Sensitivity analysis of the pressure-based direct integrity test for membranes used in drinking water treatment

Environmental Science and Technology

Volumn 43, Issue 24, 2009, Pages 9419-9424

  Minnery, John G ^a   Jacangelo, Joseph G ^b,c   Boden, Leslie I ^a   Vorhees, Donna J ^a   Heiger Bernays, Wendy ^a  

^a BOSTON UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c MWH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AIR PRESSURES; COMMERCIAL DESIGN; CRYPTOSPORIDIUM; DEFECT SIZE; DISCRETE VALUES; DRINKING WATER; DRINKING WATER TREATMENT; HOLLOW FIBER; INTEGRITY TESTS; LOWER BOUNDS; MAXIMUM BUBBLE PRESSURE METHODS; MEMBRANE DESIGNS; MONTE CARLO; NATURAL ORGANIC MATTER FOULING; OOCYSTS; PRESSURE-BASED; PROBABILITY BOUND; PRODUCED WATER; STANDARD DEVIATION; SURFACE TENSION MEASUREMENTS; TEMPERATURE PROFILES; TEST DESIGNS; UNCERTAINTY AND VARIABILITY; UPPER BOUND; VARIABLE CONTACT ANGLES;

ANGLE MEASUREMENT; ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE; BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS; CHEMICALS REMOVAL (WATER TREATMENT); CONTACT ANGLE; CONTROL THEORY; DEFECTS; DESIGN; LAWS AND LEGISLATION; MICROFILTRATION; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; ORGANIC COMPOUNDS; POTABLE WATER; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURFACE PROPERTIES; SURFACE TENSION; TESTING; ULTRAFILTRATION; WATER ANALYSIS; WATER FILTRATION;

UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS;

DRINKING WATER; NATURAL ORGANIC MATTER;

DRINKING WATER; MEMBRANE; MONTE CARLO ANALYSIS; PROTOZOAN; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURFACE TENSION; ULTRAFILTRATION; WATER TREATMENT;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; ATMOSPHERIC PRESSURE; CONTACT ANGLE; CRYPTOSPORIDIUM; HOLLOW FIBER; HYPOBARISM; LIQUID; MEASUREMENT ERROR; MICROFILTRATION; NORMAL DISTRIBUTION; OOCYST; PRESSURE; PROCESS MODEL; RIVER; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SURFACE TENSION; TEMPERATURE; ULTRAFILTRATION; WATER TREATMENT;

ANIMALS; CRYPTOSPORIDIUM; MATERIALS TESTING; OOCYSTS; PRESSURE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRAFILTRATION; WATER PURIFICATION; WATER SUPPLY;

CRYPTOSPORIDIUM;

EID: 72849114056     PISSN: 0013936X     EISSN: 15205851     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/es902210r     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Membrane Filtration Guidance Manual; EPA-815-R-06-009; EPA Office of Water: Cincinnati, OH, 2005; http://www.epa.gov/OGWDW/disinfection/lt2/pdfs/guide-lt2-membranefiltration- final.pdf.
2. Adham, S. S.; Jacangelo, J. G.; Laine, J. M. Low-pressure membranes: Assessing integrity. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1995, 87 (3), 62-75.
3. Alspach, B.; Mishra, D. General and site-specific case studies of compliance with LT2ESWTR regulatory framework under varied conditions. In AWWA WQTC, Cincinnati, OH, 2008.
4. Alspach, B. Considerations on the extension of the LT2ESWTR membrane regulatory framework to other pathogens. InAWWA WQTC, Charlotte, NC, 2007.
5. Ulman, A. An Introduction to Ultrathin Organic Films: from Langmuir-Blodgett to Self-Assembly; Academic Press, Inc.: Toronto, ON, 1991.
6. Whitesides, G. M.; Laibinis, P. E. Wet chemical approaches to the characterization of organic-surfaces - self-assembled monolayers, wetting, and the physical organic-chemistry of the solid liquid interface. Langmuir 1990, 6 (1), 87-96.
7. Lozier, J.; Cappucci, L.; Amy, G.; Lee, N.; Jacangelo, J. G.; Huang, H.; Young, T.; Mysore, C.; Emeraux, C.; Clouet, J. et al. Natural Organic Matter Fouling Of Low-Pressure Membrane Systems; American Water Works Association Research Foundation: Denver, CO, 2008.
8. Violleau, D.; Essis-Tome, H.; Habarou, H.; Croue, J. P.; Pontie, M. Fouling studies of a polyamide nanofiltration membrane by selected natural organic matter: An analytical approach. Desalination 2005, 173 (3), 223-238. (Pubitemid 40621874)
9. Zhao, Y. H.; Qian, Y. L.; Zhu, B. K.; Xu, Y. Y. Modification of porous poly(vinylidene fluoride) membrane using amphiphilic polymers with different structures in phase inversion process. J. Membr. Sci. 2008, 310 (1-2), 567-576.
10. Yu, H. Y.; Liu, L. Q.; Tang, Z. Q.; Yan, M. G.; Gu, J. S.; Wei, X. W. Mitigated membrane fouling in an SMBR by surface modification. J. Membr. Sci. 2008, 310 (1-2), 409-417.
11. Zularisam, A. W.; Ismail, A. F.; Salim, M. R.; Sakinah, M.; Hiroaki, O. Fabrication, fouling and foulant analyses of asymmetric polysulfone (PSF) ultrafiltration membrane fouled with natural organic matter (NOM) source waters. J. Membr. Sci. 2007, 299 (1-2), 97-113.
12. Zhang, W.; Wahlgren, M.; Sivik, B. Membrane characterization by the contact angle technique. II: Characterization of UFmembranes and comparison between the captive bubble and sessile drop as methods to obtain water contact angles. Desalination 1989, 72 (3), 263-273.
13. Xu, Z. K.; Dai, Q. W.; Wu, J.; Huang, X. J.; Yang, Q. Covalent attachment of phospholipid analogous polymers to modify a polymeric membrane surface: A novel approach. Langmuir 2004, 20 (4), 1481-1488.
14. Drelich, J.; Miller, J. D. The effect of solid-surface heterogeneity and roughness on the contact-angle drop (bubble) size relationship. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1994, 164 (1), 252-259.
15. Marmur, A. Thermodynamic aspects of contact-angle hysteresis. Adv. Colloid Interfaces 1994, 50, 121-141.
16. Steen, M. L.; Jordan, A. C.; Fisher, E. R. Hydrophilic modification of polymeric membranes by low temperature H2O plasma treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 2002, 204 (1-2), 341-357. (Pubitemid 34621420)
17. Hayama, M.; Kohori, F.; Sakai, K. AFM observation of small surface pores of hollow-fiber dialysis membrane using highly sharpened probe. J. Membr. Sci. 2002, 197 (1-2), 243-249.
18. Khayet, M.; Matsuura, T. Determination of surface and bulk pore sizes of flat-sheet and hollow-fiber membranes by atomic force microscopy, gas permeation and solute transport methods. Desalination 2003, 158 (1-3), 57-64. (Pubitemid 36914925)
19. Bongiovanni R.; Lombardi V.; Priola A. Surface rearrangements of polymeric materials containing fluorinated chains as studied by contact angle and other methods. In Contact Angle, Wettability and Adhesion; Mittal, K. L., Ed.; VSP(Brill): Boston, MA, 2002; Vol 2, pp 101-108.
20. Babel, S.; Takizawa, S.; Ozaki, H. Factors affecting seasonal variation of membrane filtration resistance caused by chlorella algae. Water Res. 2002, 36 (5), 1193-1202.
21. Gitis, V.; Haught, R. C.; Clark, R. M.; Gun, J.; Lev, O. Application of nanoscale probes for the evaluation of the integrity of ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 276 (1-2), 185-192.
22. Al-Amoudi, A.; Williams, P.; Al-Hobaib, A. S.; Lovitt, R. W. Cleaning results of new and fouled nanofiltration membrane characterized by contact angle, updated DSPM, flux and salts rejection. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2008, 254(13), 3983-3992.
23. Curti, P. S.; De Moura, M. R.; Radovanovic, E.; Rubira, A. F.; Muniz, E. C. Surface modification of polystyrene and poly-(ethylene terephtalate) by grafting poly(n-isopropylacrylamide). J. Mater. Sci.: Mater. Med. 2002, 13 (12), 1175-1180.
24. Curti, P. S.; De Moura, M. R.; Veiga, W.; Radovanovic, E.; Rubira, A. F.; Muniz, E. C. Characterization of PNIPAAM photografted on PET and PS surfaces. Appl. Surf. Sci. 2005, 245 (1-4), 223-233.
25. Combe, C.; Molis, E.; Lucas, P.; Riley, R.; Clark, M. M. The effect of CA membrane properties on adsorptive fouling by humic acid. J. Membr. Sci. 1999, 154 (1), 73-87.
26. Yuan, W.; Zydney, A. L.Humicacid fouling during ultrafiltration. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2000, 34 (23), 5043-5050.
27. Pontie, M.; Durand-Bourlier, L.; Lemordant, D.; Laine, J. M. Control fouling and cleaning procedures of UF membranes by a streaming potential method. Sep. Purif. Technol. 1998, 14 (1-3), 1-11.
28. Susanto, H.; Franzka, S.; Ulbricht, M. Dextran fouling of polyethersulfone ultrafiltration membranes - causes, extent and consequences. J. Membr. Sci. 2007, 296 (1-2), 147-155.
29. Susanto, H.; Ulbricht, M. Influence of ultrafiltration membrane characteristics on adsorptive fouling with dextrans. J. Membr. Sci. 2005, 266 (1-2), 132-142. (Pubitemid 41456695)
30. Freij-Larsson, C.; Jannasch, P.; Wesslen, B. Polyurethane surfaces modified by amphiphilic polymers: Effects on protein adsorption. Biomaterials 2000, 21 (3), 307-315.
31. Freij-Larsson, C.; Nylander, T.; Jannasch, P.; Wesslen, B. Adsorption behaviour of amphiphilic polymers at hydrophobic surfaces: Effects on protein adsorption. Biomaterials 1996, 17 (22), 2199-2207. (Pubitemid 26364774)
32. Jucker, C.; Clark, M. Adsorption of aquatic humic substances on hydrophobic ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 97, 37-52. (Pubitemid 289710)
33. Cho, J. W.; Amy, G.; Pellegrino, J.; Yoon, Y. M. Characterization of clean and natural organic matter (NOM) fouled NF and UF membranes, and foulants characterization. Desalination 1998, 118 (1-3), 101-108.
34. Shibuichi, S.; Onda, T.; Satoh, N.; Tsujii, K. Super water-repellent surfaces resulting from fractal structure. J. Phys. Chem.US1996, 100 (50), 19512-19517.
35. Taniguchi, M.; Pieracci, J. P.; Belfort, G. Effect of undulations on surface energy: A quantitative assessment. Langmuir 2001, 17 (14), 4312-4315. (Pubitemid 35330298)
36. Johnson, R., Jr.; Dettre, R. H. Wettability and contact angles. In Surface and Colloid Science; Matijevic E. , Ed.; Wiley Interscience: New York, 1969; Vol 2, pp 85-153.
37. Bico, J.; Marzolin, C.; Quere, D. Pearl drops. Europhys. Lett. 1999, 47 (2), 220-226.
38. De Gennes, P.-G.; Brochard-Wyard, F.; Quéré, D. Capillarity And Wetting Phenomena: Drops, Bubbles, Pearls, Waves; Springer: New York, 2004.
39. Mysels, K. J. The maximum bubble pressure method of measuring surface tension, revisited. Colloids Surf. 1990, 43, 241-262.
40. Fainerman, V. B.; Mys, V. D.; Makievski, A. V.; Miller, R. Application of the maximum bubble pressure technique for dynamic surface tension studies of surfactant solutions using the sugden two-capillary method. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2006, 304 (1), 222-225.
41. Piatkiewicz, W.; Rosinski, S.; Lewinska, D.; Bukowski, J.; Judycki, W. Determination of pore size distribution in hollow fiber membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1999, 153, 91-102. (Pubitemid 29005064)
42. Teppner, R.; Schaflinger, U. Bubble formation on porous media surfaces. In Drop-Surface Interactions; Rein, M. , Ed.; Springer Wien: New York, 2002; Vol 456, pp 291-294.
43. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Risk Assessment Guidance For Superfund (Rags): Volume III - Part A, Process For Conducting Probabilistic Risk Assessment; EPA-540-R-02-002; EPA Office of Emergency and Remedial Response: Washington, DC, 2001; http://www.epa.gov/oswer/riskassessment/rags3adt/pdf/ rags3adt-complete.pdf.
44. Ferson, S.; Ginzburg, L. R. Different methods are needed to propagate ignorance and variability. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe. 1996, 54 (2-3), 133-144.
45. Hoffman, F. O.; Hammonds, J. S. Propagation of uncertainty in risk assessments - the need to distinguish between uncertainty due to lack of knowledge and uncertainty due to variability. Risk Anal. 1994, 14 (5), 707-712.
46. Ferson, S. Ramas Risk Calc 4.0 Software: Risk Assessment with Uncertain Numbers; Applied Biomathematics: Setauket, New York, 2002.
47. Ferson, S.; Tucker, W. T. Sensitivity analysis using probability bounding. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 2006, 91 (10-11), 1435-1442.
48. Ferson, S.; Hajagos, J. G. Arithmetic with uncertain numbers: Rigorous and (often) best possible answers. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe. 2004, 85 (1-3), 135-152.
49. Sander, P.; Bergback, B.; Oberg, T. Uncertain numbers and uncertainty in the selection of input distributions - consequences for a probabilistic risk assessment of contaminated land. Risk Anal. 2006, 26 (5), 1363-1375.
50. U.S. Geological Survey. American River Below Watt Ave. Bridge Near Carmichael, CA; USGS, Department of the Interior, 2009; http://waterdata.usgs. gov/nwis/dv/?site-no)11446980.
51. U.S. Geological Survey. Penobscot River At Eddington, ME; USGS, Department of the Interior; http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/uv?site-no)01036390, February 3rd, 2007 to February 2nd, 2009.
52. U.S. Geological Survey. Irondequoit Creek Abv Blossom Rd. Near Rochestor, NY; USGS, Department of the Interior, 2009; http://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/dv/? site-no)0423205010.
53. AWWA. Microfiltration and Ultrafiltration Membranes for Drinking Water: Manual of Water Supply PracticesM53;AWWA: Denver, CO, 2005;
54. Alspach, B.; Sakaji, R. H. Comparing the federal regulatory philosophies of membrane filtration vs conventional media filters. AWWA MTC: Tampa, FL, 2007.
55. Jongwutiwes, S.; Tiangtip, R.; Yentakarm, S.; Chantachum, N. Simple method for long-term copro-preservation of cryptosporidium oocysts for morphometric and molecular analysis. Trop. Med. Int. Health 2002, 7 (3), 257-264.
56. Sunnotel, O.; Lowery, C. J.; Moore, J. E.; Dooley, J. S. G.; Xiao, L.; Millar, B. C.; Rooney, P. J.; Snelling, W. J. Cryptosporidium. Lett. Appl. Microbiol. 2006, 43 (1), 7-16.
57. Wang, Y. Y.; Hammes, F.; Duggelin, M.; Egli, T. Influence of size, shape, and flexibility on bacterial passage through micropore membrane filters. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2008, 42 (17), 6749-6754.
58. Delebecque, N.; Causserand, C.; Roques, C.; Aimar, P.Membrane processes for water disinfection: Investigation on bacterial transfer mechanisms. Desalination 2006, 199 (1-3), 81-83.
59. Wang, S.; Guillen, G.; Hoek, E. M. V. Direct observation of microbial adhesion to membranes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39 (17), 6461-6469.
60. Jacangelo, J. G.; Adham, S. S.; Laine, J. M. Mechanism of cryptosporidium, giardia, and MS2 virus removal by MF and UF. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 1995, 87 (9), 107-121.
61. Farahbakhsh, K.; Adham, S. S.; Smith, D. W. Monitoring the integrity of low-pressure membranes. J. Am. Water Works Assoc. 2003, 95 (6), 95-107.