You are on page 1of 5

1

2
3
4

Ag-decorated TiO2 photocatalytic membrane with hierarchical architecture:


photocatalytic and anti-bacterial activities
Ronn Goeia,b, Teik-Thye Lima,b,*
a

5 School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Block N1, 50 Nanyang
6
Avenue, Singapore 639798, Singapore.
7 bNanyang Environment & Water Research Institute (NEWRI), Nanyang Technological University, 1 Cleantech
8
Loop, CleanTech One, Singapore 637141. Singapore.
9
* Corresponding author: Tel: +65-6790 6933; Fax: +65-6791 0676; E-mail: cttlim@ntu.edu.sg.

10
11
12

Supplementary Data
1. XRD and N2 porosimetry result

13
14 Fig. S1. (a) XRD spectra, (b) N2 adsorption/desorption curves, and (c) pore size distribution
15
of the pulverized Ag-TiO2 layers with different amounts of Ag added.
16

1
2

17
18

2. Pure water permeability

19
20Fig. S2. Pure water permeability of Ag-TiO2 photocatalytic membrane. (The numerical values
21
depict average pure water permeability in L m2 h1 Bar1).
22
23

3. Photo-induced super-hydrophilicity (PSH)

24
25 Fig. S3 Photo-induced super-hydrophilicity of R6-like thin film coated on a borosilicate glass
26 as shown on (a) as coated thin film, (b) upon 1 h of UV irradiation, and after (c) 8 hr, (d) 24
27
h, and (e) 48 h left in the dark.
28

3
4

29

Ag-TiO2 layers were also coated on a borosilicate glass for the evaluation of their

30hydrophilicity. The coated layers were identical to those of membrane R6. The glass support
31was cleaned thoroughly and dried at the room temperature and then dipped into the
32designated Ag-TiO2 sol for 60 s using a home-fabricated dip-coater. The coated glass was
33withdrawn from the sol at a rate of 2 mm s1. The coated borosilicate glass was then heat34treated by the same method used for the Ag-TiO 2 membrane. Contact angle of the TiO2 film
35coated on glass substrate was measured using video contact angle device (VCA Optima, AST
36Products). Prior to the contact angle measurement, the Ag-TiO 2 coated glass was left in the
37dark for 24 h to remove any residual photo-induced super-hydrophilicity. The glass slide was
38then irradiated under UV for 1 h. The contact angle of the TiO 2 thin film was recorded at 0, 8,
3924, and 48 h after the irradiation; between each reading the glass slide was stored in the dark.
40Droplet volume of 1 L was dispensed from a 100 L syringe.
41
The coated R6-like thin film shows a contact angle of 51 which subsequently decreased
42to 8 after 1 h of UV irradiation. This result illustrated the photo-induced super-hydrophilicity
43property of Ag-TiO2 thin film. When the UV source was switched off, the contact angle
44increased again to 13, 17 and 34 after 8, 24 and 48 h respectively.
45
46
4. Removal of RhB in PMR
47
48

Table S1. Performance of Ag-TiO2 membrane in terms of its photocatalytic activity (PC),
adsorptive-membrane retention (Ads-MR) and percentage of flux decline
Removal (mg m2)
Removal (%)
Flux Decline
Types
PC
Ads-MR
Total
PC Ads-MR
(%)
R1
2048 52 331 26
2379 29
86.1
13.9
13.9
R2
2169 35 351 22
2520 13
86.1
13.9
15.1
R3
1999 56 407 11
2406 46
83.1
16.9
16.4
R4
2048 71 558 23
2606 74
78.6
21.4
16.8
R5
2252 30 486 29
2738 52
82.2
17.8
16.0
R6
2203 52 577 56
2780 29
79.2
20.8
17.1
Plu D
2025 24 329 13
2354 18
86.0
14.0
13.8

49
50
51
52

5. Total Ag leaching of Ag-TiO2 membrane


Table S2. Time-dependent total-Ag leaching of Ag-TiO2 membrane reported in (a) %
of initial Ag loading and (b) in g L1
(a)

5
6

Ag loading
Types

(g)

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6

0.47 0.03
1.36 0.22
0.76 0.01
1.85 0.28
1.53 0.16
4.09 0.61

Cumulative time-dependent total-Ag


leaching (%) in batch reactor
24 h
3.30 0.02
2.27 0.04
2.46 0.03
12.37 0.25
3.64 0.01
6.31 0.02

96 h
6.78 0.09
5.02 0.08
4.16 0.09
19.52 0.18
15.53 0.20
13.10 0.27

Cummulative total-Ag leaching (%) in

PMR

168 h
12.79 0.23
7.29 0.03
5.74 0.05
26.59 0.21
24.53 0.15
19.82 0.59

30 min
2.45 0.02
7.56 0.13
4.75 0.08
5.28 0.04
5.86 0.09
2.94 0.04

120 min
2.46 0.02
13.16 0.22
10.73 0.18
9.21 0.11
9.54 0.12
5.88 0.08

480 min
2.47 0.03
15.84 0.26
12.95 0.24
11.24 0.15
11.23 0.17
6.91 0.11

(b)

Types
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6

Cumulative time-dependent total-Ag


leaching (g L1) in batch reactor
24 h
0.52 0.01
1.03 0.02
0.62 0.01
7.62 0.16
1.86 0.01
8.61 0.02

96 h
1.07 0.01
2.27 0.04
1.05 0.02
12.02 0.11
7.92 0.10
17.87 0.37

Cummulative total-Ag leaching (g L1)

168 h
2.03 0.04
3.30 0.01
1.45 0.01
16.37 0.13
12.52 0.07
27.04 0.80

in PMR
30 min
2.14 0.02
3.42 0.06
1.20 0.02
3.25 0.03
2.99 0.04
4.00 0.05

120 min
3.84 0.03
5.95 0.10
2.71 0.05
5.67 0.07
4.87 0.06
8.02 0.10

480 min
4.66 0.05
7.16 0.12
3.27 0.06
6.92 0.10
5.73 0.08
9.42 0.15

53

54
55
56
57

Fig. S4. Cumulative total-Ag leached from Ag-TiO2 membrane operated in the PMR.
6. Percentage flux recovery after each cleaning cycle.

58
59 Fig. S5. Percent flux recovery after each cleaning cycle when operation (a) with UV and (b)
60
without UV.
7
8

61
62

7. E. coli reduction value of Ag-TiO2 membrane at sampling point 2

63
64
65
66
67

Fig. S6. E. coli log reduction values of Ag-TiO2 photocatalytic membrane operating in a
photocatalytic membrane reactor: at sampling point (2) when operating (a) with and (b)
without UV. Error bars represent one standard deviation of at least three replicates of
experimental runs.

9
10

You might also like