Fig. 5: Stability of the adsorptive separation performance and comparison of the MCM for antibiotics removal. | npj Clean Water

Fig. 5: Stability of the adsorptive separation performance and comparison of the MCM for antibiotics removal.

From: Metal–phenolic coating on membrane for ultrafast antibiotics adsorptive removal from water

Fig. 5

a Regeneration for cycle test of the MCM-60. Note: CIP (10 mg L−1), gas pressure of 0.4 bar. b Variation of flux and rejection of MPN membranes loading on commercial PTFE, MCE, and PES substrate. c Variation of flux and rejection of MPN membranes operated for CHL, TET, OXY, and DOX removal tests. d Tensile strength of the MPN modified composite membranes with different treating times with FeCl3. The inset shows the fracture of MCM-60. Note: Values are mean (n = 3) ± standard deviation. e Comparison for the MPN-modified composite membranes in this study with other membranes (water permeance vs. removal efficiency)43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52.

Back to article page