Paper Titles
A Damage Mechanics–Based Analysis of CNT-Modified Self-Sensing Cementitious Composites
p.9
Feasibility of AMPS Hydrogel for Surface Cleaning in Art Conservation
p.15
Polyvinyl Alcohol/ Cinnamon Essential Oils-Loaded Porous Rice Starch Composite Film for Active Food Packaging with Slow Release
p.23
Encapsulation of Cold-Pressed Avocado Oil Using Beta-Cyclodextrin: Study of Physical and Chemical Properties
p.31
Asymmetric Titanium Dioxide-Polylactic Acid Membranes for Microfiltration and Photocatalytic Dye Removal
p.41
Production and Application of Microalgae Residue-Based Biochar for Soil Amendment
p.47
The Application of Magnesium Nitrate Hexahydrate/Carrot Nanocellulose/ Graphene-Based Phase Change Aerogel in Solar Thermal Energy Storage
p.55
Material and Geometric Design of Helical and Finned Tube Heat Exchangers for Ice Thermal Energy Storage in Infrastructure Cooling
p.63
Thermal Mechanical Performance Mapping of Insulation Material under Extreme Desert Conditions: A Modeling-Based Comparative Study
p.69

Asymmetric Titanium Dioxide-Polylactic Acid Membranes for Microfiltration and Photocatalytic Dye Removal

Article Preview

Abstract:

This research aims to fabricate and analyze asymmetric polylactic acid (PLA) membranes and evaluate their performance in the removal of methyl orange (MO) dye through a microfiltration process. The asymmetric PLA membranes were synthesized via the non-solvent induced phase separation (NIPS) method. A polymer solution containing 14 wt.% PLA dissolved in 86 wt.% N,N-dimethylacetamide (DMAc) was prepared with varying amounts of TiO₂ (0, 0.5, and 1.0 wt.%). The cast membranes were immersed in a coagulant bath consisting of methanol and distilled water in an 80:20 ratio. Several characterization methods were employed: membrane porosity was measured using the gravimetric method and hydrophilicity was assessed by water contact angle. Membrane performance was evaluated in terms of water flux and permeability under a transmembrane pressure of 1 bar, as well as the removal efficiency of methyl orange dye. In addition, the photocatalytic activity of the membranes was investigated to determine its effect on dye removal. The results showed that membrane porosity decreased with increasing TiO₂ content (from 53.7% to 45.1%), while water contact angle also decreased (from 72.7° to 56.1°), indicating improved hydrophilicity. The incorporation of TiO₂ enhanced water flux (11,526.8–14,628.4 L/m²h), permeability (5763.4–7314.2 L/m²h·bar), and methyl orange removal efficiency (65–69.8%). Furthermore, photocatalytic reactions further improved dye removal efficiency with increasing TiO₂ content (up to 84.3%).

You might also be interested in these eBooks
11th International Conference on Composite Materials and Material Engineering (ICCMME): selected articles View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advances in Science and Technology (Volume 179)

Pages:

41-46

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/p-P0aBn5

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

June 2026

Authors:

Khor Yee Chow, Amira Mohd Nasib*, Enche Ab Rahim Siti Kartini, Mohamad Syahmie Mohamad Rasidi, Mohammad Firdaus Abu Hashim, Peng Yong Hoo

Keywords:

Dye Removal, Microfiltration, Photocatalysis, Polymeric Membrane, Titanium Dioxide

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions CCC:

Request Permissions

Permissions PLS:

Request Permissions

Сopyright:

© 2026 Trans Tech Publications Ltd. All Rights Reserved

Share:

Citation:

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] S. Amiri-Hosseini and Y. Hashempour: Environ. Health Eng. Manag. J. Vol. 8 No. 4 (2021), p.295

Google Scholar

[2] C. Li, M. Zhang, C. Song, P. Tao, M. Sun, M. Shao and T. Wang: J. AOAC Int. Vol. 101 No. 5 (2019), p.1341.

Google Scholar

[3] D. Karisma, G. Febrianto and D. Mangindaan: IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. Vol. 109 No. 1 (2017), p.012012.

DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/109/1/012012

Google Scholar

[4] M. Hasanpour and M. Hatami: J. Mol. Liq. Vol. 309 (2020), p.113094.

Google Scholar

[5] S.A. Kumar, G. Srinivasan and S. Govindaradjane: Environ. Nanotechnol. Monit. Manag. Vol. 12 (2019), p.100238.

Google Scholar

[6] S.S. Karim, S. Farrukh, A. Hussain, M. Younas and T. Noor: Polym. Polym. Compos. Vol. 30 (2022), p.1.

Google Scholar

[7] S. Sakarkar, S. Muthukumaran and V. Jegatheesan: Membranes Vol. 11 No. 4 (2021).

Google Scholar

[8] Z.A.M. Hir, P. Moradihamedani, A.H. Abdullah and M.A. Mohamed: Mater. Sci. Semicond. Process. Vol. 57 (2017), p.157.

Google Scholar

[9] M. Dmitrenko, A. Kuzminova, A. Zolotarev, V. Liamin, T. Plisko, K. Burts, A. Bildyukevich, S. Ermakov and A. Penkova: Polymers Vol. 13 No. 16 (2021).

DOI: 10.3390/polym13162804

Google Scholar

[10] N.S.M. Anan, J. Jaafar, S. Sato and R. Mohamud: IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. Vol. 1142 No. 1 (2021), p.012015.

DOI: 10.1088/1757-899x/1142/1/012015

Google Scholar

[11] R. Khurram, A. Javed, R. Ke, C. Lena and Z. Wang: Nanomaterials Vol. 11 No. 8 (2021).

Google Scholar

[12] E.K. Tetteh, S. Rathilal, D. Asante-Sackey and M.N. Chollom: Materials Vol. 14 No. 13 (2021), p.3524.

DOI: 10.3390/ma14133524

Google Scholar