Journal of Membrane Sczence, 53 (1990) 143-158 143

Elsevler Science Publishers B V , Amsterdam

PERVAPORATION OF LOW VOLATILITY AROMATICS FROM

WATER*

K W BODDEKER, G BENGTSON
GKSS Research Center, 2054 Geesthacht (F R G)
andE BODE
Fachhochschule Coburg, 8630 Coburg (F R G)
(Received January 12,1989, accepted m revlsed form July 25,1989)

Summary

Pervaporatlve ennchment of high boiling aromatic hydrocarbons from ddute aqueous solution
through elastomenc polymer membranes 19investigated Selectlvlty m favor of the organic. solu-
tion component, m addition to preferential membrane permeablllty, requires the aqueous-organic
feed solution to be non-ideal with positive deviation from Raoult’s law The observed effects of
downstream pressure and membrane thickness on pervaporatlon performance are ratlonahzed by
a transport model plcturmg the membrane as freely permeable to the organlcs while typically
posing a resistance to water The model predicta organic flux density and ennchment to be pro-
portional to the activity coefficient of the organic solutes m water, and mversely proportional to
downstream pressure m pervaporatlon

1. Introduction

Separations of liquid mixtures by pervaporation, according to the sorption-

diffusion concept, rely on specific interactions between the solution constitu-
ents and the membrane polymer. Selectivity is due to differences in membrane
permeability irrespective of pure component vapor pressures. Depending on
the membrane material used, pervaporation of aqueous-organic solutions may
be directed at selective removal of water (dehydration), or at selective removal
and concomitant enrichment of the organic component [ 11. By tendency, glassy
(amorphous) polymers preferentially permeate water, the smallest of liquid
molecules; the sorption isotherm is of the Flory-Huggins type as described by
a dual sorption model. Elastomeric polymers, on the other hand, interact pref-
erentially with the organic solution component; the sorption isotherm is of the
Henry type, i.e., linear, and is described by a free volume model. A further type
of pervaporation membrane is ion exchange membranes, which may be viewed

*Paper presented m part at IMTEC ‘88, Sydney, N S W., Australia, November 15-17,1988

0376-7388/90/$0350 0 1990 - Elsevler Science Pubhshers B V

144

as crosshnked electrolytes and thus are anticipated to relate to water; with

polar species, however, such as phenol, specific interactions are additionally to
be expected. This commumcation illustrates the conditions under which high
boiling organic species are selectively pervaporated from their aqueous
solutions.

2.Conditions for pervaporability

High boiling (low volatility) organics can be pervaporated from water pro-
vided that the following conditions are met:
(a) The orgamcs to be separated form non-ideal solutions with water, deviat-
mg from Raoult’s law in a positive manner, i.e., showing activity coeffi-
cients > 1.
(b) The pure organic species have a low, although not vanishing, vapor pressure.
(c ) The membrane polymer exhibits preferential permeability for the orgamc
solution component.
Pervaporation under these conditions yields a depleted aqueous retentate and
an enriched organic permeate, either of which may be the target product of the
process
Implications of concern to pervaporation of a “positive” non-ideal solution
behavior, all reflecting a low degree of molecular interaction, are:
(a) Limited miscibility of the organic species with water, resulting m phase
separation when enriched beyond the respective solubility limit.
(b) Volatility with steam, implying that, in the vapor phase, the partial pres-
sures add up to the sum of the pure component vapor pressures. It follows
that the mole fraction of the low volatility organic species in the equilib-
rium vapor phase is:

(1)

(c) Another corollary of “positive” non-ideality is the occurrence of positive

azeotropes, i.e., of constant boiling compositions of higher vapor pressure
than either of the pure solution components.
Permeabihty m diffusion-controlled membrane processes is the product of
solubility and diffusivity of the permeating species in the membrane polymer.
Selectivity m favor of the organic species may be interpreted in terms of pref-
erential sorption of the organics by the membrane, and/or hindered mobility
of water in the membrane. Boundary effects, except for concentration polari-
zation, are usually considered negligible.

3.Organic compounds examined

The organic compounds examined are aromatic hydrocarbons, listed in Ta-

ble 1 in order of increasing enrichment on pervaporation from dilute aqueous
 145

TABLE 1

Physical constants and pervaporatlon data of the organic compounds examined, arranged m order
of increasing organic ennchment from dilute aqueous solution

Organic component Phyalcal constanta Correlation data Pervaporatlon”

MW Kp, “C Vapor Solublhty Ennchment Flux

pressure at in water factor, j? density of
5O”C, at 2O”C, organic,
mbar mmol/l g/m2-hr

Resorcmol 110 11 281 - 11170 -

Hydroqumone 110 11 286 - 726 - -
Phloroglucmol 126 11 sub (d) - 79 3 - -
Benzolc acid 122 12 249 <02 23 7 20 04
Phenol 94 11 182 3 892 75 13
2-Methylphenol 108 13 191 25 231 150 28
2,5-Dlmethylphenol 122 16 2115 12 18 210 35
p-t-Butylphenol 150 21 237 03 53 250 54
o-Chlorophenol 128 56 175 13 218 265 51
o-Nltrophenol 139 11 215 13 144 270 45
Toluene 92 13 110 6 128 0 54 275 -
Nltrobenzene 123 11 210 2 15 4 295 56
Thymol 150 21 233 53 380 84
Styrene 104 14 145 (PI (3:; 2 88 690 51
o-Dlchlorobenzene 147 01 180 5 85 0 34 1000 -

Water 18 02 100 123 - - -

“PEBA 40, membrane thickness 46 p, 50 ’ C

solution. Pervaporatron performance is correlated with pure component vapor

pressure and water solubllity, the latter reflecting the degree of non-ideality of
the respective aqueous-organic feed solution (see below). Solubllity in water
ranges from practically insoluble (o-dichlorobenzene) to almost completely
miscible (resorcinol), the low solubility of the highest-valent phenol, phloro-
glucmol, being accounted for by the symmetry of the molecule.
The investigation concentrated on phenol-water because of the relatively
wide concentration range accessible, but also because of the practical signifi-
cance of this system. The most extensive documentation of liquid-vapor eqm-
librium data on phenol-water refers to a temperature of 44.4”C [ 21; pure com-
ponent vapor pressures at this temperature are: water, 92.7 mbar; phenol, 1.86
mbar. The phase diagram and activity coeffkients of the phenol-water system
are shown in Fig. 1. The coexisting phases at somewhat higher than room tem-
perature are referred to as “phenol in water”, approximately 10 wt% phenol,
and “water in phenol”, approximately 70 wt% phenol.
The phenol-water axeotrope has a normal boiling pomt of 943°C at 9.2 wt%
146

60

0 01 02 03 04 06 06 07 06 09 10
Weight Fraction of Phenol WI

Fig 1 Actlvlty coefficients at 44 4°C [2] and phase diagram of the phenol-water system

of phenol; on lowering the pressure, the azeotropic composition is shifted to

lower phenol concentrations. In terms of the above conditions, phenol occupies
an intermediate position between the aromatic hydrocarbons considered here
and aliphatic alcohols, such as butanols [ 31.

4. Polymer and membranes

The elastomeric polymer used in this study are polyether-block-polyamides

(PEBA), which are found to exhibit exceptional selectivity for aromatic hy-
drocarbons in pervaporation. PEBA formulations are segment-elastic, con-
sisting of thermoplastic polyamides made flexible by elastomeric polyether
links; the ratio of the two determines the Shore hardness of the polymer [ 41.
Commercially available granulates with the trade name Pebax (Atochem) were
used, designated PEBA 35,40 and 55 according to their Shore hardness.
Homogeneous PEBA membranes covering a range of thickness of 2 to 200
pm were prepared by solution casting. As indicated in Table 2 by pervaporation
results on phenol-water, the solvent system used has little effect on pervapo-
ration performance. Membranes thicker than 25 pm were made by casting di-
rectly onto glass plates, wlnle below 25 p a microporous polyetherimide (PEI )
support was used. PEBA membranes are also made by melt extrusion.
The sorption isotherms of phenol and water m PEBA 40 at 44.4’ C are pre-
 147

TABLE 2

Pervaporatlon of phenol-water through PEBA 35 cast from different solvent systems (feed con-
centratlon 100 mg/kgphenol, 50°C)

Solvent system Membrane Flux density, g/m2-hr Ennchment

thickness, factor, /?
p Phenol Water

1-Butanol-1-propanol (4 1) 90 152 122 0 121

Cyclohexanone-1-butanol(6 1) 95 155 118 5 124
Toluene-1-propanol (12 1) 95 132 1155 111
Chloroform-formic acid ( 13 1) 85 152 134 5 108

105

104

s
:
t8 103 i
s
0

H
b
in 102
10" 10' 10‘
1
Equlllbrwm Concentration

Fig 2 Sorption isotherms of phenol and water m PEBA 40 at 44 4” C

sented in Fig. 2, covering equilibrium phenol concentrations from 10 mg/kg to

near the solubility limit of phenol in water. The sorption isotherm of phenol is
linear up to an external concentration of 5 X lo4 mg/kg, at which point the
polymer absorbs its own weight in phenol; beyond this, swelling becomes ex-
cessrve Water sorption is not affected by the presence of phenol up to a con-
current phenol sorption of comparable magnitude (about 1.5 wt% ); thereafter
it increases slowly as the polymer softens.
Sorption of the aromatrc hydrocarbons in PEBA inversely parallels their
solubility in water, cf. Table 1, as is shown in Fig. 3 by the relative rates of
depletion of dilute aqueous-organic solutions on contact with the polymer.
Again, phenol 1s in a borderline position; all other organics considered (in-
148

5
;;i- 06

- ~-Chh7phe”o,
-..sno,_

-v P-kft-BUt~lthhs”o,

0 20 40 60 60 100 120 140 160 160 200 220

Time I minutes 1

Fig 3 Ftelatwe rate of sorption of aromatw hydrocarbons from aqueous solution by PEBA 40
granulate

cludmg benzoic acid, but excepting the higher-valent phenols) are more readily
sorbed, suggesting that they conform to the conditions for pervaporability more
closely than phenol itself.

5. Pervaporation: experimental

Pervaporation experiments were conducted in a test apparatus with contm-

uous feed circulation and adjustable downstream pressure, as represented in
Fig 4. The test cell, providing radial membrane coverage through a peripheral
feed inlet and central feed outlet, 1sshown in Fig. 5; membrane area is 100 cm’.
Standard vacuum fittings are used in the downstream manifold. Downstream
(permeate) pressure is monitored by an expansion gauge located underneath
the test cell. Downstream pressure is regulated by an adjustable valve actuated
by the pressure monitor. The feed is circulated from a thermostated reservoir
at a flow rate of 2000 ml/min. Permeate withdrawal at < 1 ml/min is small by
comparison, minimizing the effects of concentration polarization and temper-
ature loss due to pervaporation action. The permeate is collected in weighed
traps at liquid nitrogen temperature and, after appropriate dilution, is ana-
lyzed by W spectroscopy or gas chromatography. Except for the vacuum pump
(including a safety trap not shown in Fig. 4) and the pressure monitor, the
entire apparatus is enclosed in a thermostated cabinet.
Pervaporation effects, in the following sections, are recorded in terms of the
enrichment factor of the preferentially permeatmg organic species
(/3+/c: = w:‘/w: using mass concentrations), and the total or partial flux
density J in units of g/m’-hr. Transformation from molar units, where desir-
able, 1sindicated.
 --- -----
149

r 1

-_---

Fig 4 Test loop for pervaporatlon experunents under controlled condhons T=temperature,
Q= feed flow rate, P=permeate pressure

Fig 5 Pervaporatlon test cell (GKSS) Effectwe membrane area 100 cm2

6. Pervaporation: effect of downstream pressure

Pervaporation of low volatility compounds requires the permeate pressure

to be correspondingly low in order to estabhsh activity gradients across the
membrane. It 1s anticipated, therefore, that the pervaporatlon effects under
consideration will strongly depend on permeate pressure (as downstream pres-
sure, p” ) and, moreover, that the observed pressure dependence will provide
inside mto the transport mechanism.
150

250
P
E
;:
200 - 200 ”

150 2

e
E
5
100 ii

Enrrctnnent
- celwleted
+ experiment

Permeate Pressure (mbar]

Fig 6 Pervaporatlon of a ddute phenol-water solution as a function of permeate pressure, com-

panson of observed and calculated phenol ennchment

The dependence of pervaporation performance of aqueous-organic solutions

of low volatility organic compounds is illustrated in Fig. 6, again using phenol
as a representative example (feed concentration 100 mg/kg; 44.4’ C; PEBA 40,
membrane dry thickness 46 p). It is observed that water permeability (as
total flux density) depends little on downstream pressure, whereas phenol en-
richment increases strongly as the pressure is lowered (experimental points in
Fig. 6). Estimating the activity gradient for phenol across the membrane by
comparing the partial pressure of phenol in the permeate (p:’ ) from the molar
fluxes according to

with the vapor pressure of phenol in the feed @: ) reveals that, as long as the
total permeate pressure (p” ) is substantially higher than the partial pressure
of phenol therein, phenol is permeating through the membrane apparently
without an activity gradient. For water, by contrast, a steep activity gradient
does exist. These observations form the basis for a transport model describing,
as it seems, a limiting situation of pervaporative separations.

7. Pervaporation: transport model

The transport model for the pervaporation situation under consideration is

based on the assumption that the organic permeant has very nearly constant
activity throughout the system, implying that the permeability of the mem-
 151

feed ( 11 permeate (vI

Fig 7 Dmgmm of the pervaporation model 1=orgenlc permeant, J= water

brane for the organic substance is extremely high. Membrane permeability for
water, on the other hand, is typically restricted. In terms of the pertinent pres-
sures, the model is depicted in Fig. 7.
The membrane is visualized as being soaked with the organic permeant.
Water vapor, adding up to the total permeate pressure, aids in the transfer of
the permeant to the condenser. Reduction of permeate pressure, by affecting
the partial pressure of water only, increases the separation effect.
The model is verified by examining selectivity and flux in terms of model
conditions. When using molar concentrations, the separation factor is readily
obtained as follows.
The basic assumption of the model is expressed as

P:‘=Pi (3)

The molar concentration of the organic compound in the permeate vapor is

x:‘=p:‘/p” (4)

The partial pressure of the organic component in the liquid feed is

P:=YP% (5)

Combining eqns. (3)- (5) yields the separation factor a! as:

x:‘(l-4) =ypp(l-r:)
(6)
a=(1 -x:‘) x: p” --yp$c:

The separation factor approaches infinity as the total permeate pressure is

reduced to the vapor pressure of the organic permeant (p” +p: ).
An expression for the enrichment factor of the organic component, using
mass concentration units, is obtained as follows.
By definition,

/3=c:l/c;=w:l/w: (7)
The mass fractions w, of the organic component in permeate ( n) and feed ( ’ ),
respectively, are
152

(8)

(9)

By making use of the model assumptions, eqns (3) and (5), w:’ m eqn (8) is
expressed as a function of xi, which m turn is substituted by xi from eqn. (9))
leading to the following expression for the enrichment factor of the organic
component on pervaporation under the conditions of the model:

(10)

The enrichment factor approaches l/w: as the permeate pressure is reduced

to the vapor pressure of the organic permeant (j?+ l/w: for p” +p: ) . For di-
muushing feed concentration of the orgamc substance, eqn. (10) reduces to:

ASPS (11)

showing enrichment to be proportional to the vapor pressure of the orgamc

species times its activity coefficient at high dilution.
The flux density of the organic permeant, m molar concentration units, is
obtained from the relation

J,
-=- P: (12)
4 PS
Incorporating the model presumptions, eqns. (3) and (5)) leads to

(13)

Transformation from molar to mass flux using J (mass) =MJ (molar) and
eqn. (9) yields

P%&w:
J,=J (14)
‘p” [M,(l-w:)+M,w:] -p:M,yw:
which, for small feed concentration of the organic, is approximated by

J _JpLyw’
I- I (15)
P” 1
Water flux is nearly constant at the dilutions in question, and is independent
of the nature of the organic solute.
The two model statements of eqns. (11) and (15) are examined in the light
 153

of experimental evidence m the following sections. Returning first to the effect

of downstream pressure (Section 6), eqn. ( 10) was used to calculate the pres-
sure dependence of pervaporative phenol enrichment shown m Fig. 6. Com-
parison of the calculated curve with the experimental points shows reasonable
agreement. Departure at the elevated pressure side is attributed to non-con-
densable compounds (air) introduced with the feed Towards low pressure,
phenol flux lags behmd that predicted on the basis of zero resistance to the
organic component, as presumed, it is suggested at this pomt that the resis-
tance to phenol noticed at low partial pressure of water is at and/or in the
membrane after all.

8. Pervaporation: effect of membrane thickness

Enrichment of the organic component is a function of total permeate pres-

sure, eqns. (10) and (11)) being the sum of the partial pressures of the per-
meants. Since permeate pressure results from rates of permeation, eqn. (2))
membrane thickness affects pervaporatlve enrichment through its Influence
on flux. In the model approximation, the membrane is freely permeable to the
organic species; any effect of membrane thickness on flux is thus governed by
the resistance of the membrane towards water permeation, presumably de-
creasing with decreasing thickness. Confirmation of this simple picture is pre-
sented in Table 3 by pervaporation data of dilute phenol solutions using mem-
branes of graded dry thickness (feed concentration 100 mg/kg, 50” C; PEBA
35).
It should be noted that the enrichment factor according to eqns. (10) and
(11) does not explicitly depend on membrane thickness, implying that an in-
crease in water flux will not affect the separation as long as the total permeate

TABLE 3

Pervaporatlon of phenol and water at varymg membrane thickness (membranes below 30 pm are
composites)

Membrane thickness, Flux density, g/m’-hr Ennchment factor,

,um B
Phenol Water

3 13 2200 58
6 17 2400 70
10 18 2300 77
15 16 1750 94
30 16 510 31
70 16 140 112
100 1.5 125 121
115 13 100 137
154

.
_I“,;/;”

o#
P’ Enrrchmsnt
1600

--I:,;;,--,,
l/
100
I
1400

80 1200

1000
60
BOO

Y
. 600 )‘
40
Flux osnr,ty .G

20
LAP \rk u_ --a-Z- 40
400

200
0
5

g.

0 0 LL
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 110

Membrane Dry Thickness Iw I

Fig 8 Enrichment factor and total flux density m phenol-water pervaporatlon as fun&on of
membrane dry thickness

pressure is kept at a constant level. In real pervaporatlon, however, it is not

possible to maintain a constant permeate pressure at varying flux density,
higher fluxes invariably leading to lower enrichment effects. The opposing ten-
dency of enrichment and flux as a function of membrane thickness in the per-
vaporation of phenol-water is illustrated in Fig. 8 on two related polymers,
PEBA 35 and 40, at a feed concentration of 100 mg/kg of phenol at 50’ C.
Considering the extremes of membrane thickness, it is obvious that thick
membranes will present a resistance to the organic permeant as well, and that
thin membranes will eventually cease to pose a resistance to water permeation.
At some lower limit of membrane thickness, then, pervaporation approaches
evaporation except for possible membrane boundary effects. Equilibrium en-
richment of phenol from &lute solution, to which the curves of Fig. 8 should
converge at zero membrane thickness, is about 1.5 at 50” C.

9. Pervaporation: effect of feed concentration

Inspection of eqn. (10) shows the enrichment factor to be relatively msen-

sltive to the feed concentration of the organic species, w :, increasing as deple-
tion of the feed solution progresses. The individual flux of the organic, meeting
essentially no resistance accordmg to the model, is directly related to feed con-
centration, eqn. (15). Both predictions are borne out by the pervaporation
results on phenol-water presented in Table 4, which cover feed concentrations
up to 1000 mg/kg (PEBA 40; membrane thickness 46 ,um; 50°C). Downstream
pressure was set at 2 mbar. As a control, the permeate pressure was calculated
from eqn. (10) using available data (which pertain to activity coefficient and
vapor pressure at 44.4”C) and included in Table 4. Observed again is the in-
 155

TABLE 4

Pervaporatlon of phenol-water as function of feed concentration, mcludmg trend of calculated

permeate pressure

Feed concentration, Flux density, g/m’-hr Ennchment Permeate pressure,

mg/kg factor, B mbar
Phenol Water

31 04 173 a 74 174
48 06 174 4 73 1 76
85 11 177 7 73 176
153 19 177 2 68 188
324 41 180 9 68 186
585 75 1846 67 186
994 12 7 189 4 63 194

Nt
E 16-

0 100 200 300 460 560 600

Feed Concentration 1 pm 1

Fig 9 Pervaporatlon of aromatic hydrocarbons from dilute aqueous solution organic flux density
vs feed concentration Numbers alongsIde compound names are Kp values ( ‘C)

C ). With water flux and permeate

pressure being reasonably constant, the slopes of the lines, according to eqn.
(15)) are proportional to pure component vapor pressure times activity coef-
ficient, pf y. Since the activity coefficient of the organics increases with dilu-
tion, so does the enrichment factor; cf. eqn. (11).
156

phenol enrrchment
6-o

0 01 10 10 0
Electrolyte Concentration [ wt-% NaCl 1

Fig 10 Salting-out m pervaporatlon Effect of electrolyte concentration on enrichment and flux

of phenol

The activity of nonelectrolytes in aqueous solution is increased upon addi-

tion of a salt (salting-out effect); at the same time the solvent activity is low-
ered In keeping with the observed influence of the activity coefficient on per-
vaporatlon performance, salting out is expected to enhance both organic
enrichment and orgamc flux density. Confirmation is presented in Fig. 10,
showing phenol pervaporation at increasing electrolyte concentration in the
feed (concentration of phenol, 400 mg/kg; PEBA 40; membrane thickness 46
pm; 50°C).

10. Pervaporation: effect of pH

Phenol, being a weak acid, dissociates in water, the degree of dissociation

depending on the pH value. Smce only undlssociated phenol pervaporates,
whereas phenolate ion does not, phenolic enrichment depends on pH precisely
as the concentration of undissociated phenol in equilibrium with phenolate ion
does. By contrast, phenolate ion is rejected by desalination membranes in re-
verse osmosis, whereas undissociated phenol is not. In either mode, the major
change occurs at a pH value of ca. 10.
To predict the effect of pH on the pervaporative enrichment of phenol, the
ratio of undissociated phenol (cph) to total concentration (& ) is calculated
in terms of pH and the dissociation constant, pK,, as

1
-=
cPh

c;,, (l+lO-pX”+pH)‘l
 157

pH = PK. = 104
PH value

Fig 11 Pervaporatlon (ennchment) and reverse osmous (relectlon) of phenol as function of pH

Actual enrichment as a function of pH is obtained by reducing the enrichment

factor of undissociated phenol according to:

(17)

In Fig. 11, the calculated pH dependence of phenol enrichment is compared

with experimental data (feed concentration 300 mg/kg; PEBA 40; membrane
thickness 46 pm, 50’ C ), and contrasted with the reJection of phenol by cellu-
lose acetate membranes [ 51. At pH = pK,= 10 4 (50 oC ) the reduction is 0.5 in
both instances.

11. Concluding remarks

It is concluded from the foregoing that pervaporation against the vapor pres-
sure relation is a viable alternative to extraction in depleting aqueous feed
streams from low volatility organic compounds, and/or concentrating low vol-
atility organic compounds from dilute aqueous solution. A useful parameter m
assessing pervaporability appears to be the activity coefficient of the organic
solutes in the aqueous feed.
When transferring the results of this study to practical separations, a num-
ber of features are worth mentioning. One is the fact that, given the limited
solubility of the organic compounds m question, pervaporative enrichment leads
to phase separation of the condensed permeates, pointing to the composition
of the organic-rich phase as the natural enrichment of the process. According
to another observation, optimum separations are obtained with relatively thick
membranes of the order of 100 pm, obviating the need for composite membrane
structures. Finally, increasing downstream pressure (p” ) adversely affects en-
158

rxhment and flux of the organic permeants; cf. eqns. (11) and (15). Since
downstream pressure is largely determined by the resistance to vapor transfer
between membrane and condenser, a sufficiently open apparatus design is
mandatory in order to realize the observed separation effects.

List of symbols

mass concentration (mg/kg = ppm)

i flux density (g/m’-hr )
M molar mass (molecular weight)
n number of moles
P pressure (mbar = 0.1 kPa)
PO equilibrium vapor pressure
W weight fraction ( w x 100 =wt% )
x mole fraction
separation factor
; enrichment factor
Y activity coefficient

Irdzces
1 organic permeant
J water
I
feed; feed side of membrane
I, permeate; permeate side of membrane

References

1 K W Boddeker, Pervaporatlon durch Membranen und rbre Anwendung sur Trennung von
Flusslggemlschen, VDI-Verlag, Dusseldorf, 1986
2 R Weller, H Schuberth and E Lerbmtz, Die Phasengleichgewmhte dampffornug/flussrg des
Systems Phenol/n-Butylacetat/Wasser be1 44,4”C, J Prakt Chem ,21 (1963) 234-249
3 G Bengtson and K W Boddeker, Pervaporatron of low volatlles from water, m R Baklsh
(Ed ), Proc Third Int Conf Pervaporatron Processes, Nancy, 1988
4 J R Flesher, Jr, Pebax polyether block amide - a new family of engmeermg thermoplastic
elastomers, m R B Seymour and G S. Knshenbaum (Eds ), High Performance Polymers,
Then Origm and Development, Elsevler, New York, NY, 1986, pp 401-408
5 T Matsuura and S SounraIan, Reverse osmosis separation of phenols m aqueous solutions
using porous cellulose acetate membranes, J. Appl. Polym Scl ,16 (1972) 2531-2554