Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 20;13(3):357. doi: 10.3390/membranes13030357

Table 3.

Comparison of preceding studies with current work in terms of membrane performance for heavy metals removal.

Type of Modification Application Flux (LMH) Rejection (%) Ref.
PVDF/APTES functionalized halloysite-Magnetic graphene oxide/metformin Aqueous solution
Cu2+
Cd2+
Cr2+
14.2
Cu2+ = 47.9%
Cd2+ = 44.2%
Cr2+ = 52.3%
[62]
Dual layer polybenzimidazole/PES Aqueous solution
Cr2+
Pb2+
Cd2+
8.3
Cr2+ = 98%
Pb2+ = 93%
Cd2+ = 70%
[63]
NF270 Pb(NO3)2/Cd(NO3)2
aqueous solution
- Cd2+ = 99%
Pb2+ = 74%
[60]
(PEI) cross-linked P84 Pb(NO3)2 aqueous solution - Pb2+ = 91.05% [64]
TFC-NF300
polyamide thin film
CdCl2; NiSO4
aqueous solution
- Cd2+ = 80%
Ni2+ = 97%
[65]
cellulose acetate (CA) NF-23 Cd(NO3)2 - Cd2+ = 84% [66]
PES hollow fiber Ternary aqueous solution
Pb2+
Cd2+
Co2+

16.4
37.9
16.6

Pb2+ = 40%
Cd2+ = 48.3%
Co2+ = 50.5%
[67]
PES hollow fiber Binary aqueous solution
Pb2+
Co2+
Cd2+
-
Pb2+ = 60.3%
Co2+ = 58%
Cd2+ = 44.5%
[68]
PPSU NF bulk modification MXene-modified Wastewater 11.1 97% for copper, 93.4% for cadmium, and 93% for lead This work