Environmental Engineering Research

Korean Society of Environmental Engineers (대한환경공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Fouling mechanism and screening of backwash parameters: Seawater ultrafiltration case

  • Slimane, Fatma Zohra (University of Carthage, National Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology) ;
  • Ellouze, Fatma (University of Carthage, National Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology) ;
  • Amar, Nihel Ben (University of Carthage, National Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology)
  • Received : 2018.05.03
  • Accepted : 2018.08.06
  • Published : 2019.12.27
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This work deals with the membrane fouling mode and the unclogging in seawater ultrafiltration process. The identification of the fouling mechanism by modeling the experimental flux decline was performed using both the classical models of Hermia and the combined models of Bolton. The results show that Bolton models did not bring more precise information than the Hermia's and the flux decline can be described by one of the four Hermia's models since the backwash interval is ${\leq}60$ min. An experimental screening study has been then conducted to choose among 5 parameters (backwash interval, duration, pulses and the flow-rate or injected hypochlorite concentration) those that are the most influential on the fouling and the net water production. It has emerged that fouling is mainly affected by the backwash interval; its prolongation from 30 to 60 min engenders an increase in the reversible fouling and a decrease in the irreversible fouling. This later is also significantly reduced when the hypochlorite concentration increases from 4.5 to 10 ppm. Moreover, the net water production significantly increases with increasing the filtration duration up to 60 min and decreases with decreasing the backwash duration and backwash flow-rate from 10 to 40 s and from 15 to ${\geq}20L.min^{-1}$, respectively.

Keywords

References

  1. Shia X, Galit T, Hankinsa NP, Gitis V. Fouling and cleaning of ultrafiltration membranes: A review. J. Water Process Eng. 2014;1:121-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2014.04.003
  2. Choi H, Zhang K, Dionysios DD, Oerther DB, Sorial GA. Effect of permeate flux and tangential flow on membrane fouling for wastewater treatment. J. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2005;45:68-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2005.02.010
  3. Hwang KJ, Chan CS, Tung KL. Effect of backwash on the performance of submerged membrane filtration. J. Membr. Sci. 2009;330:349-356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2009.01.012
  4. Masse A, Arab O, Sechet V, et al. Performances of dead-end ultrafiltration of seawater: From the filtration and backwash efficiencies to the membrane fouling mechanisms. J. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2015;156:512-521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2015.10.044
  5. Hermia J. Constant pressure blocking filtration laws - Application to power law non-Newtonian fluids. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 1982;60:183-187.
  6. Bowen WR, Calvo JI, Hermindez A. Steps of membrane blocking in flux decline during protein microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 1995;101:153-165. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(94)00295-A
  7. Jacob J, Pradanos P, Calvo JI, Hernandez A, Jonsson G. Fouling kinetics and associated dynamics of structural modifications. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Asp. 1998;138:173-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-7757(97)00082-4
  8. Herrero C, Pradanos P, Calvo JI, Tejerina F, Hernandez A. Flux decline in protein microfiltration: Influence of operative parameters. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1997;187:344-351. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1996.4662
  9. Wang F, Tarabara VV. Pore blocking mechanisms during early stages of membrane fouling by colloids. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2008;328:464-469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2008.09.028
  10. Jaffrin MY, Ding LH, Couvreur C, Khari P. Effect of ethanol on ultrafiltration of bovine albumin solutions with organic membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1997;124:233-241. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00241-4
  11. Badrnezhad R, Beni AH. Ultrafiltration membrane process for produced water treatment: Experimental and modeling. J. Water Reuse Desalin. 2013;3:249-259. https://doi.org/10.2166/wrd.2013.092
  12. Abbasi M, Sebzari MR, Salahi A, Abbasi S, Mohammadi T. Flux decline and membrane fouling in cross-flow microfiltration of oil-in-water emulsions. J. Desalin. Water Treat. 2011;28:1-7. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2191
  13. Razi B, Aroujalian A, Fathizadeh M. Modeling of fouling layer deposition in cross-flow microfiltration during tomato juice clarification. J. Food Bioprod. Process. 2012;90:841-848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbp.2012.05.004
  14. Rezaei H, Ashtiani FZ, Fouladitajar A. Effects of operating parameters on fouling mechanism and membrane flux in cross-flow microfiltration of whey. Desalination 2011;274:262-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.02.015
  15. Torkamanzadeh M, Jahanshahi M, Peyravi M, Rad AS. Comparative experimental study on fouling mechanisms in nano-porous membrane: Cheese whey ultrafiltration as a case study. J. Water Sci. Technol. 2016;74:2737-2750. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2016.352
  16. Hwang KJ, Lin TT. Effect of morphology of polymeric membrane on the performance of cross-flow microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 2002;199:41-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(01)00675-5
  17. Li M, Zhao Y, Zhou S, Xing W. Clarification of raw rice wine by ceramic microfiltration membranes and membrane fouling analysis. Desalination 2010;256:166-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.01.018
  18. Yazdanshenas M, Soltanieh M, Tabatabaei Nejad SAR, Fillaudeau L. Cross-flow microfiltration of rough non-alcoholic beer and diluted malt extract with tubular ceramic membranes: Investigation of fouling mechanisms. J. Membr. Sci. 2010; 362:306-316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.06.041
  19. Salahi A, Abbasi M, Mohammadi T. Permeate flux decline during UF of oily wastewater: Experimental and modeling. Desalination 2010;251:153-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2009.08.006
  20. Sampath M, Shukla A, Rathore AS. Modeling of filtration processes - Microfiltration and depth filtration for harvest of a therapeutic protein expressed in Pichia pastoris at constant pressure. Bioengineering 2014;1:260-277. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering1040260
  21. Vela MCV, Blanco SA, Garcia JL, Rodriguez EB. Analysis of membrane pore blocking models applied to the ultrafiltration of PEG. J. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2008;62:489-498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2008.02.028
  22. Hong S, Faibish RS, Elimelech M. Kinetics of permeate flux decline in crossflow membrane filtration of colloidal suspensions. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1997;196:267-277. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.1997.5209
  23. Redkar SG, Davis RH. Crossflow microfiltration of yeast suspensions in tubular filters. J. Blotechnol. Prog. 1993;9:625-634. https://doi.org/10.1021/bp00024a009
  24. Romero CA, Davis RH. Experimental verification of the shear induced hydrodynamic diffusion model of crossflow microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 1991;62:249-273. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-7388(91)80042-5
  25. Ho CC, Zydney AL. A combined pore blockage and cake filtration model for protein fouling during microfiltration. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2000;232:389-399. https://doi.org/10.1006/jcis.2000.7182
  26. Bolton G, LaCasse D, Kuriyel R. Combined models of membrane fouling: Development and application to microfiltration and ultrafiltration of biological fluids. J. Membr. Sci. 2006;277: 75-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2004.12.053
  27. Paul Chen J, Kim SL, Ting YP. Optimization of membrane physical and chemical cleaning by a statistically designed approach. J. Membr. Sci. 2003;219:27-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0376-7388(03)00174-1
  28. Oriol GG, Moosa N, Garcia-Valls R, Busch M, Garcia-Molina V. Optimizing seawater operating protocols for pressurized ultrafiltration based on advanced cleaning research. J. Desalin. Water Treat. 2013;51:384-396. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.714927
  29. Slimane FZ, Ellouze F, Ben Miled G, Ben Amar N. Physical backwash optimization in membrane filtration processes: Seawater ultrafiltration case. J. Membr. Sci. Res. 2018;4:63-68.
  30. Charfi A, Ben Amar N, Harmand J. Analysis of fouling mechanisms in anaerobic membrane bioreactors. Water Res. 2012;46:2637-2650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2012.02.021
  31. Su Z, Li X, Yang Y, Fan Y. Probing the application of a zirconium coagulant in a coagulation-ultrafiltration process: Observations on organics removal and membrane fouling. RSC Adv. 2017;7:42329-42338. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA08038G
  32. Simon FX, Penru Y, Guastalli AR, Esplugas S, Llorens J, Baig S. NOM characterization by LC-OCD in a SWRO desalination line. J. Desalin. Water Treat. 2013;51:1776-1780. https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.704693
  33. Jermann D, Pronk W, Meylan S, Boller M. Interplay of different NOM fouling mechanisms during ultrafiltration for drinking water production. Water Res. 2007;41:1713-1722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2006.12.030
  34. Pervov AG, Andrianov AP, Efremov RV, Desyatov AV, Baranov AE. A new solution for the Caspian Sea desalination: Low-pressure membranes. Desalination 2003;157:377-384. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00420-X
  35. Xu J, Ruan G, Chu X, Yao Y, Su B, Gao C. A pilot study of UF pretreatment without any chemicals for SWRO desalination in China. Desalination 2007;207:216-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.08.006

Cited by

  1. Fabrication of High Performance PVDF Hollow Fiber Membrane Using Less Toxic Solvent at Different Additive Loading and Air Gap vol.11, pp.11, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/membranes11110843