AbstractThe objective of this work is to develop barrier membranes with controlled alignment of disc shaped nanoparticles within the polymer matrix using magnetic field. The aim is to get

controlled diffusivity of the membranes, where

the controlled diffusivity would depend upon

the loading, aspect ratio and orientation of the

particles within the membranes.

Introduction

Materials and Methods

References[1] S. Morariu, M. Bercea, and C. E. Brunchi, “Influence of Laponite RD on the properties of poly(vinyl alcohol) hydrogels,” J. Appl. Polym. Sci., vol. 135, no. 35, pp. 1–11, 2018.[2] J. P. DeRocher, B. T. Gettelfinger, J. Wang, E. E. Nuxoll, and E. L. Cussler, “Barrier membranes with different sizes of aligned flakes,” J. Memb. Sci., vol. 254, no. 1–2, pp. 21–30, 2005.AcknowledgementI would like to acknowledge my supervisorDr. Vikram Singh for his guidance and MTP-BTP students for their help during sample testing .

Conclusions and Future Work• The experiments shows variation of diffusivity in

membrane with loading.• Magnetic alignment of clay particles in

composites is to be done by coating theparticles with superparamagnetic materials.

Ch

em

ica

l E

ng

ine

er

ing

De

pa

rt

me

nt

....

...

Industrial Significance

Controlling Barrier Properties of Composites

Abbas Asad, Singh Vikram*

Result

Theme # Emerging Nano and Advanced Materials

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25

Perm

eab

ility

Rat

io (

P/P o

)

Volume fraction of loading Ø

Flakes

Sphere

Po/Peff = (1+Ø/2)/(1-Ø)

▪Po/Peff= 1+α2Ø 2/(1-Ø)

Figure: Schematic representation of

diffusion through a composite media

containing impermeable particles.

Laponite Particles

Figure 1: Schematic representation of a tennis ball containing

pressurized air with nanocomposite core used to prevent

leakage of air.

Figure: Schematic of diffusion cell. One side of thissetup contains the pure liquid and the other containsthe diffusing solution separated by a membrane inbetween (as shown). The two sides are well mixedduring the experiment by magnetic stirring.

Sample

Permeability Values (10-11 m2/sec)

Average

Permeability

(10-11 m2/sec)

Sample1 Sample2 Sample3 Sample4 Sample5

Pure PVA 8.146 9.47 8.851 8.553 8.655 8.735

PVA-Laponite (1%) 5.906 5.26 5.93 5.295 5.397 5.557

PVA-Laponite (3%) 14.6 9.27 11.5 11.5 10.8 11.534

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

0 0.0053 0.0106 0.0159 0.0212 0.0265 0.0318 0.0371 0.0424 0.0477 0.053

Perm

eab

ility

Rat

io

Volume fraction

Nielsen Cussler-Regular Cussler Random Gusev-Lusti Disk Crosslinked Non-Treated

0

0.00001

0.00002

0.00003

0.00004

0.00005

0.00006

0.00007

0.00008

0.00009

0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000

Co

nc.

of

H+

in r

ecei

vin

g ch

amb

er (

in M

)

time(in sec)

Figure: Typical concentration vs time graph obtained from change in pH of water during the experiment. The intercept of liner region of this graph with horizontal axis gives the lag time of the membrane.

DLS of Laponite

Comparison with Models

Theoretical data

Comparison of spherical and non-spherical particles as barriers.

Cro

sslin

ked

Me

mb

ran

e

TEM Images Scale bar = 100 nm

𝑷𝒅𝑪

𝒅𝒙=𝑽

𝑨

𝒅𝑪

𝒅𝒕

Experimental data

DOI: 10.1126/science.1210822