Tight ceramic UF membrane as RO pre-treatment: The role of electrostatic interactions on phosphate rejection

Water Research

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 498-507

  Shang, Ran ^a   Verliefde, Arne R D ^a,b   Hu, Jingyi ^a   Zeng, Zheyi ^a   Lu, Jie ^a   Kemperman, Antoine J B ^c   Deng, Huiping ^d   Nijmeijer, Kitty ^c   Heijman, Sebastiaan G J ^a   Rietveld, Luuk C ^a  

^a DELFT UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

^d Tongji University ^*  (China)

Author keywords

Biofouling; Ceramic membrane; Donnan exclusion; Electrostatic repulsion; Phosphate limitation; Phosphate rejection; Tight ultrafiltration

Indexed keywords

BIOFOULING; CERAMIC MATERIALS; CERAMIC MEMBRANES; CHEMICAL WATER TREATMENT; ELECTROSTATICS; PORE SIZE; TITANIUM DIOXIDE; ULTRAFILTRATION;

DONNAN EXCLUSION; DOUBLE-LAYER OVERLAPPING; EFFECTIVE APPROACHES; ELECTROSTATIC REPULSION; NEGATIVE SURFACE CHARGES; PHOSPHATE LIMITATION; REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEMS; ULTRAFILTRATION MEMBRANES;

MEMBRANES;

PHOSPHATE; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; CERAMICS;

BIOFOULING; CERAMICS; COAGULATION; ELECTROKINESIS; MEMBRANE; OSMOSIS; PH; PHOSPHATE; POROSITY; ULTRAFILTRATION;

ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL MEMBRANE; BIOFOULING; CERAMICS; IONIC STRENGTH; PH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVERSE OSMOSIS; STATIC ELECTRICITY; SURFACE CHARGE; ULTRAFILTRATION; CHEMISTRY; OSMOSIS;

BIOFOULING; CERAMICS; MEMBRANES, ARTIFICIAL; OSMOSIS; PHOSPHATES; STATIC ELECTRICITY; ULTRAFILTRATION;

EID: 84888842960     PISSN: 00431354     EISSN: 18792448     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.008     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Alami-Younssi S., Larbot A., Persin M., Sarrazin J., Cot L. Rejection of mineral salts on a gamma alumina nanofiltration membrane application to environmental process. J. Memb. Sci. 1995, 102(0):123-129.
2. Alberti G., Marmottini F., Cavalaglio S., Severi D. Intercalation processes of n-alkyl monoamines in γ-zirconium phosphate. Langmuir 2000, 16(9):4165-4170.
3. Ang W.S., Lee S., Elimelech M. Chemical and physical aspects of cleaning of organic-fouled reverse osmosis membranes. J. Memb. Sci. 2006, 272(1-2):198-210.
4. Ang W.S., Yip N.Y., Tiraferri A., Elimelech M. Chemical cleaning of RO membranes fouled by wastewater effluent: achieving higher efficiency with dual-step cleaning. J. Memb. Sci. 2011, 382(1-2):100-106.
5. Araki T., Ito M., Oscarsson O. Anion permeability of the synaptic and non-synaptic motoneurone membrane. J. Physiol. 1961, 159(3):410-435.
6. Ballou E.V., Wydeven T. Solute rejection by porous glass membranes. II. Pore size distributions and membrane permeabilities. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1972, 41(2):198-207.
7. Bandini S., Vezzani D. Nanofiltration modeling: the role of dielectric exclusion in membrane characterization. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2003, 58(15):3303-3326.
8. Bartels C.R., Wilf M., Andes K., Iong J. Design considerations for wastewater treatment by reverse osmosis. Water Sci. Technol. 2005, 51:473-482.
9. Bellona C., Drewes J.E. The role of membrane surface charge and solute physico-chemical properties in the rejection of organic acids by NF membranes. J. Memb. Sci. 2005, 249(1-2):227-234.
10. Boley A., Narasimhan K., Kieninger M., Müller W.R. Ceramic membrane ultrafiltration of natural surface water with ultrasound enhanced backwashing. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 61(5):1121-1127.
11. Botton S., Verliefde A.R., Quach N.T., Cornelissen E.R. Influence of biofouling on pharmaceuticals rejection in NF membrane filtration. Water Res. 2012, 46(18):5848-5860.
12. Brandhuber P., Amy G. Alternative methods for membrane filtration of arsenic from drinking water. Desalination 1998, 117(1-3):1-10.
13. Brandhuber P., Amy G. Arsenic removal by a charged ultrafiltration membrane-influences of membrane operating conditions and water quality on arsenic rejection. Desalination 2001, 140(1):1-14.
14. 2 membranes: effects of surface equilibriums on salt retention. Desalination 2010, 255(1-3):1-8.
15. Christoforou C.C., Westermann-Clark G.B., Anderson J.L. The streaming potential and inadequacies of the Helmholtz equation. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 1985, 106(1):1-11.
16. Déon S., Dutournié P., Fievet P., Limousy L., Bourseau P. Concentration polarization phenomenon during the nanofiltration of multi-ionic solutions: Influence of the filtrated solution and operating conditions. Water Res. 2013, 47(7):2260-2272.
17. Déon S., Dutournié P., Limousy L., Bourseau P. Transport of salt mixtures through nanofiltration membranes: numerical identification of electric and dielectric contributions. Separation and Purification Technology 2009, 69(3):225-233.
18. Donnan F.G. The theory of membrane equilibria. Chem. Rev. 1924, 1(1):73-90.
19. Dubin P.L. Aqueous Size-exclusion Chromatography 1988, Elsevier.
20. Fane A.G., Tang C.Y., Wang R. Treatise on Water Science 2011, 301-335. Elsevier, Oxford. W. Peter (Ed.).
21. Ferry J.D. Statistical evaluation of sieve constants in ultrafiltration. J. General Physiol. 1936, 20(1):95-104.
22. Fievet P., Sbaï M., Szymczyk A. Analysis of the pressure-induced potential arising across selective multilayer membranes. J. Memb. Sci. 2005, 264(1-2):1-12.
23. Fievet P., Sbaï M., Szymczyk A., Magnenet C., Labbez C., Vidonne A. A new tangential streaming potential setup for the electrokinetic characterization of tubular membranes. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2004, 39(13):2931-2949.
24. Fievet P., Sbaï M., Szymczyk A., Vidonne A. Determining the ζ-potential of plane membranes from tangential streaming potential measurements: effect of the membrane body conductance. J. Memb. Sci. 2003, 226(1-2):227-236.
25. Greenberg G., Hasson D., Semiat R. Limits of RO recovery imposed by calcium phosphate precipitation. Desalination 2005, 183(1-3):273-288.
26. Gross R.J., Osterle J.F. Membrane transport characteristics of ultrafine capillaries. J. Chem. Phys. 1968, 49(1):228-234.
27. ® at reverse osmosis and nanofiltration installations. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2003, 3(5-6):133-138.
28. Heijman S.G.J., Verliefde A.R.D., Cornelissen E.R., Amy G., van Dijk J.C. Influence of natural organic matter (NOM) fouling on the removal of pharmaceuticals by nanofiltration and activated carbon filtration. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2007, 7(4):17-23.
29. Herzberg M., Berry D., Raskin L. Impact of microfiltration treatment of secondary wastewater effluent on biofouling of reverse osmosis membranes. Water Res. 2010, 44(1):167-176.
30. Huisman I.H., Trägårdh G., Trägårdh C., Pihlajamäki A. Determining the zeta-potential of ceramic microfiltration membranes using the electroviscous effect. J. Memb. Sci. 1998, 147(2):187-194.
31. Hunter R.J. Zeta Potential in Colloid Science: Principles and Applications 1981, Academic Press.
32. Jacazio G., Probstein R.F., Sonin A.A., Yung D. Electrokinetic salt rejection in hyperfiltration through porous materials. Theory and experiment. J. Phys. Chem. 1972, 76(26):4015-4023.
33. Jacobson J.D., Kennedy M.D., Amy G., Schippers J.C. Phosphate limitation in reverse osmosis: an option to control biofouling?. Desali. Water Treat. 2009, 5(1-3):198-206.
34. Jamnik B., Vlachy V. Ion partitioning between charged micropores and bulk electrolyte solution. Mixtures of mono- and divalent counterions and monovalent co-ions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117(30):8010-8016.
35. Kim J., Davies S.H.R., Baumann M.J., Tarabara V.V., Masten S.J. Effect of ozone dosage and hydrodynamic conditions on the permeate flux in a hybrid ozonation-ceramic ultrafiltration system treating natural waters. J. Memb. Sci. 2008, 311(1-2):165-172.
36. Kosmulski M. A literature survey of the differences between the reported isoelectric points and their discussion. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 2003, 222(1-3):113-118.
37. Labbez C., Fievet P., Thomas F., Szymczyk A., Vidonne A., Foissy A., Pagetti P. Evaluation of the "DSPM" model on a titania membrane: measurements of charged and uncharged solute retention, electrokinetic charge, pore size, and water permeability. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2003, 262(1):200-211.
38. Larbot A., Fabre J.P., Guizard C., Cot L. Inorganic membranes obtained by sol-gel techniques. J. Memb. Sci. 1988, 39(3):203-212.
39. 2. J. Environ. Sci. Health Part A 2008, 43(4):430-436.
40. Luo J., Wan Y. Effects of pH and salt on nanofiltration - a critical review. J. Memb. Sci. 2013, 438(0):18-28.
41. 2. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2010, 44(23):9094-9098.
42. Miettinen I.T., Vartiainen T., Martikainen P.J. Phosphorus and bacterial growth in drinking water. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 1997, 63(8):3242-3245.
43. Moritz T., Benfer S., Arki P., Tomandl G. Investigation of ceramic membrane materials by streaming potential measurements. Colloids Surf. A Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 2001, 195(1-3):25-33.
44. Basic Principles of Membrane Technology 1991, Kluwer Academic Publishers. M. Mulder (Ed.).
45. Musale D.A., Kumar A. Effects of surface crosslinking on sieving characteristics of chitosan/poly(acrylonitrile) composite nanofiltration membranes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2000, 21(1-2):27-37.
46. Nghiem L.D., Schäfer A.I., Elimelech M. Pharmaceutical retention mechanisms by nanofiltration membranes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39(19):7698-7705.
47. Nghiem L.D., Schäfer A.I., Elimelech M. Role of electrostatic interactions in the retention of pharmaceutically active contaminants by a loose nanofiltration membrane. J. Memb. Sci. 2006, 286(1-2):52-59.
48. Parks G.A. The isoelectric points of solid oxides, solid hydroxides, and aqueous hydroxo complex systems. Chem. Rev. 1965, 65(2):177-198.
49. Pena M., Meng X., Korfiatis G.P., Jing C. Adsorption mechanism of arsenic on nanocrystalline titanium dioxide. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40(4):1257-1262.
50. Petersson I.U., Löberg J.E.L., Fredriksson A.S., Ahlberg E.K. Semi-conducting properties of titanium dioxide surfaces on titanium implants. Biomaterials 2009, 30(27):4471-4479.
51. Randon J., Blanc P., Paterson R. Modification of ceramic membrane surfaces using phosphoric acid and alkyl phosphonic acids and its effects on ultrafiltration of BSA protein. J. Memb. Sci. 1995, 98(1-2):119-129.
52. Sathasivan A., Ohgaki S., Yamamoto K., Kamiko N. Role of inorganic phosphorus in controlling regrowth in water distribution system. Water Sci. Technol. 1997, 35(7):37-44.
53. 3 membrane for nanofiltration. J. Memb. Sci. 1999, 163(2):229-237.
54. Schafer W.A., Carr P.W., Funkenbusch E.F., Parson K.A. Physical and chemical characterization of a porous phosphate-modified zirconia substrate. J. Chromatogr. A 1991, 587(2):137-147.
55. Schneider R.P., Ferreira L.M., Binder P., Bejarano E.M., Góes K.P., Slongo E., Machado C.R., Rosa G.M.Z. Dynamics of organic carbon and of bacterial populations in a conventional pretreatment train of a reverse osmosis unit experiencing severe biofouling. J. Memb. Sci. 2005, 266(1-2):18-29.
56. Seidel A., Waypa J.J., Elimelech M. Role of charge (Donnan) exclusion in removal of arsenic from water by a negatively charged porous nanofiltration membrane. Environ. Eng. Sci. 2001, 18(2):105-113.
57. Shang R., van den Broek W.B.P., Heijman S.G.J., van Agtmaal S., Rietveld L.C. Wastewater reuse through RO: a case study of four RO plants producing industrial water. Desal. Water Treat. 2011, 34(1-3):408-415.
58. Sperlich A., Warschke D., Wegmann C., Ernst M., Jekel M. Treatment of membrane concentrates: phosphate removal and reduction of scaling potential. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 61(2):301-306.
59. Szoke S., Patzay G., Weiser L. Characteristics of thin-film nanofiltration membranes at various pH-values. Desalination 2003, 151(2):123-129.
60. Szymczyk A., Fievet P. Investigating transport properties of nanofiltration membranes by means of a steric, electric and dielectric exclusion model. J. Memb. Sci. 2005, 252(1-2):77-88.
61. Tsuru T., Hironaka D., Yoshioka T., Asaeda M. Titania membranes for liquid phase separation: effect of surface charge on flux. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2001, 25(1-3):307-314.
62. Van Agtmaal J., de Boks P.A., Cornips R., Paping L.L.M.J. Evaluation of Feed Water Sources and Retrofitting of an Integrated Membrane System 2007, 1-8. IWA, Antwerpen.
63. Verliefde A.R.D., Cornelissen E.R., Heijman S.G.J., Verberk J.Q.J.C., Amy G.L., Van Der Bruggen B., Van Dijk J.C. The role of electrostatic interactions on the rejection of organic solutes in aqueous solutions with nanofiltration. J. Memb. Sci. 2008, 322(1):52-66.
64. Verliefde A.R.D., Heijman S.G.J., Cornelissen E.R., Amy G., Van der Bruggen B., Van Dijk J.C. Influence of electrostatic interactions on the rejection with NF and assessment of the removal efficiency during NF/GAC treatment of pharmaceutically active compounds in surface water. Water Res. 2007, 41(15):3227-3240.
65. Vrouwenvelder J.S., Beyer F., Dahmani K., Hasan N., Galjaard G., Kruithof J.C., Van Loosdrecht M.C.M. Phosphate limitation to control biofouling. Water Res. 2010, 44(11):3454-3466.
66. Xie M., Nghiem L.D., Price W.E., Elimelech M. Impact of humic acid fouling on membrane performance and transport of pharmaceutically active compounds in forward osmosis. Water Res. 2013, 47(13):4567-4575.
67. Xu P., Drewes J.E., Kim T.-U., Bellona C., Amy G. Effect of membrane fouling on transport of organic contaminants in NF/RO membrane applications. J. Memb. Sci. 2006, 279(1-2):165-175.
68. Yaroshchuk A., Ribitsch V. Role of channel wall conductance in the determination of ζ-potential from electrokinetic measurements. Langmuir 2002, 18(6):2036-2038.
69. Yaroshchuk A.E. Dielectric exclusion of ions from membranes. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2000, 85(2-3):193-230.