The influence of membrane properties on the Silt Density Index

Journal of Membrane Science

Volumn 384, Issue 1-2, 2011, Pages 205-218

  Alhadidi, A ^a   Kemperman, A J B ^a   Schippers, J C ^b   Wessling, M ^a   van der Meer, W G J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^b UNESCO IHE INSTITUTE FOR WATER EDUCATION   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Membrane properties; Membrane resistance; Silt Density Index

Indexed keywords

ACRYLIC CO-POLYMERS; ALUMINA PARTICLES; CELLULOSE ACETATES; FEED WATER; FOULING INDICES; FOULING POTENTIAL; MEMBRANE FILTERS; MEMBRANE PROPERTIES; MEMBRANE RESISTANCE; MEMBRANE TYPES; NYLON-6 ,6; PORE SHAPE; REPRODUCIBILITIES; SILT DENSITY INDEX;

CELLULOSE; CONTACT ANGLE; PORE SIZE; SILT; SURFACE ROUGHNESS; SURFACES;

MEMBRANES;

CELLULOSE ACETATE; COPOLYMER; NYLON; POLITEF; POLYCARBONATE; POLYVINYLIDENE FLUORIDE;

ARTICLE; FOULING CONTROL; MEMBRANE COMPONENT; MEMBRANE FILTER; MEMBRANE FLUIDITY; MEMBRANE RESISTANCE; PARTICLE SIZE; POROSITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVERSE OSMOSIS; SILT DENSITY INDEX; SURFACE PROPERTY;

EID: 80054786795     PISSN: 03767388     EISSN: 18733123     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2011.09.028     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Lee S., Cho J., Elimelech M. Combined influence of natural organic matter (NOM) and colloidal particles on nanofiltration membrane fouling. J. Membr. Sci. 2005, 262:27-41.
2. ASTM Standard (D 4189-07), Standard Test Method for Silt Density Index (SDI) of Water, D19.08 on Membranes and Ion Exchange Materials, 2007.
3. Nagel R. Seawater desalination with polyamide hollow fiber modules at DROP. Desalination 1987, 63:225-246.
4. Yiantsios S.G., Karabelas A.J. An assessment of the Silt Density Index based on RO membrane colloidal fouling experiments with iron oxide particles. Desalination 2003, 151:229-238.
5. Toyobo, HR, HM, HB and HL Series Seawater desalination, 2010. http://www.toyobo.co.jp/e/seihin/ro/index.htm.
6. Koch, RO Spiral Elements, 2010. http://www.kochmembrane.com/support_ro_lit.html.
7. Dow, FILMTEC SW Seawater Reverse Osmosis Element, 2010. http://www.dowwaterandprocess.com/products/ronf.htm.
8. Hydranautics, ESPA, LFC, CPA ESNA and SWC RO Seawater Element, 2010. http://www.membranes.com/pdf/HYDRABrochure.pdf.
9. Boerlage S.F.E., Kennedy M.D., Bonne P.A.C., Galjaard G., Schippers J.C. Prediction of flux decline in membrane systems due to particulate fouling. Desalination 1997, 113:231-233.
10. Schippers J.C., Verdouw J. The modified fouling index, a method of determining the fouling characteristics of water. Desalination 1980, 32:137-148.
11. Walton N.R.G. Some observations on the considerable variability of Silt Density Index results due to equipment, filter and operator variables. Desalination 1987, 61:201-210.
12. Schippers J.C., Hanemaayer J.H., Smolders C.A., Kostense A. Predicting flux decline of reverse osmosis membranes. Desalination 1981, 38:339.
13. Boerlage S.F.E., Kennedy M.D., Aniye M.P., Abogrean E.M., Galjaard G., Schippers J.C. Monitoring particulate fouling in membrane systems. Desalination 1998, 118:131-142.
14. Mosset A., Bonnelye V., Petry M., Sanz M.A. The sensitivity of SDI analysis: from RO feed water to raw water. Desalination 2008, 222:17-23.
15. Wyart Y., Georges G., Deumie C., Amra C., Moulin P. Membrane characterization by microscopic methods: Multiscale structure. J. Membr. Sci. 2008, 315:82-92.
16. Drews A., Leeb C.-H., Kraume M. Membrane fouling - a review on the role of EPS. Desalination 2006, 200:186-188.
17. Riedl K., Girard B., Lencki R.W. Influence of membrane structure on fouling layer morphology during apple juice clarification. J. Membr. Sci. 1998, 139:155-166.
18. Elimelech M., Chen W.H., Waypa J.J. Measuring the zeta (electrokinetic) potential of reverse osmosis membranes by a streaming potential analyzer. Desalination 1994, 95:269-286.
19. Nystrom M., Pihlajamiiki A., Ehsani N. Characterization of ultrafiltration membranes by simultaneous streaming potential and flux measurements. J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 87:245-256.
20. Li Q., Elimelech M. Synergistic effects in combined fouling of a loose nanofiltration membrane by colloidal materials and natural organic matter. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 278:72-82.
21. Hwang K.-J., Chien-Yao, Tung L.-L. Effect of membrane pore size on the particle fouling in membrane filtration. Desalination 2008, 234:16-23.
22. Chandler M., Zydney A. Effects of membrane pore geometry on fouling behavior during yeast cell microfiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 285:334-342.
23. Ziel R., Haus A., Tulke A. Quantification of the pore size distribution (porosity profiles) in microfiltration membranes by SEM, TEM and computer image analysis. J. Membr. Sci. 2008, 323:241-246.
24. Elimelech M., Zhu X., Childress A.E., Hong S. Role of membrane surface morphology in colloidal fouling of cellulose acetate and composite aromatic polyamide reverse osmosis membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1997, 127:101-109.
25. Rizwan T. Colloidal particle deposition onto charge-heterogeneous substrates. Mechanical Engineering 2009, Alberta.
26. Khulbe K.C., Feng C.Y., Matsuura T. Synthetic Polymeric Membranes 2008, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
27. Boussu K., Van der Bruggen B., Volodin A., Van Haesendonck C., Delcour J.A., Van der Meeren P., Vandecasteele C. Characterization of commercial nanofiltration membranes and comparison with self-made polyethersulfone membranes. Desalination 2006, 191:245-253.
28. Al-Amoudi A.S. Factors affecting natural organic matter (NOM) and scaling fouling in NF membranes: a review. Desalination 2010, 259:1-10.
29. Vrijenhoek E.M., Hong S., Elimelech M. Influence of membrane surface properties on initial rate of colloidal fouling of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2001, 188:115-128.
30. He Y., Xu P., Li C., Zhang B. High-concentration food wastewater treatment by an anaerobic membrane bioreactor. Water Research 2005, 39:4110-4118.
31. M. Elimelech, A.E. Childress, Zeta potential of reverse osmosis membranes: implications for membrane performance, in: Water Treatment Technology Program Report No. 10, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering/University of California, Los Angeles, 1996.
32. Ernst M., Bismarck A., Springer J., Jekel M. Zeta-potential and rejection rates of a polyethersulfone nanofiltration membrane in single salt solutions. J. Membr. Sci. 2000, 165:251-259.
33. Singh G., Song L. Experimental correlations of pH and ionic strength effects on the colloidal fouling potential of silica nanoparticles in crossflow ultrafiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 2007, 303:112-118.
34. Jonsson C., Jonsson A.-S. Influence of the membrane material on the adsorptive fouling of ultrafiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1995, 108:79-87.
35. Zhang W., Hallstrom B. Membrane Characterization Using the Contact Angle Technique I. Methodology of the Captive Bubble Technique. Desalination 1990, 79:1-12.
36. Mulder M. Basic Principles of Membrane Technology 2003, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. 2nd ed.
37. Rosa M.J., de Pinho M.N. Membrane surface characterisation by contact angle measurements using the immersed method. J. Membr. Sci. 1997, 131:167-180.
38. Mockel D., Staude E., Dal-Cin M., Darcovich K., Guiver M. Tangential flow streaming potential measurements: hydrodynamic cell characterization and zeta potentials of carboxylated polysulfone membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 1998, 145:211-222.
39. Rossignol F., Penard A.L., Nagaraja F.H.S., Pagnoux C., Chartier T. Dispersion of alpha-alumina ultrafine powders using 2-phosphonobutane-1,2,4-tricarboxylic acid for the implementation of a DCC process. European Ceramic Society 2005, 25:1109-1118.
40. ASTM Standard (F-316-86), Standard Test Methods for Pore Size Characteristics of Membrane Filters by Bubble Point and Mean Flow Pore Test, 1986.
41. ASTM Standard (F-316-03), Standard Test Methods for Pore Size Characteristics of Membrane Filters by Bubble Point and Mean Flow Pore Test, 2003.
42. Al-hadidi A.M.M. Limitations, Improvements, Alternatives for the Silt Density Index. Membrane Technology University of Twente 2011.
43. Alhadidi A., Blankert B., Kemperman A.J.B., Schippers J.C., Wessling M., van der Meer W.G.J. Effect of testing conditions and filtration mechanisms on SDI. J. Membr. Sci. 2011, 381:142-151.