Performance Evaluation of Polyethersulfone Membranes for Competitive Removal of Cd²⁺, Co²⁺, and Pb²⁺ Ions from Simulated Groundwater

Table 2

Comparison results of the present work and other membranes found in the literature that used for rejection of metal ions by considering the different parameters.

Membrane	Process	Heavy metals	Pressure (bar)	Heavy metal concentration	pH value	Rejection (%)	PWF; (L/m^2 h)	Ref.
PES (dead-end mode)	Complexation and UF-filtration with poly(itaconic acid)	Pb^2+; Sn^2+; Zn^2+; Cu^2+; Cd^2+	-	20 (ppm)	7	83.8; 63.9; 57.1; 61.4; 36.5	46.1	[39]
PVDF/APTES functionalized halloysite-magnetic graphene oxide/metformin	NF	Cu^2+; Cd^2+; Cr^2+	5	5 (ppm)	5.5	47.9; 44.2; 52.3	14.2	[40]
Dual layer polybenzimidazole/PES	NF	Cr^2+; Pb^2+; Cd^2+		200 (ppm)	12; 2.2; 7	98; 93; 70	8.3	[41]
DL provided by SEPA CF GE Osmonics, Florida, USA	NF (crossflow mode)	Cd^2+; Zn^2+; Cu	3	0.001 Mol/l	6.83	48; 60; 65	20	[42]
Polyamide flat sheet, spiral wound	Flat-sheet, spiral wound NF	Pb^2 + Ni^2+	6	1	3-4	86; 93	-	[43]
NF270 commercial membrane	Flat-sheet NF	Pb^2+; Cd^2+; Mn; As	5	2000 (ppm)	1.5-5	74; 99	12-33.8	[44]
PES membrane	Hollow fiber UF	Ternary; Pb^2+; Cd^2+; Co^2+	1	10-50 (ppm)	6	40; 48.3; 50.5	16.4; 37.9; 16.6	This study
PES membrane	Hollow fiber UF	Binary; Pb^2+; Co^2+; Cd^2+	1	10-50 (ppm)	6	60.3; 58; 44.5		This study