit high water permeability (up to 61.3 Lm²) along with high rejection of Na2SO4 (up to 99.3%) while maintaining low rejections of MgCl2 (up to 27.7%) and NaCl (up to 11.9%), respectively, when tested at 25 (±1)°C and 5 bar pressure using a 2 g / L feed solution. -2 h -1 bar -1 ) results.

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes. In particular, the present invention relates to a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes. [Background technology]

[0002] Ultrathin polymer nanofilms and their composite membranes are used for higher liquid permeability and high rejection of small solutes, including divalent and multivalent ions.

[0003] Nanofiltration membranes with molecular weight cutoffs of 250 to 1000 g / mol are available. They are used for the removal of multivalent ions, small organic molecules, microorganisms, and viruses. They are also used in wastewater treatment, chemical refining, food production, the chlorate and chlor-alkali industries, and as a pretreatment step in reverse osmosis water treatment plants.

[0004] It will be appreciated by those skilled in the art that many applications of nanofiltration membranes are critical to the permeability of the membrane so that a desired volume can be processed within a reasonable time frame.

[0005] Sulfate ions are a common impurity in commercial salt produced from seawater, and the process of separating sulfate from NaCl is complex.

[0006] Ion-selective thin-film composite membranes have been studied for over 30 years, and state-of-the-art nanofiltration membranes are fabricated from semi-aromatic polyamides. The membranes are capable of separating sulfate from NaCl, with a membrane selectivity of approximately 100 for NaCl from NaSO.

[0007] Highly selective nanofiltration membranes are used to improve brine recovery and sulfate removal in the chlorate and chloralkali industries.

[0008] In brine electrolysis processing plants, sodium chloride (approximately 300-350 g / L NaCl) is used as a feedstock to produce chlorine, sodium hydroxide, and hydrogen. The purity of the NaCl brine is detrimental to product quality, with a maximum sulfate impurity of approximately 20 g / L being the limit to avoid operational problems.

[0009] Highly selective separation processes are essential for the efficient removal of sulfate from NaCl and for the recovery of useful brine from brine streams.

[0010] Composite nanofiltration membranes can be used to partially or completely remove certain amounts of undesirable compounds from aqueous solutions, including significant removal of sulfate, phosphate, chromium, calcium, mercury, lead, cadmium, magnesium, aluminum, and fluoride ions from aqueous salt solutions.

[0011] State-of-the-art thin-film composite membranes applied in nanofiltration applications are prepared from approximately 2 wt% piperazine (PIP) and approximately 0.15 wt% trimesoyl chloride (TMC). The quest to produce highly permeable nanofiltration membranes is a current research trend. Many recent results have reported processes for producing highly permeable nanofiltration membranes using different fabrication methods and employing different post-treatment protocols.

[0012] One can refer to the paper by Zhenyi Wang et al., Nat. Commun. 9, 2018, 2004, which reported the formation of a polyamide film on polydopamine (PD)-modified zirconium imidazole framework (ZIF) nanoparticles, which showed a 95% removal rate of Na2SO4 with a maximum of 53.5 Lm -2 h -1 bar -1 It exhibits high water permeability.

[0013] See Science 360, 2018, 518-521, which reported piperazine-based polyamide membranes with controlled Turing structure by adding polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) to the aqueous phase via interfacial polymerization using TMC. These membranes provide high water permeability and high water-salt separation.

[0014] High water permeability (25.1Lm -2 h -1 bar -1 Reference can be made to the paper by Junyong Zhu et al., J. Mater. Chem. A 6, 2018, 15701-15709, which reported the synthesis of a free-standing polypiperazine amide film that exhibited excellent divalent ion removal, with a removal rate of 99.1% for Na2SO4 and Zn2O4.

[0015] Reference can be made to the paper by Dihua Wu et al., Reactive & Functional Polymers 86, 2015, pp. 168-183, which reported the fabrication of thin-film composite nanofiltration membranes by using polymeric amine PEI and monomeric amine PIP in combination with TMC. Dihua Wu et al. showed that a two-ply polyamide membrane fabricated by two cycles of PEI-TMC and PIP-TMC, formed separately by interfacial reaction, achieved a higher rejection rate of MgCl2 (98.0%).

[0016] Reference may be made to the paper by Chang Liu et al., J. Membr. Sci. 486, 2015, 169-176, which reported a layer-by-layer (LBL) fabrication method of polyelectrolytes cross-linked with glutaraldehyde to develop a novel hollow fiber nanofiltration membrane for low-pressure water softening. This hollow fiber membrane exhibited good water permeability (about 9.6 L m ) with good rejection of MgCl (98.1%). -2 h -1 bar -1 ) is shown.

[0017] Reference can be made to the paper by Dihua Wu et al., J. Membr. Sci. 472, 2014, 141-153, which reported a fabrication process for thin-film composite nanofiltration membranes by interfacial polymerization of PEI and TMC on a microporous polyethersulfone (PES) substrate. The membranes were prepared in a layer-by-layer structure by repeated cycles of sequential reactant deposition and reaction. The developed membranes showed better salt rejection of MgCl2 (up to 97.0%), but with a significant decrease in water permeability (approximately 0.2 L m -2 h -1 bar -1 ).

[0018] See J. Membr. Sci. 535, 2017, 357–364, which reported a post-treatment method for increasing the water permeability, water-solute selectivity, and surface charge of polyamide selective layers by quenching residual acyl chloride groups in nascent polyamide films. When alcohol solutions containing amines, ammonia, and common alcohol solvents such as methanol and ethanol were used as quenching agents, this process reduced the carboxyl group density of polyamide TFC membranes. The quenched membranes exhibited good water permeability and selectivity. When water was used as the first quenching liquid, the membrane's water permeability increased by 7–8% over the control sample, compared with an 85–97% increase in water permeability for membranes quenched using other quenching liquids prior to contact with water.

[0019] See Desalination 428, 2018, pp. 218–226, which reported a heat treatment process and post-IP rinsing method to increase the pure water permeability of fully aromatic polyamide reverse osmosis (RO) membranes. Membranes in which only the polyamide layer was heat-treated showed a 250% increase in ultrapure water permeability compared to membranes in which both the polyamide and substrate layers were heat-treated. When tested for RO salt rejection, membranes rinsed with pure n-hexane showed approximately 19% higher water permeability without a significant decrease in solute rejection.

[0020] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 5,876,602, which discloses a method for post-treatment of composite polyamide reverse osmosis membranes by treatment with an aqueous chlorinating agent at a concentration of 200 to 10,000 ppm to improve water permeability, reduce salt passage, and increase stability to bases.

[0021] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 4,960,517, which describes a method for treating composite cross-linked polyamide RO membranes with amine-reactive reagents, such as acetic anhydride and 1,3-propane sultone, which react by substituting on the amine, to improve the rejection of certain organic compounds and sulfuric acid.

[0022] Reference may be made to US Patent No. 9,452,391 B1, which describes a post-treatment method by treating a thin film polyamide layer with a dihydroxyaryl compound and nitrous acid to improve water permeability, NaCl rejection and boron rejection.

[0023] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 7,815,987 B2, which discloses a method for preparing a polyamide membrane by including a coating comprising a combination of polyalkylene oxide compounds, such as poly(ethylene oxide) diglycidyl ether (PEGDE) and polyglycerin-polyglyceridyl ether, and polyacrylamide compounds, such as polyacrylamide (Mw=10,000) and poly(acrylamide-co-acrylic acid) / 80% polyacrylamide (Mw=520,000). There are several ways to treat the membrane after the formation of the polyamide layer to improve its water permeability.

[0024] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 4,888,116, which describes a method for treating a thin film composite RO membrane having a polyamide layer with an aqueous reagent solution that reacts with primary amine groups to form diazonium salt groups or derivatives of diazonium salts, which can increase the water flux of the polyamide membrane, purportedly with little or no effect on the salt rejection of the membrane.

[0025] Reference can be made to U.S. Patent No. 3,551,331, which describes a treatment method for modifying the permeability of polyamide membranes by treatment with protonic acids, lyotropic salts, or Lewis acids. The water permeability of the treated polyamide membranes increased with increasing concentrations of the treating agents and also with increasing treatment temperatures.

[0026] Reference may be made to US Pat. No. 3,904,519, which discloses a process for treating linear aromatic polyamides with cross-linking agents to improve the permeability performance or permeability stability of the resulting membranes.

[0027] Reference can be made to U.S. Patent No. 4,277,344, which discloses a method of post-treating polyamide membranes with a solution containing 100 ppm hypochlorite for one day to improve membrane performance. In most cases, chlorination resulted in a decrease in water permeability, but an improvement in salt rejection was observed.

[0028] Reference may be made to U.S. Pat. No. 4,761,234, which discloses a treatment method for improving the performance of polyamide thin film composite membranes containing triamino-benzene as one of the monomers using an aqueous solution containing 1000 ppm residual chlorine at pH 10.3 for 18 hours at room temperature.

[0029] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 4,812,270 to Cadotte et al., which describes membrane post-treatment with phosphoric acid, which demonstrates increased membrane salt rejection and water permeability, with increased water permeability as high as 50%.

[0030] Reference may be made to U.S. Patent No. 5,582,725, which describes a post-treatment method using acyl halides such as benzoyl chloride to improve the removal of organics such as benzaldehyde, ethanol, 2-butoxyethanol, cresols, urea, and phenol by slowing down the flow of water after treatment. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0031] [Patent Document 1] U.S. Patent No. 5876602 [Patent Document 2] U.S. Patent No. 4,960,517 [Patent Document 3] U.S. Patent No. 9452391B1 [Patent Document 4] U.S. Patent No. 7815987B2 [Patent Document 5] U.S. Patent No. 4,888,116 [Patent Document 6] U.S. Patent No. 3,551,331 [Patent Document 7] U.S. Patent No. 3904519 [Patent Document 8] U.S. Patent No. 4,277,344 [Patent Document 9] U.S. Patent No. 4761234 [Patent Document 10] U.S. Patent No. 4812270 [Patent Document 11] U.S. Patent No. 5,582,725 [Non-patent literature]

[0032] [Non-Patent Document 1] Zhenyi Wang et al.,Nat.Commun.9,2018,2004 [Non-patent document 2] Tan et al.,Science 360,2018,518-521 [Non-patent document 3] Junyong Zhu et al.,J.Mater.Chem.A 6,2018,15701-15709 [Non-patent document 4] Dihua Wu et al.,Reactive&Functional Polymers 86,2015,168-183 [Non-Patent Document 5] Chang Liu et al.,J.Membr.Sci.486,2015,169-176 [Non-patent document 6] Dihua Wu et al.,J.Membr.Sci.472,2014,141-153 [Non-Patent Document 7] JRWerber et al.,J.Membr.Sci.535,2017,357-364 [Non-patent document 8] CYChong et al.,Desalination 428,2018,218-226 Summary of the Invention

[0033] (Object of the invention) The main objective of the present invention is to provide an ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane and a method for preparing the same.

[0034] Another object of the present invention is to control the thickness of polymer nanofilms prepared by interfacial polymerization.

[0035] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilms with a post-treatment process of washing the nanofilms immediately after the interfacial polymerization reaction.

[0036] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for isolating the ultrathin polymer nanofilm separation layer of a composite membrane.

[0037] It is yet another object of the present invention to provide a process for isolating the nanofilm separation layer of the composite membrane and transferring the free-standing nanofilm layer onto a different substrate while keeping the top of the nanofilm facing up.

[0038] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polyamide nanofilms by reacting piperazine (PIP) with trimesoyl chloride (TMC) via interfacial polymerization.

[0039] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes with high water permeability.

[0040] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes with high sulfate rejection.

[0041] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes with high ion selectivity.

[0042] Yet another object of the present invention is to provide a process for preparing ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes with high rejection of ions from mixed salt water.

[0043] It is yet another object of the present invention to provide an ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane for selective separation of ions from seawater.

[0044] Yet another object of the present invention is to control the chemical structure of polymer nanofilms in order to prepare selective separation membranes between monovalent and divalent ions.

[0045] Yet another object of the present invention is to control the chemical structure of polymer nanofilms through a post-treatment process of washing the nanofilms immediately after the interfacial polymerization reaction.

[0046] (Summary of the Invention) Therefore, the present invention provides i. a base layer of a porous polymer support membrane; ii. an upper polymer nanofilm; The polymer nanofilm is prepared by interfacial polymerization, and the thickness of the polymer nanofilm ranges from 4 nm to 50 nm, providing a highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane.

[0047] In one embodiment of the present invention, the base layer of the porous polymeric support membrane is selected from the group consisting of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile (HPAN), polysulfone (PSF), polyethersulfone (PES), P84, and polyacrylonitrile (PAN).

[0048] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the membrane has a resistance of 30 LM Hbar to 79.5 LM Hbar. -1 It has a high pure water permeability in the range of 81% to 99.82% and exhibits a Na2SO4 rejection rate in the range of 81% to 99.82%.

[0049] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the membrane has a MgCl and NaCl rejection in the range of 4% to 98.5% and 3% to 36.6%, respectively, and is resistant to 23.2 L Mhbar -1 ~79.5LMHbar -1 It exhibits pure water permeability in the range of .

[0050] In yet another embodiment of the invention, when the polymer repeat units are selected from piperazine and trimesoyl chloride, the nanofilm has an elemental composition of 76.86% carbon, 13.40% oxygen, and 9.74% nitrogen, and a network crosslinking degree of 52.5%; or: 74.54% carbon, 13.11% oxygen, and 12.33% nitrogen, and a network crosslinking degree of 90.8%.

[0051] In yet another embodiment, the present invention provides a method for producing a i. preparing a polymer support membrane on a nonwoven fabric by a phase inversion method; ii. modifying the polymer support membrane obtained in step (i) to obtain a hydrophilic support; iii. pouring an aqueous solution containing a diamine or polyamine at a concentration in the range of 0.01 to 5.0 w / w% onto the polymer support membrane obtained in step (i) or step (ii), followed by immersion for 10 seconds to 1 minute; iv. Discarding the aqueous solution from the polymer support film and removing the remaining aqueous solution using a rubber roller, followed by air drying for 10 seconds to 1 minute; v. Immediately contacting an organic solution containing a polyfunctional acid halide at a concentration ranging from 0.01 to 0.5 w / w% with the polymer support membrane of step (iv) for a period ranging from 5 seconds to 5 minutes for interfacial polymerization; vi. removing the excess organic solution, followed by removing the unreacted polyfunctional acid halide remaining on the nanofilm by washing with a solvent, and drying the film at room temperature for 10 to 30 seconds; vii. Annealing the membrane at a temperature ranging from 40 to 90°C for a period ranging from 1 to 10 minutes to obtain a highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane.

[0052] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, in step (iii), the diamine or polyamine is selected from the group consisting of piperazine (PIP), m-phenylenediamine (MPD), p-phenylenediamine (PPD), polyethyleneimine (PEI), 4-(aminomethyl)piperidine (AMP), 1,3-cyclohexanediamine (CDA13), 1,4-cyclohexanediamine (CDA14), 1,6-hexanediamine (HDA), ethylenediamine (EDA), resorcinol (RES), phloroglucinol (PHL), pentaerythritol (PET), quercetin (QCT), bisphenol A (BPA), and melamine (MM), alone or in combination.

[0053] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the polyfunctional acid halide used in step (v) is trimesoyl chloride (TMC) or terephthaloyl chloride (TPC).

[0054] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, the solvent used in step (vi) is selected from the group consisting of hexane, toluene, xylene, acetone, methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, water, dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethylacetamide (DMAc), N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), acetonitrile, either alone or in combination thereof.

[0055] In yet another embodiment of the present invention, organic polymer nanofilms are prepared by interfacial polymerization at the interface of two immiscible liquids. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0056] [Figure 1] Surface morphology of nanofilm composite membranes prepared on hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile (HPAN) supports and observed under a scanning electron microscope (SEM). (A,B) 1.0 w / w% PIP reacted with 0.1 w / w% TMC for 5 seconds. (C,D) 2.0 w / w% PIP reacted with 0.1 w / w% TMC for 5 seconds. (E,F) 0.1 w / w% PIP reacted with 0.1 w / w% TMC for 5 seconds. Images in the right panels are at higher magnification. [Figure 2] (A-C) Transmission electron microscope (TEM) images of free-standing nanofilms captured under different magnifications. The nanofilms were prepared on polyacrylonitrile (PAN) substrates from 1 wt.% PIP and 0.1 wt.% TMC, reacted for 5 seconds. To remove excess TMC, post-treatment was performed by washing with hexane after interfacial polymerization. [Figure 3] (A,B) Cross-sectional atomic force microscopy (AFM) height images and corresponding height profiles of a free-standing polyamide nanofilm (PIP-0.05%-0.1%-5s-hex71) transferred onto a silicon wafer. The nanofilm was prepared on a PAN support from 0.05 wt.% PIP in an aqueous phase and 0.1 wt.% TMC in hexane and allowed to react for 5 s. Post-treatment by washing in hexane was performed as described above. [Figure 4] Figure 1 shows the chemical structures of (a) fully crosslinked polyamide and (b) fully linear polyamide prepared from the interfacial polymerization of piperazine (PIP) and trimesoyl chloride (TMC). The repeating pattern units are shown within the dotted boxes in the polymer structures. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0057] The present invention relates to ultrathin polymer nanofilms and composite membranes thereof, and their preparation by interfacial polymerization (IP) of two reactant molecules dissolved in two immiscible solvents and contacting them at an interface created on a porous support.

[0058] Interfacial polymerization is a technique for producing thin film composite (TFC) membranes on a porous support (e.g., ultrafiltration, microfiltration) using one reactant molecule in the aqueous (polar) phase and another reactant molecule in the organic (non-polar) phase. Typically, the porous support membrane is saturated with an aqueous solution of a diamine (or polyamine) and contacted with a hexane layer containing TMC, allowing the synthesis of polymer nanofilms by interfacial polymerization.

[0059] The present invention discloses a process for preparing a free-standing nanofilm that is isolated by controlling the dissolution of a support film when the nanofilm is produced by interfacial polymerization. The present invention further discloses a process for preparing a composite membrane in which, after the nanofilm is formed by interfacial polymerization, a post-treatment is employed in which the nanofilm is washed with a sufficient amount of solvent, dried at room temperature [20-30°C] for 10-30 seconds, and then annealed at 70-100°C for 1-10 minutes.

[0060] Interfacial polymerization was carried out on top of an ultrafiltration support by selecting a combination of diamines (or polyamines) in the aqueous phase at concentrations of 0.01–3.0 w / w% and TMC in the hexane phase at concentrations of 0.01–0.5 w / w%. Several diamine (or polyamine) monomers (or polymers), such as piperazine (PIP), m-phenylenediamine (MPD), polyethyleneimine (PEI), and 4-(aminomethyl)piperazine (AMP), were reacted with TMC to form ultrathin polyamide nanofilms on the support. A post-treatment protocol was employed in which the nascent polymer nanofilms fabricated on the support were washed with a solvent. In this case, the washing solvent was selected from hexane, toluene, xylene, acetone, methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, water, dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethylacetamide (DMAc), N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), and acetonitrile, or a mixture of these solvents, or a combination thereof. This washing step removes the remaining TMC in the organic phase and stops the further growth of the polyamide nanofilm layer formed after the interfacial polymerization reaction during drying and annealing. Compared to conventional polyamide films formed by interfacial polymerization, the washing step helps to stop the polymerization reaction, thus reducing the effective thickness of the polymer nanofilm.

[0061] The novelty of this invention is that the salt rejection characteristics of the nanofilm composite membrane can be adjusted by selecting the combination of the diamine (or polyamine) monomer (or polymer) and TMC concentrations, and excellent membrane separation performance can be achieved. The ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane fabricated with a very low PIP concentration (0.05 w / w%) exhibited high water permeability (up to 70.8 L / m ) along with high rejection of NaSO (up to 96.5%) while maintaining low rejection of MgCl (up to 16.4%) and NaCl (up to 9.0%), as tested at a temperature of 25 (±1) °C and an applied pressure of 5 bar using a feed solution of 2 g / L. -2 h -1 bar -1Ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes fabricated with a moderately low PIP concentration (0.1 w / w%) exhibited high water permeability (up to 61.3 Lm ) along with high rejection of NaSO (up to 99.3%) while maintaining low rejection of MgCl (up to 27.7%) and NaCl (up to 11.9%), tested at a temperature of 25 (±1) °C and an applied pressure of 5 bar using a feed solution of 2 g / L. -2 h -1 bar -1 Another novelty of the present invention is that ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membranes fabricated with high PIP concentrations (1.0-2.0 w / w%) exhibited a high rejection rate of 37.1-38.4 L / m², along with high rejection rates of NaSO (up to 99.82%) and MgCl (93.5-98.5%), while maintaining low NaCl rejection (up to 19.1-28.3%) when tested at a temperature of 25 (±1) °C and an applied pressure of 5 bar using a feed solution of 2 g / L. -2 h -1 bar -1 This results in a water permeability in the range of . [Example]

[0062] The following examples are given by way of illustration and therefore should not be construed as limiting the scope of the present invention.

[0063] [Example 1] Preparation of ultrafiltration support membrane and cross-linking of support membrane Ultrafiltration polysulfone (PSf), polyethersulfone (PES), P84, and polyacrylonitrile (PAN) support membranes were prepared by the phase inversion method. Polyacrylonitrile (PAN) support membranes were prepared on nonwoven fabric using a continuous casting machine. First, PAN polymer powder was dried in a hot air oven at 70 (±1) °C for 2 hours. The dried PAN was then dissolved in DMF in an airtight glass flask with continuous stirring at 70 (±1) °C for several hours to produce a 13.0 wt% polymer solution. The polymer solution was then cooled to room temperature (25 (±1) °C). A semi-continuous casting machine was used to continuously cast a membrane sheet approximately 60 m long and 0.32 m wide onto the nonwoven fabric at a speed of 5 m / min, maintaining a gap (130–150 μm) between the casting knife and the nonwoven fabric. During this process, the polymer film, along with the nonwoven fabric, was placed in a water gelation bath maintained at 25 (±1) °C, where it underwent phase inversion to form an ultrafiltration membrane, which was then taken up on a take-up roller. The distance between the knife position and the water gelation bath, i.e., the distance traveled through air, was approximately 0.35 m. The membrane roll was then washed with pure water, cut into pieces measuring 16 cm x 27 cm, and stored in pure water for two days before final storage in a mixture of isopropanol and water (1:1 v / v) at 10 (±1) °C. To crosslink the ultrafiltration support, several pieces (approximately 75 pieces) of the PAN support were removed from the storage solution and thoroughly washed with pure water. The support was then immersed in 5 L of 1 M sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution preheated to 60 °C, and the solution was placed in a hot air oven at 60 (±1) °C for 2 hours to allow hydrolysis. After crosslinking, the PAN membrane was washed with pure water and stored in pure water for several days. The pH of the water was checked periodically and replaced with pure water daily until the pH reached approximately 7. Finally, the hydrolyzed PAN (HPAN) membrane fragments were stored in a mixture of isopropanol and water (1:1 v / v) at 10 (±1) °C. Similarly, a PSf polymer solution was prepared by dissolving 17 wt% PSf in NMP, a P84 polymer solution was prepared by dissolving 22 wt% P84 in DMF, and a PES polymer solution was prepared by dissolving 19 wt% PES with 3 wt% PVP in DMF. Support membranes were fabricated by the phase inversion method as described above.

[0064] [Example 2] Preparation of nanofilm composite membranes Nanofilm composite membranes were prepared on top of HPAN, PAN, PSf, PES, and P84 support membranes using conventional interfacial polymerization techniques. For storage, the support was washed with ultrapure water to remove excess isopropanol. Next, an aqueous solution containing a diamine (or polyamine) selected from PIP, MPD, AMP, and PEI at concentrations ranging from 0.01 to 5.0 w / w% was poured onto the support and allowed to soak for approximately 20 seconds. The excess aqueous solution was removed from the support using a rubber roller, and the support was then gently air-dried for approximately 10 seconds. Immediately, a hexane solution containing TMC at concentrations ranging from 0.01 to 0.5 w / w% was contacted with the support for the specified time (5 seconds to 5 minutes) to initiate the interfacial polymerization reaction. Immediately after the interfacial polymerization reaction, the excess TMC-containing hexane solution was removed, and the nanofilm surface was further removed by rinsing with pure hexane, followed by drying at room temperature for 10 to 30 seconds. The composite membranes were finally annealed in a hot air oven at specific temperatures ranging from 40 to 90°C for specific times ranging from 1 to 10 minutes. Unless otherwise specified, the diamine monomer (amine polymer) was placed in an aqueous solution, and TMC was placed in a hexane solution for interfacial polymerization. After washing the nanofilm with solvent, the drying time at room temperature was 30 seconds. The preparation conditions for the nanofilm composite membranes are summarized below: Table 1: Preparation conditions of nanofilm composite membranes by interfacial polymerization (IP).

[0065] [Table 1-1] [Table 1-2] [Table 1-3]

[0066] [Example 3] Process for isolating the separation layer of the composite membrane and creating a free-standing nanofilm: We used a nanofilm composite membrane prepared by interfacial polymerization of PIP and TMC on a PAN support, a thin-film composite membrane prepared on a conventional support prepared by interfacial polymerization of MPD and TMC on a PAN support, and a commercially available TFC reverse osmosis membrane. The composite membrane was swollen in acetone by immersing it in acetone for 30 minutes. The support membrane along with the nanofilm was peeled off from the nonwoven fabric using adhesive tape. The nonwoven fabric was peeled off by attaching adhesive tape to the top of the composite membrane, i.e., on the surface of the nanofilm, and then removing the support (along with the nanofilm) from the fabric. Acetone was added during this process to promote layer separation. The nanofilm along with the support was then cut into small pieces and floated on the surface of DMF containing 2% water (v / v). The DMF solution containing water slowly dissolved the polymer support during this time, leaving only the nanofilm layer floating on the surface of the solution. The nanofilm was then transferred onto different supports, such as anodic alumina, silicon, and copper grids. The back side of the nanofilm (facing the aqueous phase during interfacial polymerization) was present on the support, and the top surface (facing the organic phase during interfacial polymerization) remained on top. Finally, the support containing the nanofilm was dried at room temperature, washed in methanol, and finally dried in a hot air oven at a temperature of 50 °C for 30 min before being used for characterization.

[0067] [Example 4] Analysis of surface morphology and estimation of nanofilm thickness by scanning electron microscopy (SEM): Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to analyze the surface morphology and cross-sectional images of the films. Prior to SEM examination, the sample surfaces were coated with a 2-3 nm thick gold-palladium coating. To avoid errors in thickness estimation, measurements greater than approximately 20 nm were considered due to the surface coating.

[0068] [Example 5] Evaluation of nanofilm surface morphology and estimation of its thickness by atomic force microscopy (AFM) Surface morphology, such as roughness and thickness, of the nanofilms was measured using an NT-MDT NTEGRA Aura atomic force microscope (AFM) equipped with a pizzo-type scanner. Some samples were also characterized on a Bruker Dimension 3100. Images were acquired in tapping mode using a PointProbe® Plus silicon-SPM probe (PPP-NCH, Nanosensors®, Switzerland). For thickness measurements, the nanofilms were transferred onto a silicon wafer and scratched to expose the wafer surface, allowing for measurements of the height from the silicon wafer surface to the top nanofilm surface. The step height was an estimate of the nanofilm thickness. A sampling resolution of 256 or 512 points per line and a sampling rate of 0.5–1.0 Hz were used. Gwyddion 2.52 SPM data visualization and analysis software was used for image processing.

[0069] [Example 6] Surface morphology of nanofilm composite membrane observed under SEM The surface morphology of the film was analyzed using SEM, as shown in Figure 1. Nanofilm films were prepared by interfacial polymerization of PIP and TMC on an HPAN support. Immediately after the reaction, the excess hexane solution containing TMC was removed, and the unreacted TMC remaining on the nanofilm surface was further removed by washing with pure hexane and then dried at room temperature for 30 seconds. The composite film was finally annealed in a hot air oven at 70 °C for 1 minute. SEM images were taken of the nanofilm composite film without removing the support.

[0070] [Example 7] Surface morphology of nanofilm composite membrane observed under TEM Nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization of 1 wt% PIP and 0.1 wt% TMC on a PAN substrate for 5 seconds. Immediately after the reaction, the excess hexane solution containing TMC was removed, and the nanofilm was washed with pure hexane to further remove any unreacted TMC remaining on the surface. The nanofilm was then dried at room temperature for 30 seconds. The composite film was finally annealed in a hot air oven at 70°C for 1 minute. The nanofilm, along with the support, was then peeled off from the fabric and allowed to stand free as described above. The free-standing nanofilm was then transferred onto a copper scalpel of a TEM grid, dried in a hot air oven at 50°C for 15 minutes, and examined under a TEM. Images are shown in Figure 2. A virtually amorphous, defect-free nanofilm is observed covering the entire surface of the TEM grid.

[0071] [Example 8] Nanofilm thickness estimation from cross-sectional images by AFM Cross-sectional images were captured by AFM to measure the nanofilm thickness. Images are shown in Figure 3. Nanofilms were prepared from 0.05 w / w% PIP in an aqueous phase and 0.1 w / w% TMC in hexane and reacted for 5 seconds on a PAN substrate. Immediately after the reaction, the excess TMC-containing hexane solution was removed, and the nanofilm surface was further removed by rinsing with pure hexane and drying at room temperature for 30 seconds. The composite film was finally annealed in a hot air oven at 70 °C for 1 minute. The free-standing nanofilm was transferred onto a silicon wafer as described above. The nanofilm-containing substrate was then dried at room temperature, washed in methanol, and finally dried in a hot air oven at 50 °C for 30 minutes before being used for characterization. For thickness measurements, a scratch was made to expose the wafer surface, allowing for measurements of the height from the silicon wafer surface to the top nanofilm surface.

[0072] [Example 9] Determination of surface charge by zeta potential measurements The surface charge of the nanofilm membranes was determined by zeta potential measurements. Zeta potential values ​​were obtained using a ZetaCad zeta potential analyzer. The membranes were cut into 5 cm x 3 cm pieces and placed in a cell. Measurements were performed at 25 °C using a standard electrolyte of 1 mM KCl. The zeta potential of the different membranes was measured at pH 7. The measured membrane zeta potential values ​​ranged from -20 to -30 mV.

[0073] [Example 10] Evaluation of desalination performance of nanofilm composite membranes The desalination performance of the nanofilm composite membrane was tested in a cross-flow filtration system with a cross-flow rate of 50 L / h. 2 A circular membrane sample was used for each test cell with an effective surface area of ​​1000 sq. m. All experiments were carried out under an applied pressure of 5 bar, with a salt concentration of 2 g / L as the feed solution, and maintaining a feed temperature of 25 (±1) °C. All results were collected after the membranes were allowed to reach a steady state, which was achieved by waiting approximately 7 hours under cross-flow at 5 bar pressure. In this case, the membrane permeability remained nearly constant. The membrane permeability was calculated using the following equation:

[0074]

number

[0075] where V is the volume of the permeate (liters) and A is the surface area of ​​the membrane (m 2 ) where t is the time in hours. The rejection rate of the membrane was calculated from the conductivity ratio of the difference between the feed and permeate concentrations and the feed concentration.

[0076]

number

[0077] In the formula, C p is the concentration of salt dissolved in the permeate, and C f is the concentration of dissolved salt on the feed side.

[0078] The ion (or salt) selectivity was expressed by the following formula:

[0079]

number

[0080] Two-stage RO treated water (conductivity <2 μS) was used for pure water permeability measurements and for preparing the feed solution. An electrical conductivity meter (Eutech PC2700) was used to measure the sample conductivity in the range of several microsiemens (μS) to several millisiemens (mS). The conductivity of the permeate sample, which measured conductivity >10 μS, and the conductivity of the feed sample were measured, and the salt rejection was calculated using equation (ii). For the permeate sample, which measured conductivity <10 μS, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) and ion chromatography (IC) were used to measure the ion concentrations in the samples. After necessary dilutions, both the feed and permeate samples were analyzed by ICP-MS and IC. The rejection and selectivity were determined using equations (ii) and (iii), respectively.

[0081] [Example 11] Thickness evaluation by AFM or SEM For thicknesses less than approximately 20 nm, the thickness of polyamide nanofilms was determined by AFM analysis. Free-standing nanofilms were transferred onto silicon wafers as described above. The support containing the nanofilm was then dried at room temperature, washed in methanol, and finally dried in a hot air oven at 50°C for 30 minutes. For thickness measurements, a scratch was made to expose the wafer surface, allowing for measurements of the height from the silicon wafer surface to the top nanofilm surface. AFM height images of the polyamide nanofilms were recorded and analyzed.

[0082] Table 2: Estimated thickness of nanofilms by AFM. The nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization and washed with hexane.

[0083] [Table 2]

[0084] [Example 12] Nanofiltration performance of nanofilm composite membranes The nanofiltration performance of the nanofilm composite membranes fabricated on HPAN supports is shown in Table 3. For the experiments, individual salt solutions (Na2SO4, MgSO4, MgCl2 and NaCl) were used as feed solutions with a concentration of 2 g / L. Table 3: Nanofiltration performance of nanofilm composite membranes fabricated on HPAN supports. The nanofilms are the separation layer of the composite membranes. The nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization and washed with hexane.

[0085] [Table 3-1] [Table 3-2] [Table 3-3]

[0086] [Example 13] Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS) and Ion Chromatography (IC) Low concentrations of magnesium and sodium ions were detected using an inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (Perkin Elmer, Optima 2000 instrument). The concentrations of the samples were determined from the calibration curves of these specific ions. Samples were prepared by maintaining the ionic strength in the range of 0.3 to 10 ppm. Ion chromatography (DIONEX ICS-5000) was used. + The sulfate and chloride ions in the samples were determined using a DC (Dispersion Controlled) instrument. Samples with concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 10 ppm were tested. In all cases, samples were analyzed after necessary dilutions.

[0087] [Example 14] Calculation of ideal ion selectivity (Cl) from the measured salt rejection of each pure salt solution as feed. - ~SO4 2- ) The nanofiltration performance of the nanofilm composite membrane was evaluated separately by using pure salts (NaCl and Na2SO4) as the feed solution at a concentration of 2 g / L, an applied pressure of 5 bar, a temperature of 25 (±1) °C, and a cross-flow rate of 50 L / h. The ionic strengths of anions and cations present in the feed solution and permeate were measured by IC and ICP analysis, and the ideal ion selectivity was calculated based on equation (iii). Table 4: Nanofiltration performance of nanofilm composite membranes. Calculated ideal ion selectivity (Cl - ~SO4 2- For the experiments, individual salt solutions (Na2SO4 and NaCl) were used as feed solutions at a concentration of 2 g / L. The nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization and washed with hexane.

[0088] [Table 4]

[0089] [Example 15] Ion selectivity (Cl) from mixed salt solutions - ~SO4 2- and Na + ~Mg 2+ ) measurement The nanofiltration performance of the nanofilm composite membrane in a mixed salt solution as the feed solution was used to measure the ion selectivity. In one feed solution, Na2SO4 and NaCl were mixed together to obtain Cl2. - ~SO4 2- The selectivity was measured, and in the next feed, Na + ~Mg 2+ MgCl and NaCl were used to measure selectivity. 1 g / L of each salt was used in the feed, for a total of 2 g / L. The membranes were tested at a temperature of 25 (±1) °C, under an applied pressure of 5 bar, and at a cross-flow rate of 50 L / h. Table 5: Nanofiltration performance of nanofilm composite membranes. Ion selectivity (Cl) from the mixed salt feed solution.- ~SO4 2- and Na + ~Mg 2+ ) was measured. Mixed salt solutions (Feed Solution 1: NaSO: 1 g / L and NaCl: 1 g / L, and Feed Solution 2: MgCl: 1 g / L and NaCl: 1 g / L) were used, and the total salt concentration of the feed solutions was 2 g / L. Nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization and washed with hexane.

[0090] [Table 5]

[0091] [Example 16] Ion selectivity (SO4 2- ~Cl - ) measurement The nanofiltration performance of the nanofilm composite membrane in synthetic seawater (salt concentrations used were NaCl: 24.5 g / L, MgCl2: 5.2 g / L, Na2SO4: 4.09 g / L, CaCl2: 1.16 g / L and KCl: 0.695 g / L) was tested under an applied pressure of 10 bar, a temperature of 25 (±1) °C and a cross-flow rate of 50 L / h. -1 Permeability calculated in LMHbar at 5bar -1 Note that this is lower than the calculated permeability. Table 6: Nanofiltration performance of nanofilm composite membranes. Ion selectivity (Cl) from synthetic seawater feed solution - ~SO4 2- and Na + ~Mg 2+ ) measurement. The nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization and washed with hexane.

[0092] [Table 6]

[0093] [Example 17] X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) testing Freestanding polymer nanofilms were prepared and transferred onto PLATYPUS® gold-coated silicon wafers as described above. The gold-coated silicon wafers containing the nanofilms were then dried at room temperature, rinsed in methanol, and finally dried in a hot air oven at 50°C for 30 minutes. XPS analysis was performed using an Omicron Nanotechnology spectrometer, using 300 W monochromatic AlKα X-rays as the excitation source. Survey and core-level XPS spectra were recorded from at least three different points on the sample. The analyzer was operated with a constant pass energy of 20 eV, and the C1s peak was set at BE 285 eV to overcome any sample charging. Data processing was performed using CasaXps. Peak areas were measured using a linear background or after satellite and background subtraction according to the method of Shirley (D.A. Shirley, High-resolution X-ray photoemission spectrum of the valence bands of gold, Phys. Rev. B 5, 4709, 1972).

[0094] [Example 18] XPS testing to measure the degree of network cross-linking in nanofilms During interfacial polymerization, there is a possibility that both network crosslinks and linear crosslink branches exist in the polymer. The degree of network crosslinking is a measure of the amount of network crosslinking moieties in the polymer. The chemical structure of the fully aromatic polyamide formed by interfacial polymerization is shown in Figure 4. From the XPS test, the elemental composition of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and oxygen (O) was determined. Based on the elemental composition, the degree of network crosslinking (DNC) was calculated according to the formula given in US20180170003A1:

[0095]

number

[0096] in this case,

[0097]

number

[0098] Polyamide nanofilms were prepared by interfacial polymerization of PIP and TMC on a PAN substrate and reacted for 5 seconds. Immediately after the reaction, the excess hexane solution containing TMC was removed, and the nanofilm surface was washed with pure hexane to further remove unreacted TMC. The film was then dried at room temperature for 30 seconds. The composite film was finally annealed in a hot air oven at 70°C for 1 minute. The results are shown in Table 7. Table 7: Chemical composition and surface properties of free-standing polymer nanofilms

[0099] [Table 7]

[0100] Advantages of the present invention The highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane has the following advantages: 1. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein are fabricated by interfacial polymerization, a process commonly used for large-scale industrial membrane production, and are used for desalination. This process produces polymer nanofilms less than 5 nm thick. 2. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein can be washed with solvents to reduce their thickness and membrane permeation resistance and improve nanofiltration performance. This includes the removal of anions (SO4) along with high water permeability. - ) and cations (Mg 2+ ) high removal rates of both. 3. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein possess unique features of tunable salt rejection properties, increased water permeability, and high selectivity for monovalent to multivalent ions. 4. The nanofilm composite membrane presented herein exhibits a rejection rate of up to 99.82% for Na2SO4 and is capable of purifying at 79.5 L Mhbar. -1 demonstrates extremely high water permeability. 5. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein also exhibit very high (up to 98.5%) MgCl2 rejection and very low (19.1%) NaCl rejection. 6. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein separate ions from mixed salts and exhibit high ion selectivity of over 1200. 7. The nanofilm composite membranes presented herein exceed state-of-the-art nanofiltration membranes and exhibit much higher permeability than commercially available membranes. The inventions described in the original claims of this application are set forth below. [1] A highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane, comprising: i. a base layer of a porous polymer support membrane; ii. an upper polymer nanofilm; The highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane, wherein the polymer nanofilm is prepared by interfacial polymerization, and the thickness of the polymer nanofilm is in the range of 4 nm to 50 nm. [2] 10. The membrane of claim 1, wherein the base layer of the porous polymer support membrane is selected from the group consisting of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile (HPAN), polysulfone (PSF), polyethersulfone (PES), P84, and polyacrylonitrile (PAN). [3] The membrane is 30LMHbar-1 to 79.5LMHbar -1 It has high pure water permeability in the range of 81% to 99.82% 2 SO 4 The membrane according to [1], which exhibits a removal rate of [4] The membranes contain MgCl in the range of 4% to 98.5% and 3% to 36.6%, respectively. 2 and NaCl removal rate, 23.2LMHbar -1 ~79.5LMHbar -1 The membrane according to [1], which exhibits a pure water permeability in the range of [5] [1] The film of [1], wherein the nanofilm has an elemental composition of 76.86% carbon, 13.40% oxygen, and 9.74% nitrogen, and a network crosslinking degree of 52.5%, when the polymer repeat unit is selected from piperazine and trimesoyl chloride; or: 74.54% carbon, 13.11% oxygen, and 12.33% nitrogen, and a network crosslinking degree of 90.8%. [6] 1. A process for preparing a highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane, comprising: i. preparing a polymer support membrane on a nonwoven fabric by a phase inversion method; ii. modifying the polymer support membrane obtained in step (i) to obtain a hydrophilic support; iii. pouring an aqueous solution containing a diamine or polyamine at a concentration in the range of 0.01 to 5.0 w / w% onto the polymer support membrane obtained in step (i) or step (ii), followed by immersion for 10 seconds to 1 minute; iv. discarding the aqueous solution from the polymer support film and removing the remaining aqueous solution using a rubber roller, followed by air drying for 10 seconds to 1 minute; v. Immediately contacting the polymer support membrane of step (iv) with an organic solution containing a polyfunctional acid halide at a concentration ranging from 0.01 to 0.5 w / w% for interfacial polymerization for a period ranging from 5 seconds to 5 minutes to obtain a nanofilm; vi. removing the excess organic solution, and then removing the unreacted polyfunctional acid halide remaining on the nanofilm by washing with a solvent, and drying the film at room temperature for 10 to 30 seconds; vii. Annealing the membrane at a temperature ranging from 40 to 90°C for a period ranging from 1 to 10 minutes to obtain the highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane. [7] 6. The process according to claim 6, wherein in step (iii), the diamine or polyamine is selected from the group consisting of piperazine (PIP), m-phenylenediamine (MPD), p-phenylenediamine (PPD), polyethyleneimine (PEI), 4-(aminomethyl)piperidine (AMP), 1,3-cyclohexanediamine (CDA13), 1,4-cyclohexanediamine (CDA14), 1,6-hexanediamine (HDA), ethylenediamine (EDA), resorcinol (RES), phloroglucinol (PHL), pentaerythritol (PET), quercetin (QCT), bisphenol A (BPA), and melamine (MM), either alone or in combination. [8] [6] The process according to [6], wherein in step (v), the polyfunctional acid halide used is selected from trimesoyl chloride (TMC) or terephthaloyl chloride (TPC). [9] [6] The process according to [6], wherein the solvent used in step (vi) is selected from the group consisting of hexane, toluene, xylene, acetone, methanol, ethanol, propanol, isopropanol, water, dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethylacetamide (DMAc), N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP), and acetonitrile, either alone or in combination.

Claims

1. A highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane, comprising: i. a base layer of a porous polymeric support membrane; and ii. an upper polymer nanofilm; the top polymer nanofilm is a polyamide having repeating units selected from piperazine and trimesoyl chloride; the thickness of the upper polymer nanofilm is in the range of 4 nm to 50 nm; the top polymer nanofilm has an elemental composition of 76.86% carbon, 13.40% oxygen, and 9.74% nitrogen and a network crosslinking degree of 52.5%; or an elemental composition of 74.54% carbon, 13.11% oxygen, and 12.33% nitrogen and a network crosslinking degree of 90.8%; and The top polymer nanofilm is a highly permeable ultrathin polymer nanofilm composite membrane having a zeta potential in the range of -20 to -30 mV at pH 7.

0.

2. 10. The membrane of claim 1, wherein the base layer of the porous polymer support membrane is selected from the group consisting of hydrolyzed polyacrylonitrile (HPAN), polysulfone (PSF), polyethersulfone (PES), and polyacrylonitrile (PAN).

3. The membrane has a high pure water permeability in the range of 30 LMHbar to 79.5 LMHbar and a Na ２ SO ４ 10. The membrane of claim 1, wherein the membrane exhibits a rejection rate of

4. The films were prepared by mixing 4% to 98.5% and 3% to 36.6% MgCl ２ and NaCl rejection and exhibiting a pure water permeability in the range of 23.2 LMHbar to 79.5 LMHbar.

Images