Table 1 Comparison of permeation and filtration properties of various membranes with PMT membrane

From: Photo responsive single layer MoS2 nanochannel membranes for photocatalytic degradation of contaminants in water

Membrane

Fabrication method

Pore size (μm)

Water flux (L m−2 h−1)

Wettability (Contact Angle)

Flux Recovery Ratio (%)

Solute

Filtration efficiency (%)

Ref.

PVC/Al2O3

Solution casting

79

65

86

74

Methylene blue

89

77

Polyamide /graphene oxide

Interfacial polymerisation

658

11.02

89.32

38

New Coccine

85

78

PVDF-g-POEM

(ATRP)

--

14

82

26

Oleic acid

77

79

PES/GO

Solution casting

856

25.65

54

56

Methylene blue

94.2

80

PVDF/PAN/ PVA

Extrusion casting

745

20

--

63

Bilge water

39

81

PVDF/PANI

Phase Inversion method

632

--

65

--

Allura red

51

82

PVDF-g-PVP

graft polymerisation

168

72.2

71

43

Oily wastewater

94

83

GO/PANI-PVDF

Phase inversion

220

60

78

91

Methyl orange

~94

84

PES/PEG/PVP

electro spinning

--

22.80

--

73

Reactive Black 5

81

85

PS/PES

Interfacial polymerisation

216

35.43

--

91.2

Acid Red B

90.9

86

PVDF/PANI-montmorillonite

Grafting polymerisation

438

53

106

56

Tetracycline

32

87

PVDF/TiO2

Dip coating

351

15.3

124

82

Reactive Blue 19

49.2

88

Sulfated polyelectrolyte/ Chitosan

Solution casting

281

11.32

72

73

Methyl blue

79.9

89

PVDF/PANI-TiO2

Phase inversion

81-93

44

65.11

65

Methyl orange

90

90

Polypropylene/PVA

Dip coating method

--

18.73

62.43

76

Crystal violet

89.2

91

PVDF/MoS2-TNT

Phase inversion

0.006

68.5

41.11

94

Navy XF

97

This Work