Porous ceramic membrane supports face an intrinsic trade-off between water permeation, which needs high open porosity, and mechanical strength, which porosity degrades. Gu et al. (ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021) demonstrated one route past this trade-off: compositing low-cost kaolin nanoflakes with coarse alumina particles and extruding multichannel flat-sheet supports that, after partial sintering at 1400 °C, reached a water permeability of about 9912 LMH/bar with a flexural strength of about 110 MPa, and simultaneously showed promising direct oily-wastewater filtration. The demonstration, however, did not establish systematic composition–sintering–microstructure–property relationships beyond the reported recipe, reproducible control over pore formation during extrusion, or the long-term stability of the kaolin-derived mullite/cristobalite interfacial phases. The open problem is to convert this demonstration into an industrially usable support technology: establish systematic composition–sintering–microstructure–property relationships, gain reproducible control over pore formation in scalable extrusion, verify long-term chemical/thermal durability of the interfacial necks, and develop fouling-mitigation and cleaning/regeneration protocols for oily-wastewater service. The same permeability–strength trade-off remains an open problem in neighboring material systems while these system-specific gaps remain unaddressed.

Background

A ceramic membrane is a porous inorganic filter built in layers: a mechanically strong, highly porous ceramic support carries one or more thin separation (top) layers that do the actual selective filtering. Because almost all of the hydraulic resistance of a thick support comes from its internal pore network, the support's water permeation — the volume of water passed per area, time, and pressure, commonly reported in LMH/bar (liters per square meter per hour per bar) — grows with its open porosity (the volume fraction of pores that are interconnected and thus permeable). Mechanical strength, usually measured as flexural strength in a bending test, does the opposite: it falls as porosity rises, because the solid skeleton carries less load. This permeability–strength trade-off is the central materials constraint on high-flux inorganic membranes, and support design tries to escape it by microstructural architecture rather than by composition alone.

One architectural strategy is interfacial engineering: adding a fine secondary phase that forms strong necks (the solid bridges that grow between particles where they touch) at contacts between coarse particles during partial sintering, so that the large through-pores between the coarse skeleton are preserved while the contact points are reinforced. Kaolin, a cheap natural clay mineral, is an attractive secondary phase because on heating it transforms around 1200 °C into mullite (a strong aluminosilicate, Al6Si2O13) and cristobalite (a silica polymorph) — ceramics that can bond alumina particles. Gu, Kotobuki, Kirk, He, Lim, Ng, Zhang, Ng, and Wang (ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 13, 29199–29211, 2021) executed this strategy by mixing kaolin nanoflakes (nanometer-thin clay platelets) with coarse alumina particles and extruding the paste into multichannel flat-sheet supports (flat plates with parallel water-flow channels, made by forcing the clay-rich paste through a shaped die), followed by partial sintering. The kaolin lowered the effective sintering temperature to about 1200 °C, and the support sintered at 1400 °C combined a nominal pore size of 1.47 µm, water permeability of 9911.9 ± 357.5 LMH/bar, and flexural strength of 109.6 ± 4.6 MPa — an unusually favorable combination, attributed to a multilevel pore structure (large through-pores plus finer porosity) and to strong interfacial bonding at the kaolin-derived necks, evidenced by trans-granular fracture (cracks cutting through grains rather than following the weaker boundaries between them, a hallmark of strong interparticle bonding). The supports also showed good chemical resistance and efficient removal of oil from emulsified oily wastewater.

What the 2021 work did not establish is everything needed to turn this single recipe into a production technology. First, the demonstration reported one best sintering condition (1400 °C) with the property values quoted above; how the kaolin fraction, nanoflake spatial distribution, and sintering time/temperature jointly control the balance between large through-pores, neck formation, and retained porosity — the balance that must be tuned to host a specific membrane top layer — was not mapped as a design space. Second, the pore structure arises during extrusion and sintering in ways the authors could observe — an interesting evolution of the pore structure with sintering temperature, and a multilevel pore structure credited with the improved permeability — but not yet commanded at scale; the underlying pore-formation mechanism is not fully established (one candidate mechanism attributes part of the holey interior to the migration and aggregation of entrained air bubbles under die pressure and paste rheology), and reproducible control of pore formation in larger-scale manufacturing remains to be established. Third, the mullite/cristobalite (silica-rich) neck phases that carry the strength were shown to give the supports chemical resistance in the demonstration, but their stability over many cycles of filtration, chemical cleaning, and thermal exposure — and whether sustained cycling degrades strength or leaches species into the permeate — was not established and requires extended durability testing. Fourth, the demonstration reported good removal of oil from emulsified oily wastewater, but its fouling behavior (flux loss from deposited matter such as a cake layer — a compressed layer of rejected oil droplets and solids on the feed side) and its regeneration by cleaning were not characterized, so strategies for rejecting smaller oil droplets, mitigating cake formation, and regenerating the support remain to be developed.

Problem Statement

For the kaolin-nanoflake/alumina multichannel flat-sheet ceramic membrane support system of Gu et al. (2021), establish the science and process control needed to make the interfacial-engineering route an industrially deployable support technology, jointly covering four linked gaps that stand between the single demonstrated recipe and an industrially deployable technology and that the demonstration did not establish: (1) systematic optimization — map how kaolin fraction, nanoflake spatial distribution, and sintering time/temperature jointly control the balance between large through-pores, sintering-neck formation, and retained open porosity, so that permeability and flexural strength can be deliberately tuned to the requirements of depositing specific membrane top layers, going beyond the demonstrated recipe; (2) scalable pore-formation control — understand and reproducibly control the formation of the multilevel pore structure during extrusion and partial sintering, so that it can be reproduced in larger-scale manufacturing; (3) long-term durability — quantify the stability of the kaolin-derived interfacial phases (mullite/cristobalite, silica-rich necks) and of the supports' mechanical and permeation performance over repeated cycles of filtration, chemical cleaning, and thermal exposure, including any leaching; and (4) fouling and regeneration — develop strategies that improve rejection of smaller oil droplets, mitigate cake-layer formation, and provide effective cleaning/regeneration protocols for direct oily-wastewater operation. The four components are independently resolvable sub-goals, each with its own measurable completion criterion: (1) a design-space map of kaolin fraction and sintering time/temperature that reports permeability and flexural strength for each mapped condition and identifies the membrane top-layer that condition can host; (2) a pore-formation method reproduced across runs at an explicitly stated, production-relevant extrusion scale, with the run-to-run tolerance on the resulting pore structure reported; (3) a durability result over an explicitly defined number of filtration, chemical-cleaning, and thermal cycles, reported as retained strength and permeability and any leaching relative to stated limits; and (4) oily-wastewater fouling and cleaning/regeneration protocols reported against explicit metrics for oil-droplet rejection, cake-layer growth, and cleaning recovery. The full objective additionally requires that these results be consistent for one and the same support system. The common objective binding these components is the translation of the demonstrated permeability–strength combination into reproducible industrial production and operation of low-cost high-flux ceramic supports; 'industrially deployable' is judged by whether the support's properties are reproduced within a stated tolerance at a production-relevant scale rather than only in a single laboratory demonstration.

References

  1. Qilin Gu, Masashi Kotobuki, Chin Ho Kirk, Meibo He, Gwendolyn J. H. Lim, Tze Chiang Albert Ng, Lei Zhang, How Yong Ng, John Wang. "Overcoming the Trade-off between Water Permeation and Mechanical Strength of Ceramic Membrane Supports by Interfacial Engineering." ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 13 (24), 29199–29211 (2021). DOI: 10.1021/acsami.1c08157. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.1c08157
  2. Jin-Woo Jeong, Seung-Yeon Kim, A-Jin Kim, Hye Sun Lee, Seong-Joong Kim. "Effect of illite addition on the mechanical strength and permeability of porous alumina supports." Ceramics International (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2026.07.243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2026.07.243
  3. Mengfei Liu, Huanyu Zhou, Minghui Qiu, Xiaowei Da, Xianfu Chen, Yiqun Fan. "Facile fabrication of high strength ceramic membrane supports with exceptional permeability by ultra-dispersed nano-additives." Separation and Purification Technology 380, 135320 (2026). DOI: 10.1016/j.seppur.2025.135320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2025.135320
  4. Zhipeng Fu, Lingfei Zhang, Changlian Chen, Shuai Yang, Rongqi Xu, Xianliang Fu, Li Zhu, Hebin Shi, Man Xu. "High porosity and robust strength silicon carbide ceramic membrane for water treatment." Journal of the European Ceramic Society 45 (13), 117478 (2025). DOI: 10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2025.117478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2025.117478
  5. Thaís Martins Neves, João Pedro Weidlich Franco, Nilson Romeu Marcílio, Isabel Cristina Tessaro. "A Study of Low-Cost Kaolin and Rice Husk Ash Flat Ceramic Supports for Carbon Membrane Development." Chemical Engineering & Technology 49 (6) (2026). DOI: 10.1002/ceat.70263. https://doi.org/10.1002/ceat.70263
  6. Guoliang Zhang, Zixuan Fan, Xu Zhang, Zehai Xu, Qin Meng. "Asymmetric alumina-based ultrathin composite ceramic membranes with interfacial modification of black talc nanosheets." Ceramics International 49 (15), 25371–25380 (2023). DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.05.073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2023.05.073
  7. Fan Wu, Hong-Lei Wang, Shu-Zhen Zhou, Xu Wang, Hong-Liang Xu, An-Hui Lu. "Enhancing interfacial synergies for the preparation of high mechanical strength and interconnected porosity of alumina extrudates through pre-wetting method." Microporous and Mesoporous Materials 372, 113108 (2024). DOI: 10.1016/j.micromeso.2024.113108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.micromeso.2024.113108
  8. Siti Khadijah Hubadillah, Mohd Riduan Jamalludin, Mohd Hafiz Dzarfan Othman, Yuji Iwamoto. "Recent progress on low-cost ceramic membrane for water and wastewater treatment." Ceramics International 48 (17), 24157–24191 (2022). DOI: 10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.05.255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ceramint.2022.05.255
  9. Juhaina Al Bahri, Chunlin Zhai, Mohammed Al Abri, Yanling Liu, Shengji Xia. "Comprehensive review on advanced ceramic membranes for oily water treatment." Environmental Science: Water Research & Technology 11 (12), 2844–2859 (2025). DOI: 10.1039/D5EW00842E. https://doi.org/10.1039/D5EW00842E
  10. Youta Boushi, Takashi Yanagishita. "Highly Permeable Alumina Membrane with Mechanical Durability." ACS Applied Engineering Materials 2 (8), 2227–2234 (2024). DOI: 10.1021/acsaenm.4c00399. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsaenm.4c00399