This specification relates to filtering membranes.
The following discussion is not an admission that anything discussed below is common general knowledge or background knowledge of a person skilled in the art.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,472,607 to Mahendran et al. describes a hollow fiber membrane comprising a braided tubular support coated on its outer surface with an asymmetric semipermeable film of polymer. Voids in the braided support are small enough to inhibit substantial penetration of a membrane forming dope. The polymer film extends over less than 33% of the outer portion of the braid's cross-sectional area. In one example, a tubular braid of glass fibers was coated with a dope of polyvinylidene-difluoride (PVDF) in N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP). The braid had an inner diameter of 1.0 mm and an outer diameter of 1.5 mm. The complete microfiltration (MF) membrane had an outside diameter of 1.58 mm.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,354,444 to Mahendran et al. describes microfiltration (MF) or ultrafiltration (UF) membranes supported on a tubular braid. Various physical characteristics of a preferred braid are described. The braid may be made, for example, from polyesters or nylons. In a comparison test, membranes made of a PVDF in NMP dope coated onto a polyester braid were found to break less frequently than membranes with a glass fiber braid when used in an aerated, immersed microfiltration module.
Membranes generally as described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,354,444 are used in ZeeWeed membrane modules sold by GE Water and Process Technologies. These modules, originally developed by Zenon Environmental Inc., are possibly the most successful immersed membrane products for use in membrane bioreactors (MBR) ever made. However, although the membranes do not break, these membranes still occasionally suffer failures that occur when the membrane coating peels off of the braided support in harsh operating conditions. These delamination failures occur particularly at high stress points where the membranes enter the resin potting blocks. Although the fiber does nor break, delamination causes a breach in the rejection capability of the membrane.
In U.S. Pat. No. 7,807,221, Shinada et al. attempt to provide increased adhesion between a membrane material and a supporting braid by applying the membrane material in two separate coating layers. In U.S. Pat. No. 7,909,177, Lee et al. attempt to increase peeling strength by using fine filaments in the braid and adding stabilizing agents to the membrane dope to avoid forming large macro-void pores near the membrane to braid interface.
The following introduction is intended to introduce the reader to the detailed description and not to limit or define any claimed invention.
This specification describes an alternative supporting structure for a filtering membrane. The supporting structure comprises filaments. The supporting structure is coated with a polymeric membrane layer to produce a supported membrane. The polymeric membrane layer does not completely penetrate through the supporting structure. Some or all of the filaments of the supporting structure comprise a polymer that is soluble or swellable in a solvent of the membrane layer polymer used to make a membrane casting polymer solution, alternatively called dope. The membrane may be used in any filtration application including, for example, drinking water filtration, tertiary filtration or mixed liquor filtration in a membrane bioreactor.
A membrane may be supported on a braided or woven support which has a first supporting polymer and one or more carriers or yarns comprising filaments having a second supporting polymer. The second supporting polymer is soluble or swellable in a solvent of a membrane dope. The second supporting polymer preferably also has a high affinity for a membrane forming polymer. Optionally, the second supporting polymer may be the same as the membrane forming polymer. Optionally, one or more carriers or yarns may consist essentially entirely of filaments comprising the second supporting polymer. The filaments comprising the second supporting polymer may be bi-component filaments of the second supporting polymer and either the first supporting polymer or a third supporting polymer. The support is not fully embedded in the membrane polymer layer.
The detailed description describes, as an example, a braid supported hollow fiber membrane. Polyester (PET) is used to make the braided support because of its high tensile strength. Polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF) is used for the membrane layer for its excellent chemical resistance. The membrane layer was produced by coating the braid with a dope based on PVDF in N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP). However, PVDF has low adhesion to polyester and the braid is not fully embedded in the membrane layer. When PET yarns were substituted with yarns made of filaments that comprise PVDF, the peel strength of the membrane improved. More than half of the cross-sectional area of the braid was made of PET and so the membrane retained sufficient tensile strength. However, replacing as little as 4% of the yarns in the braid with a yarn of PET/PVDF core-sheath filaments provided an unpeelable membrane.
Without intending to be limited to any particular theory, the improvement in peel strength appears to be based on two mechanisms. Firstly, the PVDF filaments have a high affinity for the PVDF based dope, which causes enhanced penetration of the dope into the braid along or into the yarn with filaments comprising PVDF. Secondly, the PVDF filaments partially or completely dissolve when exposed to the NMP, which anchors the penetrating dope into the support structure.
The supporting structure 12 is made up of filaments 228. Optionally, these filaments may be collected together into yarns 230. The yarns 230 may be collected together into a sheet or tube, for example by braiding. As used herein, the term “braided” and related terms includes knitted and woven structures and their related terms. Alternatively, the supporting structure 12 may be made up of filaments 228 directly as in, for example, a non-woven substrate such as a needle-punched, spun-bond or melt-blown substrate. In the case of a hollow fiber membrane, a braided tube may be made from about 16 to 96 yarns or ends braided at between about 5 and 100 picks per inch.
Spaces, or voids, are present on the outer surface 226 of the supporting structure 12 between adjacent or crossing filaments 228, or between yarns 230 if the filaments 228 are arranged in yarns 230. The voids may have a median or average area that is similar in area to a circular opening with a diameter between about 10 microns and 100 microns. This range may be adjusted to suit the membrane dope. However, voids less than 10 microns in size may interfere with permeate flux through the membranes. Voids larger than 100 microns in size may allow excessive dope penetration, which could result in the membrane lumen being blocked or the membrane layer 14 being thick. A thick membrane layer 14 consumes excessive amounts of membrane dope and may also cause reduced flux. Large voids also tend to coincide with there being fewer filaments 228, which may reduce adhesion between the supporting structure 12 and the membrane layer 14.
In
The membrane 10 is produced by casting one or more membrane dopes onto the supporting structure 12. The dope generally comprises a film-forming polymer and a solvent for the polymer, optionally with other additives such as non-solvents, weak non-solvents, and hydrophilic additives. The film-forming polymer forms the membrane layer 14 after it comes out of solution with the solvent.
Suitable film-forming polymers include, for example, polysulfone, polyethersulfone, polyether ether ketone, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyvinylidene dichloride (PVDC), chlorinated polyvinylchloride (CPVC), polyvinylidene difluoride (PVDF), polyvinylfluoride (PVF), other fluoro polymers or co-polymers, cellulose acetate, cellulose nitrate, cellulose triacetate, cellulose butyrate, polyacrylonitrile, sulfonated polyether ether ketone, sulfonated polysulfone, sulfonated polyethersulfone, polyimides, polyamides, polymethyl methacrylate, polystyrene, or blends or co-polymers of the above.
Solvents most commonly used in membrane dopes include pentane, hexane, cyclohexane, ethyl acetate, dichloroethane, chloroform, dimethylformamide (DMF), dimethylacetamide (DMAc), N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), N-ethylpyrrolidone (NET), formamide, triethylphosphate (TEP), y-butyrolactone, e-caprolactam, dimethylsulfoxide (DMSO), tetrahydrofuran (THF), acetone, pyperidine, imidazole, and sulfuric acid.
Generally speaking, the dope is introduced into a casting device, such as a coating nozzle, casting head or casting knife, at a flow rate correlated to the speed of the supporting structure relative to the casting device. The dope flow rate is chosen to provide a desired thickness of the membrane layer 14.
For example,
In the supporting structure 12, some of the filaments 228 comprise a first polymer and some or all of the filaments 228 comprise a second polymer. Some filaments 228 may be bi-component filaments, for example core—sheath filaments. Bi-component filaments may comprise the first polymer and the second polymer. Alternatively, bi-component filaments may comprise the second polymer and a third polymer. In a bi-component filament 228, the second polymer should be exposed to at least part, and preferably all, of the outer surface of the filament 228.
The first polymer is chosen primarily for its mechanical properties such as strength, ductility or flexibility, or for other considerations such as cost. The second polymer is chosen to be soluble or swellable in a solvent of the membrane dope, for example NMP. The second supporting polymer preferably also has a high affinity for the film forming polymer of the dope. Optionally, the second polymer may be the same as the film forming polymer in the membrane dope. The third polymer, if any, may be chosen for its mechanical properties, for other considerations such as cost, or for its compatibility with the second polymer in a bi-component filament.
The first polymer may be, for example, polyester (PET) or a co-polymer of polyester (coPET). Other possible first polymers include, for example, polyolefin, polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyamide (PA), polypropylene (PP), polysulfone, polyestersulfone, polyphenylsulfone, polyacrylonitrile, cellulose and derivatives thereof. The second polymer may be PVDF. Other possible second polymers include, for example, polyvinylidene chloride, polyacrylonitrile (PAN) and its copolymers, polysulfone, polyethersulfone, polyphenylsulfone and derivatives thereof. Polymers that are listed both as possible first and second polymers may be suitable for use as homogenous filaments in combination with other filaments of another first polymer.
In a braided supporting structure 12, the filaments 228 are grouped together into yarns 230. Filaments 228 comprising the second polymer can be provided as a yarn 230 made up entirely of bi-component filaments comprising the second polymer or as a yarn of homogenous filaments of the second polymer. Alternatively, bi-component or second polymer filaments 228 can be mixed with filaments of the first polymer in one or more yarns 230. However, it is not clear at the time of writing this specification whether yarns 230 containing a mix of filaments comprising the second polymer and filaments of the first polymer can provide as much peel strength improvement as a yarn 230 made entirely of filaments of the second polymer for the same number of filaments comprising the second polymer. Accordingly, it is presently preferred for the supporting structure 12 to have one or more yarns 230 in which 50% or more, or all, of the filaments 228 are filaments comprising the second polymer.
Although optional, bi-component filaments 228 can have the advantage of decreasing the total amount of the second polymer in the supporting structure for a given surface area of the second polymer. This may be desirable because the second polymer has poor mechanical properties, or for other reasons such as its cost. Between 1 and 100% of the filaments 228 or yarns 230 can be filaments or yarns that comprise the second polymer. However, at least 50% of the cross-sectional area of the support is preferably made of the first polymer. By using bi-component fibers, even if all of the filaments 228 comprise the second polymer, 50% or more of the supporting structure 12 may be made of the first polymer.
In experimental examples, braid supported hollow fiber membranes were made with some or all of the yarns substituted with yarns made of bi-component fibers. Polyester (PET) was used as a first polymer because of its high tensile strength. In a reference membrane, the braid was made from yarns of PET filaments. PVDF was used for the membrane layer, chosen for its excellent chemical resistance. The primary solvent in the membrane dope was NMP. Although successful commercial membranes have been made in this way, PVDF has low adhesion to polyester and there have been some membrane peeling or de-lamination failures in the field. As will be discussed in more detail below, when one or more of the PET yarns were substituted with yarns made of filaments that comprise PVDF, the peel strength of the membrane improved. Less than half of the cross-sectional area of the braid was made of PVDF and so the membrane retained sufficient tensile strength. Replacing as few as 4% of the yarns in the braid with PET-PVDF core-sheath filaments provided an unpeelable membrane.
Each membrane in the experiment was supported on a tubular braid made in a regular braid pattern (one yarn floating over two adjacent yarns) with 24 carriers. The braid had 36-40 picks per inch. Two reference membranes were made using 400 and 460 dtex f96 flat polyester (PET) yarns. Two types of braid were used differing in various dimensions as indicated in
In different experiments, 1, 2, 6, 12 and 24 out of 24 carriers were replaced with bi-component filaments giving 4%, 8%, 25%, 50% and 100% replacement rates. The braiding machine had two counter rotating carrier systems. When two or more carriers were replaced in a single carrier system, the replaced carriers were spaced equally around the carrier system and produced a set of parallel helices. When 6 and 12 carriers were replaced, half of the replaced carriers were located on each of the carrier systems to produce a crossing pattern between the bi-component yarns and the PET yarns. The resulting braid structures are shown schematically in
A membrane layer was cast on the braid samples using a dope based on PVDF in NMP to produce a loose ultrafiltration or tight microfiltration membrane. The membrane layer could not be peeled from any of the membranes with modified braids having at least one yarn of bi-component filaments. In particular, standard peel strength tests could not be performed because the membrane layer could not be removed from the supporting structure using standard test equipment.
A ‘pull-off’ test was performed after potting membrane samples into a solid block of polyurethane to obtain numerical data. The membrane length in the resin block was 30 mm. Since the polyurethane to membrane adhesion is higher than the membrane layer to supporting structure adhesion, delamination occurs at the boundary between the membrane layer and the supporting structure when a sufficient force is applied to membrane. This allowed the adhesion between the membrane layer and the supporting structure to be quantified by measuring the force required to pull the membrane out of the resin block. The properties of the membranes are summarized in Table 1.
a Percentage of PVDF/PET yarn blended in total yarn.
b 95 cm dead-end single fiber representing permeation in a Zeeweed ® 500 filtration module
c 6 mm contact perimeter
d 90 mm2 contact area
As indicated in Table 1, pull strength increased significantly with even one yarn of bi-component filaments. Pull strength continued to increase with more yarns of bi-component filaments. Membrane qualities were generally unchanged at low substitution rates, but permeability began to decline for substitution rates over 25%. However, a membrane with 50% bi-component yarns of the Type 1 pattern still had better permeability than a membrane with a PET braid of the Type 2 pattern.
Without intending to be limited by any particular theory, the improvement in peel strength appears to be based on two mechanisms. Firstly, the PVDF filaments have a high affinity for the PVDF dope, which causes enhanced penetration of the dope into the braid along the PVDF filaments. Secondly, the PVDF filaments partially or completely dissolve when exposed to the NMP which anchors the penetrating dope into the support structure.
Although membranes as described above may be used in various applications, their increased mechanical robustness is particularly useful in immersed membrane bioreactors (MBRs). In MBRs, the membranes are frequently aerated intensely to scour the membranes and the membranes are mounted with excess length between potting headers to encourage them to sway when aerated. This inhibits fouling, but also causes stress where the membrane ends are fixed in the potting heads. Increased peel strength can be expected to reduce the rate of delamination failures of immersed membrane modules used in MBRs and in other harsh operating environments. The membranes described herein may be used in immersed, suction driven, ultrafiltration or microfiltration membrane modules such as ZeeWeed™ 500 series modules made by GE Water and Process Technologies.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2747649 | Reed | May 1956 | A |
2936482 | Kilian | May 1960 | A |
3494121 | Bohrer | Feb 1970 | A |
3547721 | Dietzsch | Dec 1970 | A |
3567666 | Berger | Mar 1971 | A |
3615024 | Michaels | Oct 1971 | A |
3673028 | Pearson | Jun 1972 | A |
3676193 | Cooper et al. | Jul 1972 | A |
3705070 | Kim | Dec 1972 | A |
3745142 | Mahlman | Jul 1973 | A |
3816231 | Marshall | Jun 1974 | A |
3849241 | Butin et al. | Nov 1974 | A |
3948781 | Brun et al. | Apr 1976 | A |
3984328 | Brun et al. | Oct 1976 | A |
4020230 | Mahoney et al. | Apr 1977 | A |
4029265 | Piper | Jun 1977 | A |
4061821 | Hayano et al. | Dec 1977 | A |
4115492 | Mahoney et al. | Sep 1978 | A |
4247498 | Castro | Jan 1981 | A |
4253936 | Leysen et al. | Mar 1981 | A |
4274539 | Rabeneck et al. | Jun 1981 | A |
4299083 | Igel et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4335193 | Doi et al. | Jun 1982 | A |
4340480 | Pall et al. | Jul 1982 | A |
4384047 | Benzinger et al. | May 1983 | A |
4399035 | Nohmi et al. | Aug 1983 | A |
4405688 | Lowery et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4406850 | Hills | Sep 1983 | A |
4541981 | Lowery et al. | Sep 1985 | A |
4631128 | Coplan et al. | Dec 1986 | A |
4664681 | Anazawa et al. | May 1987 | A |
4666607 | Josefiak et al. | May 1987 | A |
4702836 | Mutoh et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4707265 | Barnes, Jr. et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4741829 | Takemura et al. | May 1988 | A |
4764320 | Chan et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4919856 | Anazawa et al. | Apr 1990 | A |
4957943 | McAllister et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
5011588 | Rao et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5013339 | Mahoney et al. | May 1991 | A |
5022990 | Doi et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5032282 | Linder et al. | Jul 1991 | A |
5034129 | Ten Hove | Jul 1991 | A |
5066401 | Muller et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5139529 | Seita et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5143312 | Baurmeister | Sep 1992 | A |
5151191 | Sunaoka et al. | Sep 1992 | A |
5168005 | Keating | Dec 1992 | A |
5171493 | Aptel et al. | Dec 1992 | A |
5209852 | Sunaoka et al. | May 1993 | A |
5232597 | Eguchi | Aug 1993 | A |
5232642 | Kamo et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5238562 | Rogut | Aug 1993 | A |
5240610 | Tani et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5271883 | Timmons et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5284583 | Rogut | Feb 1994 | A |
5294338 | Kamo et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5303550 | Setzer | Apr 1994 | A |
5328610 | Rogut | Jul 1994 | A |
5332498 | Rogut | Jul 1994 | A |
5336298 | Quinn et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5374453 | Swei et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5376273 | Pacheco et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5380477 | Kent et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5385777 | Higuchi et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5392588 | Morrison | Feb 1995 | A |
5435955 | Kamei et al. | Jul 1995 | A |
5470659 | Baumgart et al. | Nov 1995 | A |
5472607 | Mailvaganam et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5474680 | Eguchi | Dec 1995 | A |
5489406 | Beck et al. | Feb 1996 | A |
5497608 | Matsumoto et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5547756 | Kamo et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5582913 | Simons | Dec 1996 | A |
5637385 | Mizuki et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5651888 | Shimizu et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5656167 | Martz | Aug 1997 | A |
5709735 | Midkiff et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5716689 | Rogut | Feb 1998 | A |
5753351 | Yoshida et al. | May 1998 | A |
5782959 | Yang et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5783608 | Sugo et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5804128 | Ogata et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5882461 | Rogut | Mar 1999 | A |
5888605 | Hachisuka et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5914039 | Mahendran et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5972501 | Ohmory et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6015495 | Koo et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6024872 | Mahendran et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6048641 | Ohmory et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6077376 | Katraro et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6083393 | Wu et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6090731 | Pike et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6114017 | Fabbricante et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6127433 | Sugo et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6183640 | Wang | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6245239 | Cote et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6264044 | Meyering et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6273271 | Moya | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6280791 | Meyering et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6354443 | Moya | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6354444 | Mahendran et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6454943 | Koenhen | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6465094 | Dugan | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6495663 | Rothbard et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6559192 | Maccone et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
6562879 | Hatsuda et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6592759 | Rabie et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
6635204 | Tanaka et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6746627 | Niu et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6792744 | Feuerlohn et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6802971 | Gorsuch et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6890435 | Ji et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
RE39176 | Dutt | Jul 2006 | E |
7081273 | Ji | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7165682 | Ji | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7172075 | Ji | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7185597 | Phillips et al. | Mar 2007 | B1 |
7247238 | Mullette et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7267872 | Lee et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7306105 | Shinada et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7413804 | Lee et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7441667 | Galvin et al. | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7563376 | Oishi | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7776214 | Saito et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7807221 | Shinada et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7861869 | Beckers et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7909177 | Lee et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
20020046970 | Murase et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020090690 | Eddleman et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020111674 | Chouinard et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020155289 | Cistone et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030094409 | Minegishi et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030098275 | Mahendran et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030107150 | Hamanaka et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030192826 | Wang et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030197308 | Montoya | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040073300 | Chouinard et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040078903 | Bruning et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040136894 | Yoshizawa et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20050124249 | Uribarri | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050189292 | Ward et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050205488 | Shinada et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060000766 | Ji | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060175243 | Mahendran et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20070084794 | Morikawa et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070262017 | Shinada et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080023125 | Arnold et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080210623 | McMahon et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080241451 | Beckers et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080292823 | Lee et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080305290 | Lee et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090068428 | Shinoda et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090314708 | Yeom | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100024631 | Lee et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20110114553 | Teramachi et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20120018371 | Cote | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120097604 | Cote et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120156485 | Palinkas et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120164447 | Kohinata | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130153490 | Pedersen et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130158007 | Mickle et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130168007 | Cote et al. | Jul 2013 | A1 |
20130233788 | Vizvardi et al. | Sep 2013 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
986422 | Mar 1976 | CA |
2288316 | May 2000 | CA |
2474625 | Aug 2003 | CA |
2478445 | Sep 2003 | CA |
2478831 | Sep 2003 | CA |
2630418 | Jun 2007 | CA |
507012 | May 1971 | CH |
286263 | Feb 2000 | CZ |
4142417 | Jun 1992 | DE |
10211051 | Oct 2003 | DE |
0241995 | Oct 1987 | EP |
0761292 | Mar 1997 | EP |
0819467 | Jan 1998 | EP |
0998972 | May 2000 | EP |
1193292 | Apr 2002 | EP |
1236503 | Sep 2002 | EP |
1424157 | Jun 2004 | EP |
1658889 | May 2006 | EP |
0998972 | Apr 2007 | EP |
2301654 | Mar 2011 | EP |
2301654 | Mar 2011 | EP |
1511581 | Feb 1968 | FR |
2616812 | Dec 1988 | FR |
2336962 | Jul 1997 | FR |
1325672 | Aug 1973 | GB |
1374704 | Nov 1974 | GB |
2041821 | Sep 1980 | GB |
53-039982 | Sep 1974 | JP |
52137026 | Nov 1977 | JP |
53028084 | Mar 1978 | JP |
55137209 | Oct 1980 | JP |
57005914 | Jan 1982 | JP |
57-028139 | Feb 1982 | JP |
58-004810 | Jan 1983 | JP |
58-049408 | Mar 1983 | JP |
58-093734 | Jun 1983 | JP |
59196706 | Nov 1984 | JP |
60137402 | Jul 1985 | JP |
60139815 | Jul 1985 | JP |
61-146811 | Jul 1986 | JP |
62001404 | Jan 1987 | JP |
62019206 | Jan 1987 | JP |
62045318 | Feb 1987 | JP |
62079806 | Apr 1987 | JP |
62-133190 | Jun 1987 | JP |
64-014315 | Jan 1989 | JP |
2107318 | Apr 1990 | JP |
2268816 | Nov 1990 | JP |
04-265132 | Sep 1992 | JP |
4265133 | Sep 1992 | JP |
4293529 | Oct 1992 | JP |
5301031 | Nov 1993 | JP |
06-015152 | Jan 1994 | JP |
06-246139 | Sep 1994 | JP |
6246140 | Sep 1994 | JP |
07-080263 | Mar 1995 | JP |
07-116483 | May 1995 | JP |
7157580 | Jun 1995 | JP |
8165396 | Jun 1996 | JP |
52082682 | Jul 1997 | JP |
10-323546 | Dec 1998 | JP |
11-319519 | Nov 1999 | JP |
11348131 | Dec 1999 | JP |
2000-093768 | Apr 2000 | JP |
2000288365 | Oct 2000 | JP |
2001-062258 | Mar 2001 | JP |
2003320584 | Nov 2003 | JP |
2008-114180 | May 2008 | JP |
20040038473 | May 2004 | KR |
20110089621 | Aug 2011 | KR |
1010458 | Apr 2000 | NL |
200946323 | Nov 2009 | TW |
WO 9323153 | Nov 1993 | WO |
WO 9901207 | Jan 1999 | WO |
2009142279 | Nov 1999 | WO |
WO 0078437 | Dec 2000 | WO |
WO 0234373 | May 2002 | WO |
WO 03059496 | Jul 2003 | WO |
WO 03068374 | Aug 2003 | WO |
WO 03076055 | Sep 2003 | WO |
WO 03076056 | Sep 2003 | WO |
WO 03097221 | Nov 2003 | WO |
WO 2004009221 | Jan 2004 | WO |
WO 2004089520 | Oct 2004 | WO |
WO 2005002712 | Jan 2005 | WO |
2005061081 | Jul 2005 | WO |
2005082503 | Sep 2005 | WO |
2005-113218 | Dec 2005 | WO |
2005118116 | Dec 2005 | WO |
WO 2006053406 | May 2006 | WO |
WO 2006063426 | Jun 2006 | WO |
WO 2007116072 | Oct 2007 | WO |
WO 2008066340 | Jun 2008 | WO |
WO 2009142279 | Nov 2009 | WO |
2010062454 | Jun 2010 | WO |
WO 2010081228 | Jul 2010 | WO |
2010108285 | Sep 2010 | WO |
WO 2010108285 | Sep 2010 | WO |
2010148517 | Dec 2010 | WO |
WO 2010148517 | Dec 2010 | WO |
2012036935 | Mar 2012 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Search Report and Written Opinion from corresponding PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/025110 dated May 13, 2013. |
Jie Liu, Pingli Li et al. Preparation of PET threads reinforced PVDF hollow fiber membrane, Desalination, vol. 249, Issue 2, Dec. 15, 2009, pp. 453-457. |
Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US2011/063332 dated Jul. 31, 2012. |
Search Report and Written Opinion from PCT/US2011/050479 dated Nov. 25, 2011. |
Caplan et al., Formation of microporous Teflon PFA membranes via thermally induced phase separation, Journal of Membrane Science, 130 (1997) p. 219-237. |
Choi et al., Fabrication and characterization of multi-walled carbon nanotubes/polymer blend membranes, Journal of Membrane Science 284 (2006) p. 406-415. |
Choi et al., Modification of Performances of Various Memranes Using MWNTs as a Modifier, Macromol. Symp. 2007, 249-250, p. 610-617. |
English language abstact of JP 11-319519 to Nitto Denko Corp, published Nov. 24, 1999. |
English language abstract of JP 04-265132 to UBE Ind Ltd, published Sep. 21, 1992. |
English language abstract of JP 04265133 to UBE Ind Ltd, published Sep. 21, 1992. |
English language abstract of JP 04293529 to UBE Ind Ltd, published Oct. 19, 1992. |
English language abstract of JP 06-015152 to Tokuyama Soda Co Ltd, published Jan. 25, 1994. |
English language abstract of JP 06-246139 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published Sep. 6, 1994. |
English language abstract of JP 06246140 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published Sep. 6, 1994. |
English language abstract of JP 07-080263 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Mar. 28, 1995. |
English language abstract of JP 07-116483 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published May 9, 1995. |
English language abstract of JP 07157580 to Kawamura Inst of Chem Res Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published Jun. 20, 1995. |
English language abstract of JP 08165396 to Kurabe Ind Co Ltd, published Jun. 25, 1996. |
English language abstract of JP 10-323546 to Nitto Denko Corp, published Dec. 8, 1998. |
English language abstract of JP 11-319519 to Nitto Denko Corp published Nov. 24, 1999. |
English language abstract of JP 2000-093768 to Nok Corp, published Apr. 4, 2000. |
English language abstract of JP 2000288365 to Torary Ind Inc, published Oct. 17, 2000. |
English language abstract of JP 2001-062258, to Mitsubishi Rayon Co. Ltd, published Mar. 2001. |
English language abstract of JP 2008114180 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published May 22, 2008. |
English language abstract of JP 2107318 to Daicel Chem, published Apr. 19, 1990. |
English language abstract of JP 2268816 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co, published Nov. 2, 1990. |
PCT Search Report dated Jun. 14, 2010 issued in connection with PCT Application No. PCT/CA2010/000469 which was filed on Mar. 26, 2010. |
English language abstract of JP 52082682 to Asahi Chemical Ind, published Jul. 11, 1997. |
English language abstract of JP 52137026 to Toyobo Co Ltd, published Nov. 16, 1977. |
English language abstract of JP 5301031 to Daicel Chem, published Nov. 16, 1993. |
English language abstract of JP 53028084 to Nitto Electric Ind Co, published Mar. 15, 1978. |
English language abstract of JP 53-039982 to Kunyu, published Sep. 3, 1974. |
English language abstract of JP 55137209 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Oct. 25, 1980. |
English language abstract of JP 57005914 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Jan. 12, 1982. |
English language abstract of JP 57-028139 to Asahi Chem Ind Co Ltd, published Feb. 15, 1982. |
English language abstract of JP 58-004810 to Toyobo Co Ltd, published Jan. 12, 1983. |
English language abstract of JP 58-049408 to Nitto Electric Ind Co Ltd, published Mar. 23, 1983. |
English language abstract of JP 58-093734 to Asahi Kasei Kogyo KK, published Jun. 3, 1983. |
English language abstract of JP 59196706 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc Kawamura Inst of Chem Res, published Nov. 8, 1984. |
English language abstract of JP 60137402 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Jun. 22, 1985. |
English language abstract of JP 60139815 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Jul. 24, 1985. |
English language abstract of JP 61-146811 to Ube Ind Ltd, published Jul. 4, 1986. |
English language abstract of JP 62001404 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co, published Jan. 7, 1987. |
English language abstract of JP 62019206 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published Jan. 28, 1987. |
English language abstract of JP 62045318 to Dainippon Ink & Chem Inc, published Feb. 27, 1987. |
English language abstract of JP 62079806 to Ube Ind Ltd, published Apr. 13, 1987. |
English language abstract of JP 62-133190 to Toagosei Chem Ind Co Ltd, published Jun. 16, 1987. |
English language abstract of JP 64-014315 to Mitsubishi Rayon Co Ltd, published Jan. 18, 1989. |
Ramaswamy et al., Fabication of poly (ECTFE) membranes via thermally induced phase separation, Journal of Membrane Science, 210 (2002) p. 175-180. |
Lin et al., Microporous PVDF membrane formation by immersion precipitation from water/TEP/PVDF system, Desalination, 145 (2002) p. 25-29. |
Lloyd et al., Microporous membrane formation via thermally-induced phase separation. II. Liquid-liquid phase separation, Journal of Membrane Science, 64 (1991) p. 1-11. |
Lloyd, Douglas R., Microporous membrane formation via thermally induced phase separation. I. Solid-liquid phase separation, Journal of Membrane Science, 52 (1990) p. 239-261. |
Murata Manufacturing Co, English language abstract of JP11348131, published Dec. 21, 1999. |
Tsujino, Jiromaru et al., Welding of Flat Copper Braid Wire Specimens Using Ultrasonic Complex Vibration—Direct Machining of Terminal Parts on Flat Braided Wires, Ultrasonics Symposium, IUS 2008. IEEE, Nov. 2-5, 2008. |
Elke, English language abstract of EP1424157, published Jun. 2, 2004. |
Inoue Shoten KK, English language abstract of JP2003320584, published Nov. 11, 2003. |
Sung Cheol, English language abstract of KR20110089621, published Aug. 9, 2011. |
Guo-Chang, English language abstract of TW200946323, published Nov. 16, 2009. |
Schunk Ultraschalltechnik GMGH, English language abstract of CZ286263, published Feb. 16, 2000. |
PCT Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 21, 2013 from PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/026979. |
PCT Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 28, 2013 from PCT Application No. PCT/US2012/065648. |
PCT Search Report dated Oct. 16, 2013 from PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/053891. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20130233788 A1 | Sep 2013 | US |