Professional Documents
Culture Documents
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/44653620
CITATIONS
READS
240
1,243
3 authors, including:
William A Phillip
Menachem Elimelech
Yale University
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE
Introduction
Forward osmosis (FO) and pressure retarded osmosis (PRO)
are two emerging technologies that fall under the classification of osmotically driven membrane processes (1, 2). These
technologies take advantage of the osmotic pressure difference that is generated when a semipermeable membrane
separates two solutions of differing concentrations. By using
the osmotic pressure difference to drive the permeation of
water across the semipermeable membrane, osmotically
driven membrane processes may be capable of addressing
several of the shortcomings of hydraulically driven membrane
processes, such as reverse osmosis (RO).
Unlike RO, FO does not require a high applied hydraulic
pressure, thereby decreasing capital and energy costs (3).
Furthermore, recent investigations have demonstrated a
lower fouling propensity with FO (1, 4-6), implying lower
operating costs. Several studies have taken advantage of these
benefits and demonstrated the use of osmotically driven
membrane processes to desalinate seawater and brackish
water (1, 7-9), treat wastewater (4, 10), and reclaim wastewater using an osmotic membrane bioreactor (11).
* Corresponding author phone: (203)432-2789; e-mail: menachem.
elimelech@yale.edu.
5170
Theory
A schematic of an asymmetric membrane operating in FO
mode (i.e., with the selective layer facing the feed solution)
is shown in Figure 1. For the draw solute to leak into the feed
solution, it must first diffuse through the support layer, where
its diffusion is opposed by the convective flow of solvent,
until it reaches the interface between the support layer and
the active layer. Once there, the draw solute partitions into
the active layer before diffusing across it. After diffusing
across the active layer, the draw solute partitions into the
feed solution, which has a negligible concentration of draw
solute. This process can be described by considering the
mass transfer through the support layer and then the active
layer in series.
Draw Solute Mass Balance in the Support Layer. For the
support layer, a steady-state mass balance can be written on
a differential volume
dJsS
d2c
dc
) -DS 2 + Jw
)0
dz
dz
dz
(1)
( )
JwtS z
JwtS s
(c - cis) + exp
c - cD
D tS D
D i
JwtS
exp
-1
D
( )
(4)
dc
+ Jwc
dz
(5)
JsS
(2)
(3a)
z ) tS c ) cD
(3b)
( ( )
( )
JwtS s
c - cD
D i
JwtS
exp
-1
D
Jw exp
(6)
DA A
(c - 0)
tA i
(7)
(8)
(9)
5171
Js )
JwcD
JwtA
) ( )
JwtS
exp
1- 1+ A
D
D H
JwcD
Jw
JwS
exp
1- 1+
B
D
(10)
) ( )
Note that the derived equation for the draw solute flux
contains two important transport parameters
S)
B)
tS
(11)
DAH
tA
(12)
( 1 -R R ) exp(- k )
Jw
B ) Jw
(13)
(14)
()
(15)
B)
( )
cD exp -
Jw
k
(16)
()
B + ADb
D
ln
Jw
B + Jw
(17)
5173
Jw
) nRgTciS
A
(18)
( )
Jw ) ADb exp -
( )
JwS
JwS
) AnRgTcD exp D
D
(19)
where the bulk osmotic pressure has been written using the
vant Hoff equation. Next, the reverse flux selectivity is
calculated by taking the ratio of eq 19 to eq 10 to give
[ ( ) (
AnRgT
JwS
Jw
Jw
)
exp - 1+
Js
Jw
D
B
)]
(20)
(21)
DS
NOMENCLATURE
A
Am
B
c
cD
cF
ciA
ciS
D
DA
H
Js
Jw
n
R
Rg
S
t
T
tA
tS
VF
z
Acknowledgments
The work was supported by the WaterCAMPWS, a Science
and Technology Center of Advanced Materials for the
Purification of Water with Systems under the National Science
Foundation Grant CTS-0120978; and Oasys Water Inc.
Literature Cited
(1) Cath, T. Y.; Childress, A. E.; Elimelech, M. Forward osmosis:
Principles, applications, and recent developments. J. Membr.
Sci. 2006, 281, 7087.
(2) McGinnis, R. L.; Elimelech, M. Global Challenges in Energy and
Water Supply: The Promise of Engineered Osmosis. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 2008, 42, 86258629.
(3) Baker, R. W. Membrane technology and applications, 2nd ed.;
J. Wiley: Chichester, New York, 2004.
(4) Holloway, R. W.; Childress, A. E.; Dennett, K. E.; Cath, T. Y.
Forward osmosis for concentration of anaerobic digester
centrate. Water Res. 2007, 41, 40054014.
(5) Mi, B.; Elimelech, M. Chemical and physical aspects of organic
fouling of forward osmosis membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2008,
320, 292302.
(6) Lay, W. C. L.; Chong, T. H.; Tang, C. Y. Y.; Fane, A. G.; Zhang,
J. S.; Liu, Y. Fouling propensity of forward osmosis: investigation
of the slower flux decline phenomenon. Water Sci. Technol.
2010, 61, 927936.
(7) Kravath, R. E.; Davis, J. A. Desalination of Sea-Water by Direct
Osmosis. Desalination 1975, 16, 151155.
(8) Tan, C. H.; Ng, H. Y. A novel hybrid forward osmosis nanofiltration (FO-NF) process for seawater desalination: Draw
solution selection and system configuration. Desalin. Water
Treat. 2010, 13, 356361.
(9) Choi, J. S.; Kim, H.; Lee, S.; Hwang, T. M.; Oh, H.; Yang, D. R.;
Kim, J. H. Theoretical investigation of hybrid desalination system
combining reverse osmosis and forward osmosis. Desalin. Water
Treat. 2010, 15, 114120.
(10) Cartinella, J. L.; Cath, T. Y.; Flynn, M. T.; Miller, G. C.; Hunter,
K. W.; Childress, A. E. Removal of natural steroid hormones
from wastewater using membrane contactor processes. Environ.
Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 73817386.
(11) Achilli, A.; Cath, T. Y.; Marchand, E. A.; Childress, A. E. The
forward osmosis membrane bioreactor: A low fouling alternative
to MBR processes. Desalination 2009, 239, 1021.
(12) Loeb, S.; Titelman, L.; Korngold, E.; Freiman, J. Effect of porous
support fabric on osmosis through a Loeb-Sourirajan type
asymmetric membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 1997, 129, 243249.
(13) Lonsdale, H. K.; Merten, U.; Riley, R. L. Transport Properties of
Cellulose Acetate Osmotic Membranes. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1965,
9, 1341&.
(14) McCutcheon, J. R.; Elimelech, M. Influence of concentrative
and dilutive internal concentration polarization on flux
behavior in forward osmosis. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 284, 237
247.
(15) McCutcheon, J. R.; Elimelech, M. Modeling water flux in forward
osmosis: Implications for improved membrane design. AIChE
J. 2007, 53, 17361744.
(16) Ng, H. Y.; Tang, W. L.; Wong, W. S. Performance of forward
(direct) osmosis process: Membrane structure and transport
phenomenon. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2006, 40, 24082413.
VOL. 44, NO. 13, 2010 / ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
5175
5176
(27) Lobo, V. M. M. Mutual Diffusion-Coefficients in AqueousElectrolyte Solutions (Technical Report). Pure Appl. Chem. 1993,
65, 26142640.
(28) Chang, Y. C.; Myerson, A. S. The Diffusivity of PotassiumChloride and Sodium-Chloride in Concentrated, Saturated, and
Supersaturated Aqueous-Solutions. AIChE J. 1985, 31, 890894.
(29) McCutcheon, J. R.; McGinnis, R. L.; Elimelech, M. Desalination
by ammonia-carbon dioxide forward osmosis: Influence of draw
and feed solution concentrations on process performance. J.
Membr. Sci. 2006, 278, 114123.
(30) Mulder, M. Basic principles of membrane technology, 2nd ed.;
Kluwer Academic: Dordrecht, Boston, 1996.
(31) Hoek, E. M. V.; Kim, A. S.; Elimelech, M. Influence of crossflow
membrane filter geometry and shear rate on colloidal fouling
in reverse osmosis and nanofiltration separations. Environ. Eng.
Sci. 2002, 19, 357372.
(32) Mehta, G. D.; Loeb, S. Performance of Permasep B-9 and B-10
Membranes in Various Osmotic Regions and at High Osmotic
Pressures. J. Membr. Sci. 1979, 4, 335349.
(33) Reusch, C. F.; Cussler, E. L. Selective Membrane Transport. AIChE
J. 1973, 19, 736741.
(34) Tang, C. Y.; She, Q.; Lay, W. C. L.; Wang, R.; Fane, A. G. Coupled
effects of internal concentration polarization and fouling on
flux behavior of forward osmosis membranes during humic
acid filtration. J. Membr. Sci. 2010, 354, 123133.
ES100901N