Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Membrane PDF
Membrane PDF
Module :
3
Dr. Sirshendu De
Professor, Department of Chemical Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur
e-mail: sde@che.iitkgp.ernet.in
Keywords:
Separation processes, membranes, electric field assisted separation, liquid
membrane, cloud point extraction, electrophoretic separation, supercritical fluid
extraction
It is an interface that separates the two phases and restricts the transport of various
2. It is put on a plate. Place another plate on top of it. The gap is of the order of
~ 0.25mm
3. Give a one directional motion to the top plate. A thin film is produced on the
bottom plate.
4. Take out bottom plate and place it in ice-water bath, which releases the film.
Homogeneous barrier:
Typical RO membrane
Microporous Barrier:
Asymmetric Barrier:
In this case, a thin polymeric skin is cast on another polymeric support. It is shown
schematically in Fig. 3.1. The skin acts like a membrane. Since the thickness of the skin
is really small, the resistance offered is less and one can expect a higher flux compared to
homogeneous membranes.
If homogeneous barrier is the skin, micro porous barrier may be the support.
1) Permeation:
Single gaseous molecules diffuse under rarefied conditions so that the mean free path
Reverse Osmosis:
Pore size: 2 10 A0
Nanofiltration:
Pore size: 5 20 A0
Pressure: 15 25 atm.
Ultrafiltration:
Pressure: 6 8 atm.
Microfiltration:
Pressure: 2 4 atm.
Fig. 3.2 shows that a semipermeable barrier separates a solution having some solute in
one side and pure solvent (water in this case) at the other side. Due to presence of
difference in concentration of solvent in both sides, water from solution side permeate
through the membrane to the solution side. Therefore, the level of water in solvent side
goes down and that in the solution side goes up. At equilibrium, there exists a
difference in hydrostatic pressure in both the chambers, although the chemical potential
of the solvent is equal across the membrane. The developed hydrostatic head is called
osmotic pressure. If the solute concentration in the solution is more, the solution is
When water is forced through a concentrated solution (by applying pressure), the
osmotic pressure resists. The energy required to overcome this resistance is called
osmotic energy.
concentration.
1
and C
Mw
RTC
and hence, = (3.1)
Mw
It may be mentioned that any solution has its own osmotic pressure, but it can only be
saline water has its own osmotic pressure but it can only be realized, if we place it across
a semi-permeable barrier.
This property indicates the extent of separation of a membrane can produce with
respect to the solute concentration in the feed. Thus, observed retention is defined as,
Cp
Ro = 1 (3.2)
Co
Real retention is a constant that defines the partition of the solute concentration
across the membrane, i.e., between the the membrane-solution interface and the
permeate side. Since, this definition is not masked by any physical phenomenon like
concentration polarization, (defined later) etc., this definition indicates the true
Cp
Rr = 1 (3.3)
Cm
here that since, membrane surface concentration of solute is always greater than the bulk
concentration, real retention is always greater than observed retention. For complete
Molecular weight cut off is another concept to characterize a membrane. In this case,
pressure drop, high turbulence and low feed concentration. Experiments are conducted
using each of these solutes and the observed retention values at the steady state are
measured. The observed retention values are then plotted against the molecular weight of
the solutes in a semi-log plot. The typical solutes are glucose (molecular weight 180),
weights: 200, 400, 600, 1000, 1500, 2000, 4000, 60000, 10000, 30000), dextran
(molecular weight 40000, 1,50,000), etc. The molecular weight at 90% solute retention
indicates roughly the molecular weight cut off of the membrane. The molecular weight
1.0
0.90
R0
Log MW
Log MW
Molecular weight cut off curves may be a sharp cut off or a diffused cut off. If the
retention curve raises sharply to 90% level over a small span of molecular weight regime,
then the cut off curve is called a sharp cut off curve. If the retention curve rises over a
wide span of molecular weight region, it is a diffused cut off curve. One has to have an
accurate control over the operating conditions to achieve the sharp cut off membranes. In
This parameter shows how porous the membrane is. If Lp is more, then the
J0
membrane is more porous. Mathematically, Lp is defined as, L p = , where, J0 is the
P
pure water flux and P is transmembrane pressure drop. This concept is elaborated in
Retention:
Real retention (Rr): One has to conduct batch experiments at high stirring speed, low
feed concentration and low operating pressure. In that case, it is assumed that there is
no formation of concentrated solute layer over the membrane surface and in absence of
Permeability:
pressure drops, the water flux is measured. A plot of permeate flux versus operating
pressure would be a straight line through the origin, as shown in Fig. 3.5. The slope of
this curve indicates the permeability (Lp) of the membrane. I may be noted here that the
the membrane is independent of turbulence (stirring speed or cross flow velocity) in the
m3 m
flow channel. The unit of permeability is 2 or .
m .Pa.s Pa.s
J
(m /m2.s)
3
Slope=Lp
Fig.3.5: A typical flux versus pressure plot for ditilled water as feed
Membrane modules:
The practical equipment where the actual membrane based separation occurs is known
maximum membrane area in relatively smaller volume, so that the permeate flux i.e.,
the productivity of the system is maximum. These membrane modules are of four types,
(i) plate and frame module, (ii) hollow fiber module, (iii) spiral wound and (iv) tubular
The heart of plate-frame module is the support plate that is sandwiched between two
flat sheet membranes. The membranes are sealed to the plate, either gaskets with
locking devices, glue or directly bonded. The plate is internally porous and provides a
flow channel for the permeate which is collected from a tube on the side of the plate.
Ribs or grooves on the face of the plate provide a feed side flow channel. The feed
chanel can be a clear path with chanel heights from 0.3 to 0.75 mm. The higher channel
heights are necessary for high viscosity feeds; reduction in power consumption of 20 to
Commercial plate-frame units are usually horizontal with the membrane plates mounted
vertically. They can be run with each plate in parallel plates in two or three series.
Laboratory are also available as preformed stacks up to 10 plates. A typical plate and
Tubular modules
In such modules, the membrane is cast on the inside surface of a porous tube. Tubular
along the membrane surface in a sweeping type action. The feed solution is pumped
through the center of the tube at velocities as high as 6 m/s. These cross-flow
membrane surface, promoting high and stable flux and easy cleaning, especially when
Permeate is driven through the membrane to be directed out of the system or back
into the process depending on the application. There are many advantages in tubular
advantage of being able to process high suspended solids, and concentrate product
successfully and repeatedly to relatively high end point concentration levels without
reduce waste volume as much as possible to reduce concentrate hauling costs. For
yields and the highest final suspended solids concentration levels. Tubular MF, UF
and NF systems do not require significant prefiltration. Some tubular products have
process, and are also used to enhance chemical cleaning by reducing time and
processes, juice clarification, treatment of pulp and paper industry waste, etc. Tubular
membranes typically have life upto 2 to 10 years. The following figure (Fig. 3.5 b)
In hollow fiber module, lots of hollow fibers (each fiber is a tubular module) are
contained in a compact module. This means large volumes can be filtered, while
utilizing minimal space, with low power consumption. Hollow fiber membranes
can be designed for circulation, dead end and single pass operation. Some of the
treatment, juice clarification, wine filtration, dairy processing, etc. The advantages
lowering in chemical cost, delivery of high quality product water, etc. Hollow
fiber membranes offer the unique benefits of high membrane packing densities,
can withstand permeate back pressure thus allowing flexibility in system design
and operation. Most KMS hollow fiber products are available in (i) 1" diameter
(ii) Standard commercial cartridge lengths of 25", 43", 48", 60" and 72",
(iii) Nominal separation ranges from 0.2 micron down to 1,000 MWCO, (iv)
The following figure (Fig. 3.5c) shows some hollow fiber cartridges of 5, 8 and
Benefits of hollow fiber membranes include (i) controlled flow hydraulics, (ii) tangential
flow along the membrane surface limits membrane fouling, (iii) membranes can be
backflushed to remove solids from the membrane inside surface, thus extending the time
between two chemical cleaning cycles, (iv) high membrane packing density resulting in
high throughput, (v) modular in structure so that future extension of the plant becomes
easier. The flow pattern in a typical hollow fiber module takes place as shown in Fig.
3.5d.
In spiral wound membrane, membrane is cast as a film onto flat sheet. Membranes are
sandwiched together with feed spacers (typical thickness 0.03 to 0.1 inch) and permeate
carrier. They are sealed at each edge and wound up around a perforated tube. The
module diameter ranges from 2.5 to 18 inch and length varies from 30 to 60 inch. The
The application of spiral wound module includes, seawater desalination, brackish water
treatment, potable water treatment, dairy processing, electrocoat paint recovery, protein
Therefore, it can be identified that the modeling of plate and frame and spiral
wound module can be done by considering the flow through a rectangular channel. On
the other hand, that for a tubular and hollow fiber module are done by considering flow
through a tube.
Transport rate is determined by the driving force acting on individual components, their
As described in Fig. 3.6, in such cases, the upstream chemical potential of a component
A'
A' > A''
A''
A' B
A
A' > A''
AB
A''
A + B AB A
In this case also the chemical potential of a species in upstream is more than that
coupled with a carrier in the membrane phase. So, it is a special form of passive
transport and very selective and at the same time, the transport is facilitated by the
carrier component.
A''
B
A
AB
A
A' A + B AB
As shown in Fig. 3.8, components are transported against driving force. Driving
force for transport is provided by the activation energy of chemical reaction in the
membrane phase (Living Cell). In this case, the upstream chemical potential is higher
proportional to the driving force. The proportionality constant is the transport property
specific to the system. Table 3.1 presents various phenomenological equations common
Phenomenon Constant of
Flux Driving force
relation property
Electric potential
Ohms Law Electricity R
difference
concentration gradient across a membrane not only leads to flow of matter, can also cause
Temperature difference across the membrane leads to heat flow associated with flow of
Concentration difference across the membrane causes mass flux as well as temperature
Let us consider an experiment, where, a solvent and a solution are separated by a semi-
A B
Solution
Solvent
equal.
Let us use the notation, 2 is for solvent and 1 is for solute. P1 is pressure in
At osmotic equilibrium:
2 ( at P1 ) = 2 ( at P2 ) (3.4)
2 = 20 + RT ln a2 (3.5)
Hypothetical Experiment:
Both chambers have pure water and initially at pressure P1, 2 is same at both chambers.
Then, 20 ( P1 ) becomes 2 ( P1 ) in B
2 ( P1 ) = 20 ( P1 ) + RT ln a2 (3.6)
At osmotic equilibrium,
20 ( P2 ) + RT ln a2 = 20 ( P1 ) (3.8)
20 ( P2 ) 20 ( P1 ) = RT ln a2 (3.9)
i0
Vi = Partial molar volume of i species =
th
. Thus, Eq.(3.9) is written as,
P T ,n
P2
( P2 ) ( P1 ) = V2 dP
0
2
0
2 (3.10)
P1
V2 ( P2 P1 ) = RT ln a2 (3.11)
V2 = RT ln a2 (3.12)
PS
=
PS*
RT PS*
So, = ln (3.13a)
V2 PS
(3.13c)
Transport equation for the solute and solvent through reverse osmosis membrane
(a) Flux of ith species may be a function of every force that exists in the system.
(b) Under conditions not too far from equilibrium the flux-force relation is linear.
nf
N i = Lij Fj (3.14)
j =1
The notations are, 1 is for solute and 2 is for solvent. Thus, the fluxes for the solvent
Coupling:
The addition to the flux of one species due to the existence of force acting on another
species is termed as coupling. For RO, it is assumed that no coupling takes place between
Therefore, L12 = L21 = 0 . Therefore, the solvent and solute fluxes are expressed as,
N 2 = L222 ; (3.17)
N1 = L111 (3.18)
expressed as,
i = i P + i Ci (3.19)
P T ,n Ci P ,T
2
N 2 = L22 2 P + C 2m (3.20)
P T ,n C2 m P ,T
At the steady state, one dimensional transport across the membrane of thickness l is
' ''
C2m C2m
x=0 x=1
Fig. 3.10: Steady state, one dimensional transport across the membrane.
is obtained.
C2 m
''
P1
2
l
0 2
N dx = L22
2
C2' m C2 m P ,T
dC 2m + P n,T
P2
dP (3.21)
Vi = Partial molar volume of i th species = i . Using this definition of
P T ,n
C2 m
''
P1
2
So, N 2l = L22 2
dC 2m + P n,T
dP (3.22)
C2' m C2 m P ,T P2
C2'' m
2
V2 ( P2 P1 ) = C dC2 m
C2' m 2 m P ,T
= V2 (3.23)
Combining Eqs.(3.22) and (3.23), the following equation of the solvent flux is obtained.
P2
N 2l = L22 V2 V2 dP
P1
L22V2
= L22 V2 V2 P = [ P ] (3.24)
l
N 2 = ksol [ P ] (3.25)
Thus, the phenomenological equation of the solvent flux through reverse osmosis
membrane is derived.
(c) No coupling
C1m
''
P1
1
l
0 1
N dx = L11 1
C1' m C1m P ,T
dC1m + P n,T
P2
dP
C1''m
1
= L11 C
' 1m
dC1m + V1 L11P
P ,T
(3.26)
C1 m
For dilute solution, a1m C1m and the expression of chemical potential is,
= 0 + RT ln a1m
= 0 + RT ln C1m (3.27)
ln C1m
= RT (3.28)
C1m T C1m
C1' m
N1l = L11 RT ln + V1 L11P
C1''m
V1 L11
In most of the cases, P 0
l
L11 RT C1' m
N1 = ln '' (3.30)
l C1m
For dilute solution, L11 D1m C1m ,avg . Thus, solute flux expression becomes,
1
N1 = L11 C1m
C1m
= D1m 1 C1mC1m
C1m
d ln C1m dC1m
= D1m RT C1m
dC1m dx
d ln C1m
= D1m RTC1m (3.31)
dx
C1''m
N1l = D1m RT dC 1m (
= D1m RT C1''m C1' m )
C1' m
D1m RT '
N1 =
l
(
C1m C1''m )
(
N1 = K S C1' m C1''m ) (3.32)
matrix. The model of solute flux through the membrane presented by Eq.(3.32) is
It may be noted that the solvent flux N2 presented above is molar flux with the unit
moles
2
. This can be converted to volumetric flux (J), m3/m2.s. Following equation
m .s
N 2 M 2W 103
J = (3.33)
solution
(
JC1''m = K s C1' m C1''m ) (3.34)
Combining the above equation with the definition of observed retention, the permeate
1
J = B 1 (3.35)
1 R0
The solvent flux, in terms of volumetric flux and membrane permeability (Lp), can be
J = L p ( P ) (3.36)
Combining the above two equations, the observed retention can be expressed in terms of
operating pressure.
Lp ( P )
R0 = (3.37)
L p ( P ) + B
solvent flux will increase due to increase in driving force. So, solute becomes diluted and
In case of solution diffusion imperfection model, the solution diffusion model is modified
to incorporate the convective effects, i.e., the effects due to pressure drop across the
membrane. Therefore, the solute and solvent flux through the membrane are written as,
N 2 = k1 ( P ) + k2 P (3.38)
( )
N1 = k3 C1' C1'' + k4 P (3.39)
Accumulation of solute particles as shown in Fig. 3.11 over the membrane surface is
(iv) Solute enters into the pores and pores are blocked partially or completely.
First phenomena decrease in driving force. Second and third increases the
resistance against flux. Fourth decreases the membrane permeability. All these effects
C = C0
Boundary layer
C = Cm
Reversible fouling:
is reversible fouling.
Irreversible fouling:
In this case, membrane pores are blocked permanently and they cannot be removed, even
It must be clear by now that in any membrane separation process, there exists a
concentration boundary layer between the bulk of the solution and the membrane surface,
theory is used to quantify this concentration polarization or expresses the permeate flux
in terms of solute concentration at the membrane surface, bulk and the permeate stream.
At the membrane surface, three solute fluxes can appear. Convective flux towards the
dC
membrane (J C); diffusive flux away from the membrane (-D ) and convective flux
dy
away from the membrane (J Cp). A solute mass balance at the steady state results,
dC
J (C C p ) + D =0 (3.40)
dy
of the mass transfer boundary layer. The above equation must satisfy the conditions at y=
0 (at the membrane surface), C= Cm. At the edge of mass transfer boundary layer, i.e., at
Cm C p J
= exp (3.41)
C0 C p k
We can find out the mass transfer coefficient (k), from the appropriate Sherwood number
relation. Leveque relation is valid for the laminar flow through a conduit.
For tube,
1
kd d 3
Sh = = 1.62 Re Sc for Re < 2100 (3.42)
D l
u0 d
Where, Re = ; Sc =
D
1
kd d 3
Sh = e = 1.85 Re Sc e for Re < 2100
D l
u0 d e
Where, Re = ; Sc =
D
Sh = 0.023 ( Re ) ( Sc )
0.8 0.33
(3.44)
kr
= 0.285 ( Re ) ( Sc )
0.55 0.33
Sh = (3.45a)
D
In the above relation, Reynolds number is defined on stirrer speed ( ) in rad/s as,
r 2
Re = . The above relation is valid when Re<32000. For Re>32,000, the following
relation is used.
kr
= 0.0443 ( Re ) ( Sc )
0.8 0.33
Sh = (3.45b)
D
stirred cell, this can easily be done by increasing stirring. For a continuous system, the
feed is allowed to flow tangentially over the membrane surface and the growth of
concentration boundary layer is arrested. Since the direction of feed flow is normal to the
direction of the permeate flow, the system is defined as a cross flow system.
i.e., throughput of the process and the permeate quality (permeate concentration or
observed retention).
For membrane separation systems, where, osmotic pressure plays important and limiting
role, osmotic pressure model is used to predict the system performance. Eq, (3.36)
represents the flux as a function of operating pressure and osmotic pressure difference
across the membrane. The osmotic pressure across the membrane is expressed as,
= m p (3.46)
Using the osmotic pressure relation for concentrated solution Eq.(3.13c), Eq.(3.46) can be
expressed as,
Since real retention is constant for a membrane solute system, using Eq.(3.3), permeate
C p = Cm (1 Rr ) (3.48)
Combining Eqs.(3.47) and (3.48), the osmotic pressure difference can be expressed in
terms of Cm only.
Cm Rr
J = k ln
C C (1 R )
(3.50)
0 m r
Therefore, Eqs. (3.36) and (3.50) can be solved simultaneously with two unknowns J and
It may be mentioned that osmotic pressure model can be used for reverse osmosis,
performance.
J
ek =1 (3.51)
J = L p [ P bRr C0 ] (3.52)
J
1+
J = L p P bRr C0 k (3.54)
J
Rr + (1 Rr ) 1 +
k
The above solution results into a quadratic in J and can be solved, explicitly.
J
J = L p P bC0 1 + (3.55)
k
Lp ( P bC0 )
J= (3.56)
bC L
1+ 0 p
k
1
Lp =
Rm
as,
P bC0
J= (3.57)
bC
Rm + 0
k
Here, the first term in denominator represents the membrane resistance and the second
term in the denominator represents the mass transfer resistance and both are in series.
Cm C p J
= exp (3.58)
C0 C p k
Cp
Using the definition of real retention, Rr = 1 , one can write C p = Cm (1 Rr ) .
Cm
Cp
Using the definition of observed retention, Ro = 1 , one can write, C p = C0 (1 R0 ) .
Co
Thus, Cm and Cp in Eq.(3.58) can be replaced and that equation can be expressed as,
Cp
Cp J
1 Rr
=e k
(3.59)
Cp
Cp
1 R0
J
R0 e k
Rr = vw
(3.60)
R0 e + (1 R0 )
K
R R J
ln 0 = ln r (3.61)
1 R0 1 Rr k
steady state values of the permeate flux and observed retention are noted. A plot of
R J
ln 0 versus would be a straight line, as shown in Fig. 3.12. From the intercept
1 R0 k
Rr from intercept
R J /k
ln 0
1 R0
J
k
Fig. 3.12: Schematic of velocity variation technique
It can be identified that the concept of real retention is nothing but a partition coefficient
between the solute concentration in the permeate and that at the membrane surface.
Hence for a more realistic situation, the solute flux through the membrane is considered
using solution diffusion model described earlier. The osmotic pressure is considered here
starting equations are osmotic pressure equation Eq.(3.36) and the film theory equation,
Eq.(3.41). The osmotic pressure model can be written by inserting the expression of the
J = J 0 1 ( Cm C p ) (3.62)
a
Where, = , J 0 = L p P is the pure water flux. The above equation can be
P
equated with the film theory equation and the following equation is resulted.
Cm C p
J 0 1 ( Cm C p ) = k ln (3.63)
C0 C p
JC p = B ( Cm C p ) (3.64)
Cm C p
J 0 1 ( Cm C p ) = B (3.65)
Cp
Cm C p
1 Cm + C p =
Cp
(3.66)
B
Where, = . From above equation, the membrane surface concentration is obtained
vw0
as,
1
Cm = C p 1 + (3.67)
+ C p
vw0 Cp
k ln =0 (3.68)
Cp + ( C p + )( C0 C p )
Again, a trail and error solution for Cp is sought using some standard iterative technique.
J = L p ( P ); (3.69)
J = L p P a ( Cm C p ) (3.70)
From the film theory equation, the membrane surface concentration can be expressed as,
J
Cm = C p + ( C0 C p ) e k (3.71)
J
J = L p P a ( C0 C p ) e k (3.72)
the definition of real retention or solution diffusion model, Eq.(3.64). After that,
incorporating the convective transport of the solutes through the pores, in addition to the
diffusive transport. Thus, this model is more applicable for more porous membrane. The
JC p = ( Cm C p ) + (1 ) JCavg (3.73)
Cm C p
Where, Cavg =
C
ln m
Cp
J
(1 ) ( C0 C p ) e k
C p = ( C0 C p ) e k + (3.74)
J C C p Jk
ln 1 + 0 e
Cp
We have 3 equations (3.69), (3.71) and (3.3) and 3 unknowns in Cm, Cp and J. We can
boundary layer outside the membrane in the flow channel by film theory has certain
transfer analogy.
These effects are more prominent for ultrafiltration. As, for RO, permeate flux is
transfer coefficient
The schematic of the flow geometry and flow pattern in a rectangular thin channel is
x
Flow y h/2
Membrane J
The following assumptions are made: (i) steady state, fully developed, laminar flow; (ii)
permeation rate is negligible compared to cross flow rate and hence the parabolic velocity
profile remains intact; (iii) there is no adsorption of solute on the membrane surface.
Under these assumptions, the solute balance equation in the thin concentration boundary
layer becomes,
c c 2c
u +v =D 2 (3.75)
x y y
The above equation is coupled with the momentum balance equations in x and y
directions and the coupling points are the velocity components in x and y direction. This
complicates the calculation procedure. To overcome this, the velocity fields can be
decoupled without compromising the physical understanding of the system using the
assumption (i) and (ii). By virtue of this, it is safely assumed that the x-component
3 yh
2
u( y) = u 0 1 (3.76)
2 h
Therefore, we are dealing with a problem where the hydrodynamic boundary layer is
completely developed and the mass transfer boundary layer is still developing. Assuming
the mass transfer boundary layer is very thin, the domain of applicability of the velocity
profile given by Eq.(3.76) becomes negligible compared to the physical dimension of the
channel. In other words, within thin concentration boundary layer where, Eq.(3.76) is
valid, the dimension y is much less than channel half height h. This further simplifies
2
Eq.(3.77) by opening up the square and neglecting the term y . Therefore, the x-
h2
3u 0 y
u( y) = (3.77)
h
Within the thin concentration boundary layer, it is further assumed that the y-component
v = J ( x) (3.78)
Inserting these velocity profiles in Eq.(3.75), the governing equation of the solute
becomes,
3u0 y c c 2c
J =D 2 (3.79)
h x y y
The above equation is a parabolic partial differential equation. We require one condition
At the edge of the concentration boundary layer, the concentration is almost the feed
concentration. Therefore,
The above boundary condition requires some discussion. Since, the thickness of the mass
transfer boundary is very small compared to the channel height, therefore, concentration
remains almost unchanged in the channel, beyond the boundary layer. Thus, any location
in the channel cross section can be assumed to be located at infinity. Hence, the boundary
At y = , c=c0 (3.82)
This enables Eq.(3.79) to be eligible for having a similarity solution. The other boundary
condition at the membrane surface is that at the steady state all fluxes towards the
membrane is zero.
C
JC + D = JC p (3.83)
y
Now, let us find out the similarity parameter for this system of equations. The similarity
parameter is obtained by evaluating the governing equation (Eq. 3.79) at the edge of the
c
mass transfer boundary layer, recognizing the fact that at this location the term =0.
y
3u 0 y c 2c
=D 2 (3.84)
h x y
obtain,
3u 0 c c
D 2 (3.85)
h x
From the above equation, the spatial variation of the concentration boundary layer is
obtained.
1
hDx 3
= (3.86)
3u
0
1
y u 3 y
1 = = 0 1 (3.87)
hD 3
x
We have carried out the above analysis in the dimensional form to show that ultimately
the similarity parameter turns out to be non-dimensional. Now, the partial derivatives in
1
c dc 1 u0 3 y 1 1 dc
= = (3.88)
x d1 3 hD 13 x 3 x d1
x
1
c u0 3 1 dc
= (3.89)
y hD 13 d1
x
2
2 c u0 3 1 d 2 c
= (3.90)
y 2 hD 32 d12
x
Substituting the above derivatives in Eq.(3.79), the following equation is obtained after
simplification.
1
2 J hx dc = d c
3 2
(3.91)
1 u0 D 2 d1 d12
Since mass transfer boundary layer varies directly as one third power with x, the
1
J 1
(3.92)
x 3
1
In other words, Jx 3 = constant. Therefore, the following equation can be written,
1
hx 3
J 2
= cons tan t = A1 (3.93)
u D
0
d 2c dc
= 12 A1 (3.94)
d12
d1
In the above equation, all the quantities except c is non-dimensional. Therefore, the
d 2 c* dc*
= 2
A (3.95)
d12
1
d1
1
dc* 13
= K 3 exp A11 (3.96)
d1 3
13
c (1 ) = K 3 exp
*
A11 d1 + K 4 (3.97)
0 3
dc*
at 1 = 0 , + A1 cm* Rr = 0 (3.98)
d1
at 1 = , c* = 1 (3.99)
From Eq.(3.97), it may be observed that the membrane surface concentration is evaluated
at 1 = 0 , i.e., cm* = K 4 . Applying the boundary conditions, Eqs.(3.98) and (3.99), the
A1 Rr
K3 = (3.100)
1 A1 Rr I1
1
K 4 = cm* = (3.101)
1 A1 Rr I1
3
and, I1 = exp 1 A1 d1 (3.102)
0 3
The non-dimensional form of the osmotic pressure relation (Eq. 3.36) in this case
becomes,
( )
Pew x * = B1 (3.103)
P
1
1
d 3 3
1
Jd
Pew = e = 4 3 A1 Re Sc e x* (3.104)
D L
1
x* (3.105)
1
d 3
4 Re Sc e
3
With the above formulation, it is possible to calculate the permeate flux profile along the
At a particular x* location,
(vii) If convergence is achieved in the previous step, calculation for the next axial
1 1
1 1 1
d 3 d 3
1
The above equation is rearranged to express the constant A1 in terms of length averaged
permeate flux.
A1 = 0.421 (3.107)
Pew
1 = 1
(3.108)
de 3
Re Sc L
3
I1 = exp 1 0.4211 d1 (3.109)
0 3
C
y y =0
k= (3.110)
Cm C0
1
u 3 dC
*
( m )
k C 1 = D 0
*
hxD d1 1 =0
(3.111)
1
K 3 u0 D 2 3
k = (3.112)
K 4 1 hx
Combining Eqs.(3.100), (3.101) and (3.112) and after simplification, the following
equation is obtained.
1
1 u D2 3
k ( x) = 0 (3.113)
I 1 hx
1 1
1
43 de 3 * 3
Sh( x* ) = Re Sc L ( x ) (3.114)
I1
1
1
2.381 de 3
Sh = Sh( x* )dx* = Re Sc (3.115)
0
I1 L
3
I1 = exp 1 d1 = 1.288 (3.116)
0 3
1
d 3
Sh = 1.85 Re Sc e (3.117)
L
The above equation is same as the Leveque solution for flow through a thin channel.
For a typical reverse osmosis and ultrafiltration system, the suction parameter 1
vary from low value to upto about 10. The variation of 1/I1 with 1 is shown in Fig. 3.**,
and the results are fitted in the form of a third degree polynomial and the final expression
1
d 3
Sh = 1.85 Re Sc e 1 + 0.321 + 0.0212 8.05 104 13 (3.118)
L
Tubular Module
The detailed derivation of Sherwood number for such a case is available in literature. The
corresponding equation for Sherwood number becomes,
Pew
Where, 2 = 1
.
d 3
Re Sc
L
condition), presented by Eq.(3.83) holds good at the membrane surface (y=0), over the
element of length x, between x and x+x (i.e., at every x-location on the membrane
surface). Now, if the element x is considered as the membrane length itself, then all the
C
J ( Cm C p ) = D (3.120)
y y =0
In the above equation, vw, cm, cp, etc., all are length averaged values. This equation can be
J ( Cm C p ) = k L ( Cm C0 ) (3.121)
In the above equation, all the quantities are length averaged. The non-dimensional form
ShL 1
Pew = 1 * (3.122)
Rr Cm
Jd e k L de
Where, Pew = and Sh L = .
D D
The non-dimensional form of the Darcys law or osmotic pressure relationship (Eq. 3.36)
Pew = B1 1 (3.123)
P
The expression of length averaged Sherwood number is derived for different geometries,
flow regimes and rheologies, which are essentially functions of length averaged permeate
flux ( Pew ). For example, Eq.(3.118) for Newtonian fluid, laminar flow. The appropriate
expression of average Sherwood number may be inserted in Eq.(3.122). Eqs. (3.122) and
(3.123) are then solved by simultaneously using trial and error. Therefore, it is noted that
using similarity solution method, the governing partial differential equation along with its
boundary conditions and osmotic pressure relationship finally boil down to two non-
It may be emphasized that the permeate flux, membrane surface concentration, etc.,
obtained by this method are all length averaged quantities and profiles of these are not
powerful tool to estimate quickly the behavior of the state variables of the systems.
In case of the filtration in an unstirred batch cell, we assume that the permeate volume is
much less than the feed volume. Therefore, the feed volume remains almost constant
leading to the unchanged concentration of the feed. The species mass balance equation
C C 2C
+v =D 2 (3.124)
t y y
In the above equation, it may be assumed that within thin concentration boundary layer,
v = J (3.125)
C C 2C
J =D 2 (3.126)
t y y
The above equation is a parabolic partial differential equation. The pertinent initial
condition is
At the membrane surface, assuming no adsorption of solutes, total flux towards the
membrane surface becomes zero. This results in the following boundary condition at the
membrane surface,
C
at y=0, J (Cm C p ) + D =0 (3.128)
y
We require one more boundary condition on y as Eq.(3.3) is second order with respect to
Since, the thickness of concentration boundary layer is in the order of micron and the
solute concentration is at c0 from the edge of the boundary layer to the bulk of the feed
R 2 C * C * 2C *
Pew * = *2 (3.131)
D t y y
of time. It may be noted that using the above analysis, the non-dimensional form of time
form becomes,
C * C * 2C *
Pew * = *2 (3.132)
y y
at = 0 , C* = 1 (3.133)
C *
at y*=0, + Pew Cm* Rr = 0 (3.134)
y *
at y*=, C* = 1 (3.135)
Any governing equation is valid inside as well as on the boundary of the control volume.
Thus evaluating Eq.(3.132) at the edge of the boundary layer and recognizing the fact that
C *
at the edge of boundary layer = 0 , the following equation is evolved:
y*
C * 2C *
= *2 (3.136)
y
obtain,
C * C *
(3.137)
2
From the above equation, the time variation of the concentration boundary layer is
obtained.
= (3.138)
y y
= = (3.139)
Now, the partial derivatives in Eq.(3.9) can be expressed in terms of the similarity
parameter,
C * dC * 1 y* dC *
= = (3.140)
d 2 d
C * dC * 1 dC * (3.141)
= =
y* d y * d
2C * 1 dC * 1 dC * 1 d 2C *
= = = (3.142)
y*2 y * d d y* d 2
Substituting these partial derivatives in Eq.(3.132), the following second order ordinary
d 2C *
*
dC
= + J (3.143)
d 2 2 d
boundary layer,
1
J (3.144)
J = constant=A (3.145)
d 2C *
*
dC
= + A (3.146)
d 2 2 d
dC *
at = 0 , + ACm* Rr = 0 (3.147)
d
at = , C* = 1 (3.148)
dC * 2
= K1 exp A (3.149)
d 4
One more integration of the above equation results the profile of the concentration,
2
c * ( ) = K 1 exp A d + K 2 (3.150)
0
4
K 1 + ARr K 2 = 0 (3.151)
K1 I1 + K 2 = 1 (3.152)
2
I 1 = exp A (3.153)
0
4
ARr
K1 = (3.154)
1 ARr I
1
and K 2 = Cm* = (3.155)
1 ARr I
The above formulation must be coupled with the osmotic pressure model, assuming there
Pew ( ) = B1 (3.156)
P
concentration becomes,
[ ] [ ]
Where, b1 = a1c0 Rr ; b2 = a 2 c 02 1 (1 Rr ) ; b3 = a3 c 03 1 (1 Rr3 ) .
2
(iv) Definite integral I is evaluated from Eq.(3.153) (the upper limit of this
(vi) The values of Cm* from steps (i) and (v) are compared and if they are
It may be noted that the convergence is faster if the guess value of membrane
Mass transfer coefficient is a vital design parameter for the design of membrane
C
k (Cm C0 ) = D (3.158)
y y =0
becomes,
C * 1 dC * K
* 1
kR y y* = 0 d =0
Sh = = = = (3.159)
D ( Cm 1)
*
( Cm 1)
*
K 2 1
By substituting the expressions of K1 and K2 from Eqs.(3.154) and (3.155) in the above
1
Sh = (3.160)
I
A gel can be formed over the membrane surface due to two ways,
(i) Membrane surface concentration increases with pressure or along the length
or a channel and it can exceed the solubility limit of the solutes at that
temperature. Thus, the solid particles settle over the membrane surface as a
gel.
(ii) Some solutes form a thick viscous layer of constant concentration over the
membrane surface from the very beginning of the filtration. For example,
PVA (poly vinyl alcohol), pectin etc. It is assumed that solute concentration in
the gel layer is constant. Theory for the gel layer controlling filtration is
The steady state permeate flux is obtained from film theory as,
Cg
J = k ln (3.161)
C0
In most of the realistic cases, gel layer grows with time and then attain a steady
C = C0
y=0
C = Cg
y =
y=+L
Permeate flux, J
Fig. 3.14: Formation of gel layer and mass transfer boundary layer over the membrane
There exists a concentration boundary layer beyond gel layer. Where the
concentration varies from C0 to Cg. Within the gel layer, Cg remains constant. Solute
dL dC
Solute balance = g = JC D (3.162)
dt dy
J
Cg C0 exp
dL k
g =J (3.165)
dt J
1 exp
k
Please note that the Eq. (3.165) at steady state is reduced to film theory equation.
P
J= (3.166)
( Rm + Rg )
Rg = (1 g ) g L (3.167)
Where, = specific gel layer resistance; g = gel porosity; g = gel layer density and L =
180 (1 g )
= (3.168)
g3 g d p2
Eq. (3.165) to (3.168) can be solved simultaneously and numerically to obtain L and J as
a function of time.
This can be estimated from the experiments conducted in unstirred batch cell. The
1 dV
J= (3.169)
A dt
V = cumulative volume
1 dV P
=
A dt ( Rm + Rg )
P
= (3.170)
R
Rm 1 + g
Rm
P
Noting, J w0 = pure water flux =
Rm
1 dV J w0
= (3.171)
A dt R
1+ g
Rm
LA (1 g ) g = C0V (3.172)
C0V
Rg = (3.173)
A
1 dV J w0
= (3.174)
A dt C0
1+ V
ARm
C0 2
V + V = AJ wt
0
(3.175)
2 ARm
t 1 C
= 0
+ 2 00 V (3.176)
V AJ w 2 A J w Rm
A plot of t/V vs V would result in a straight line. The slope can give an estimate
= 0 ( P )
n
(3.177)
Estimation of g, dp:
V0 = d 3p (3.178)
6
Volume of 1 mole = N A d 3p , NA = Avagadro number
6
Cg
Number of moles in 1 m3 solution = 103
Mw
Cg
Thus, volume of gel in 1 m3 solution is = 103 NA d 3p
Mw 6
Cg
g = 1 103 NA d 3p (3.179)
Mw 6
1 g
0 ( P ) =
n
180 (3.180)
3 2
g d p g
Eq. (3.180) has only one variable dp on the right hand side as g can be expressed in terms
of dp by Eq. (3.179).
Eq. (3.180) can be solved using Newton-Raphson technique to obtain dp and g at various
values of P.
It may be mentioned that above method is for malleable particles like polymeric and
polysaccharide solutes. For proteins and colloids, hard sphere diameter is considered as
dp.
k increasing
J
ln Cg
ln C0
All the curves are extrapolated and they cut at ln Cg on the axis.
It is a black box approach. Various resistances are presented in series and flux is
proposed as,
P
J= (3.181)
( Rm + Rg + Rbl + Rirr )
resistance and Rirr is irreversible membrane resistance. These resistances are related to the
operating conditions.
In this section, design equations of various modules under various flow regimes have
the equations for membrane module is carried out in step by step manner, with increasing
order of complexity. First, the case is considered when the permeate flux is constant.
and negligible osmotic pressure build up across the membrane. Finally, the inclusion of
The flow through a spiral wound module can be reasonably approximated as the flow
through a rectangular channel when the module is opened up. In this case, we consider
the permeate flux is constant. This situation corresponds to the case, where, very dilute
solution is filtered. The assumptions involved are: (i) the flow is steady; (ii) no
concentration build up over the membrane surface, leading to almost constant permeate
flux; (iii) permeation rate is negligible compared to bulk cross flow; (iv) the flow regime
Qout
Qin h
x=0 vw x=L
For slit flow with impermeable wall, the volumetric flow rate at any axial x-location can
2h 3 w dP
Q= (3.182)
3 dx
For impermeable channel, the volumetric flow rate is constant and therefore pressure is a
linear function of axial location. At this point the definition of pressure needs to be
clarified. P in Eq.( 3.182) is absolute value of pressure at any axial location. The term
dP
represents the axial pressure drop. It may be noted here that the pressure in the
dx
P( x) = P ( x) Patm (3.183)
dP dP
= (3.184)
dx dx
Therefore, variation of pressure inside the channel along the axial direction is equivalent
The volumetric flow rate (Q) is not constant for membrane channel. In case of membrane
channel, permeation occurs through the walls of the channel. Therefore, the volumetric
flow rate is a decreasing function of x due to loss of the materials. Now, consider, a
differential element of the membrane channel. The overall material balance over the
differential element leads to the governing equation of change of volumetric flow rate at
the steady,
Q x Q x +x p J (2wdx) = 0 (3.185)
The factor 2 appears in Eq.( 3.185), because of there is suction across the membrane wall
from both sides of the channel. Assuming, the density of the feed and permeate are same,
dQ
= 2 wJ (3.186)
dx
2 h 3 w d 2 P dQ
= (3.187)
3 dx 2 dx
Combining Eqs.(3.186) and (3.187), the explicit expression for profile of transmembrane
d 2 P 3
= 3 J (3.188)
dx 2 h
Since, the above equation is a second order ordinary differential equation, two boundary
conditions are required to solve the same. It may be remembered that only the inlet
conditions are specified for this problem. Therefore, we have to formulate two distinct
boundary conditions from the inlet conditions (at x=0). The first one is that the
P = Pi (3.189)
The second inlet information that is known to us is the flow rate. This is directly obtained
from Eq.(3.182),
dP 3
= 3 Qi (3.190)
dx 2h w
It is interesting to note that this problem is a typical example where both the boundaries
are specified at the same location and one is dirichlet (value of dependent variable
specified) and the other one is neumann (derivative of the dependent variable is
specified). Thus, this problem is truly an initial value problem. Eq.(3.188) is now solved
using the boundary conditions given by Eqs.(3.189) and (3.190) and the solution is given
below,
3 2 Jwx
Pi P ( x) = 3
Qi x 1 (3.191)
2hw 2Qi
3 2 JwL
Pi P ( L) = 3
Qi L 1
2hw 2Qi
(3.192)
f
= ( P ) vw = 0 1
2
In the above equation, f is the fractional permeate recovery which is the ratio of total
permeate flow rate to total inlet flow rate. Physically, f indicates the fraction of the net
material entering into the system is recovered in the permeate stream. Higher be the value
Tubular module
The above analysis is carried out for tubular module as described below.
For tubular flow with impermeable wall, the volumetric flow rate at any axial x-location
R 4 dP
Q= (3.193)
8 dx
Overall material balance over a differential element located between x and x+x, at the
( Q x Q x +x ) p J ( 2 Rx ) = 0 (3.194)
dQ
= 2 RJ (3.195)
dx
dQ R 4 d 2 P
=
2
(3.196)
dx 8 dx
Equating Eqs. (3.195) and (3.196), the governing equation of trnsamembrane pressure
drop is obtained,
d 2 P 16
= 3 J (3.197)
dx 2 R
Eqs.(3.189) and (3.190) present the boundary conditions for the above equation. The
solution is as follows,
8 JRx
Pi P ( x) = Qi x 1 (3.198)
R 4
Qi
The axial pressure drop over the module length L is given as,
8 f
Pi PL = Qi L1 (3.199)
R 4
2
2RLv w
f = (3.200)
Qi
negligible
In this case, the concentration polarization is assumed to be negligible. This indicates, the
osmotic pressure generated in the feed channel is small compared to the transmembrane
pressure difference and the feed channel has uniform solute concentration at the entry
level. Therefore, the permeate flux at any x-location of the module is proportional to the
J = LP P (3.201)
Eq.(3.188):
d 2 P 3LP
= P (3.202)
dx 2 h3
Using the boundary conditions presented by Eqs. (3.189) and (3.190), the profile of
P ( x) 3 Qi
= cosh(x) sinh(x) (3.203)
Pi 2 h 3 w Pi
3 Qi
Pi P ( x) = Pi [1 cosh (x )] + sinh (x ) (3.204)
2 h 3 w
3L p
Where, the parameter is given as, = .
h3
The axial pressure drop over the full length of the module is obtained by substituting x
by L.
3 Qi
Pi P ( L) = Pi [1 cosh (L )] + sinh (L ) (3.205)
2 h 3 w
The fractional recovery of the feed over the complete module is given as,
L
2wLp P( x)dx
Qp 2wLp Pi 3Qi
f = = = sinh(L) 3 {cosh(L) 1}
0
Qi Qi Qi 2h wPi
(3.206)
3 Q
J ( x) = LP Pi cosh( x ) 3 i sinh ( x ) (3.207)
2h wPi
The profile of cross flow velocity is obtained by substituting flow rate Q = 2 xhu in
Eq.(3.186).
du J
= (3.208)
dx h
Expression of permeate flux is then substituted in Eq.(3.208) from (3.207) and integration
u
L p Pi x 3Qi
u du = h 0 2h 3 wPi sinh (x ) cosh(x ) dx (3.209)
i
Carrying out the above integration, the profile of cross flow velocity along the module
length is obtained.
u( x) Lp Pi 3Qi
= 1 sinh(x) 3 {cosh(x) 1} (3.210)
ui hui 2h wPi
The cross flow velocity at the channel outlet is obtained by substituting x by L in the
above equation. Since, the membrane is completely retentive membrane, the species
d ( uC 2 wh ) = 0 (3.211)
The channel dimensions remain constant, the above expression reduces to the following
equation,
u ( x)C ( x) = ui Ci (3.212)
Combining Eq.( 3.212) and (3.210), the profile of bulk concentration is obtained as,
C ( x) u 1
= i = (3.213)
Ci u ( x) L P 3 Q
1 p i sinh( x) 3 i {cosh( x) 1}
h ui 2h wPi
The bulk concentration at the module outlet is obtained by putting L in lace of x in the
above equation.
Tubular module
In case of tubular module, the cross sectional averaged velocity is obtained from
Eq.(3.193),
R 2 dP
u= (3.214)
8 dx
The above equation is valid assuming that the permeation velocity is so less, it does not
affect magnitude of cross flow velocity, keeping its parabolic profile intact. Eq.(3.214)
dP 8
= 2u (3.215)
dx R
Writing down the material balance over a differential element, the governing equation of
u ( u + du ) R 2 p J 2 Rdx = 0 (3.216)
Assuming the feed and permeate density do not vary much, the governing equation of
du 2J
= (3.217)
dx R
du 2 L p P
= (3.218)
dx R
d 2 P 16L p
= P (3.219)
dx 2 R3
Eqs(3.189) and (3.190) are the boundary condition of the above equation. Therefore, the
16L p 8 u i
where, m = and = . The profile of axial pressure drop along the module
R 3
mR 2
becomes,
between x=0 and any location in the module, the profile of cross section averaged
velocity is obtained,
u 2L p
= 1 [Pi sinh(mx) + {1 cosh (mx )}] (3.224)
ui mR
given as,
C ( x) u 1
= i = (3.225)
Ci u ( x) 2 Lp
1 Pi sinh( x) {cosh( x) 1}
mR
membrane
In this section, we have developed the one dimensional design equations for membrane
modules. The model is fairly detailed. The osmotic pressure and effects of concentration
polarization are included. The membrane is considered as partially retentive. The effects
of suction on the mass transfer coefficient are also included. The section is divided into
several subsections, each elaborates calculation procedure for various types of fluids,
In this case, the governing equation of transmembrane pressure drop is obtained from
Eq.(3.182) as
dP 3Q
= 3 (3.226)
dx 2h w
By substituting the flow rate as Q = 2 whu in above equation, the governing equation of
dP 3 u
= 2 (3.227)
dx h
The governing equation for cross flow velocity is subsequently obtained from Eq.( 3.208)
which is directly derived from Eq.( 3.186). Osmotic pressure across the membrane is not
neglected in this case. The permeate flux through the membrane is expressed by Darcys
J = Lp ( P ) (3.228)
Using Eqs. (3.3), (3.47) and (3.228), the permeate flux can be expressed as a
{ (
J = L p P B1cm Rr B2 cm 2 1 (1 Rr )
2
) + B c (1 (1 R ) )}
3 m
3
r
3
(3.229)
d (uC ) J .C p
= (3.230)
dx h
dC J
u. = .(C C p ) (3.231)
dx h
Thus, three ordinary differential equations are arrived at for three independent variables
C
k ( Cm C ) = D ( ) y =0 (3.232)
y
At the steady state, summation all the fluxes towards the membrane surface is zero. This
C
J ( Cm C p ) = D ( ) y =0 (3.233)
y
Combining Eqs. (3.3), (3.232) and (3.233), the following expression is obtained,
k ( Cm C ) = JCm Rr (3.234)
Combining Eqs.(3.229) and (3.234), the following algebraic equation for membrane
k ( Cm C )
= P ( A1Cm + A2Cm 2 + A3Cm3 ) (3.235)
Cm Rr Lp
1 3
1 uD 2
k ( x ) = (3.236)
I hx
3
I = exp 0.42 d (3.237)
0 3
1
dL 3
=J e 2 (3.238)
uD
L
1
J=
L J ( x ) dx
0
(3.239)
For impervious conduit (no suction), the value of is zero and the value of I becomes,
I = 1.2879 .
Tubular module:
dP 32 u
= (3.240)
dx d2
du 4J
= (3.241)
dx d
and that for the solute concentration is obtained by carrying out a solute mass balance in
dC 4 J
u
dx
=
d
(C C p ) (3.242)
The expression of permeate flux remains same as Eq. (3.229). The equation
relating the membrane surface concentration with the bulk concentration through mass
transfer coefficient remains as Eq.(3.234). The mass transfer coefficient for the tubular
1
1 u D2 3
k = (3.243)
I 1 d x
8 3 2
I 1 = exp d (3.244)
0 9 3
flux represented as in Eq.(3.239). For impervious conduit (without suction, =0), the
In case of turbulent flow regime, the governing equations of cross flow velocity and
solute concentration remain same as Eqs.(3.208) and (3.231). The governing equation of
transmembrane pressure drop is obtained by carrying out an overall energy balance over
the differential element. The energy balance equation in the differential element becomes,
( u + du )
2
u2 Am J 2 2 4 f dx u 2
P ( P + dP ) +
2
2
+
Q 2
( u vw ) = 2d (3.245)
e
where, Am is the area of the permeation. In the differential element, Am=2 w dx. It
may be noted here that P in Eq.(3.245) is the gauge pressure and since the permeate is
transmembrane pressure drop. Inserting the definition of Am in Eq.( 3.245), the following
equation is obtained,
wJ wvw 4 fu 2
d P ( u du ) + u dx
2
J dx =
2
dx (3.246)
Q Q 2d e
The equivalent diameter is defined as d e 4h for a thin channel. Using the definition of
d P du w J wJ fu 2
= u + u2 J2 (3.247)
dx dx Q Q 2h
du
Replacing the flow rate, Q=2xhu and from Eq.(3.208), the governing
dx
equation of the transmembrane pressure drop across the module length is obtained as,
d P J3
= 3u J fu 2 (3.248)
dx 2h u
The fanning friction factor, f for the turbulent flow in a smooth pipe is given by Blasius
formula,
0.079
f = (3.249)
Re 0.25
In Eq.( 3.249), Reynolds number is defined based on the equivalent diameter. The
expression of permeate flux remains same as Eq.( 3.229). The equation relating the
membrane surface concentration with the bulk concentration through mass transfer
coefficient remains as Eq.( 3.232). The mass transfer coefficient for the turbulent flow
1
0.236 D Re1.75 Sc 3
k ( x) = 2 (3.250)
I xd e
3
I = exp 2.82 d (3.251)
0
3
vw
= 1
(3.252)
Re Sc
1.75 3
D 2
de L
Where, J is the length averaged permeate flux defined as Eq.(3.239). For impervious
present the governing equations of cross flow and solute concentration. An energy
balance over the differential element like the spiral wound module, the following
d P 2 v w3
= 3u v w fu 2 (3.253)
dx d u
The mass transfer coefficient for the tubular module is derived by Minnikanti et al. and
Eqs. (3.250) to (3.252) remain in the same form; only de is replaced by the tube diameter
d.
3.23 Dialysis
gradient. The schematic of a batch and continuous dilayzer are shown in Figs. 3.17 a and
3.17 b.
Dialysate
chamber
Feed chamber
Membrane
In a batch system there is a level difference after some time as both solute and
Continuous System:
dCim Cim
= Dim = Dim (3.254)
dx L
Here, Dim = Diffusivity through the membrane ; L = membrane thickness
Dim F
Ni =
L
(
Cim CimD ) (3.255)
It is assumed that,
CimF CimD
= mi = (3.256)
CiF CiD
mi = distribution coefficient . Thus, the solute flux across the membrane becomes
Dim
Ni =
L
(
mi CiF CiD ) (3.257)
Here, mi = 0.5 for urea in water and regenerated cellulose and Dim 1011 m 2 /s .
Determination of Dim:
DiB
Dim = Fdrag (3.258)
Where, DiB = bulk diffusivity ; = membrane porosity ; = tortuosity
3 5
r ri ri
= 1 2.1 i + 2.09 0.95 (3.259)
rs rs rs
Various resistive films of liquids across the membrane is shown in Fig. 3.18 (a) and 3.18
(b).
F D
Rf Rd
CiF
CiF CiD
CiD
The solute flux across the membrane in the various flow domains are presented below:
CiF CiF
Ni = (Across liquid film in feed)
Rf
Dim
= ( CiF CiD ) (Across membrane)
L
CiD CiD
= (Across dialysate side) (3.260)
Rd
CiF CiD
Ni = (3.261)
R0
Where, overall resistance is given as,
L
R0 = R f + + Rd (3.262)
Dim
In terms of overall mass transfer coefficient, the overall mass transfer coefficient is
expressed as,
1 1 L 1
= + +
koverall k f Dim kd
1
koverall = (3.263)
1 L 1
+ +
k f Dim kd
The above equation is valid for every location, along the length of the dialyzer.
Calculation of net mass flow rate across the membrane in a dialysate unit:
CiF
COD COF
dm
CiD
C
0 A
dA
VF = volumetric flow rate of feed and VD = volumetric flow rate of dialysate . Mass
dm dm
dCF = ; dCD = (3.266)
VF VD
C = CF CD (3.267)
1 1
d ( C ) = + dm (3.269)
V
F VD
1 1
d ( C ) = + ( k0 dA ) C (3.270)
VF VD
Integration of above equation is carried out between the inlet and exit of the channel,
0
d C 1 1
A
i C VF VD 0 k0 dA
= + (3.271)
C |0 1 1
A
ln = + k0 dA (3.272)
C |i VF VD 0
Integration of Eq.(3.269) results,
0
1 1
m
i ( ) VF VD 0 dm
d C = +
1 1
C |0 C |i = + m (3.273)
VF VD
Combining Eqs. (3.272) and (3.273), the following is the expression of mass transported
( C )0 ( C )i
m ( Kg/s ) = k0 A (3.274)
( C )0
ln
( C )i
Thus, the mass transported can be expressed in terms of overall mass transfer coefficient
m = k0 A ( C ) LMTD (3.275)
1
k0 = (3.276)
1 L 1
+ +
k f Dim kd
VF VD
CiD(t)
d A D
( CiDVD ) = m im ( CiF CiD ) (3.277)
dt L
d A D
( CiFVF ) = m im ( CiF CiD ) (3.278)
dt L
The initial conditions are: at t=0, CiF = CiF0 and CiD = 0 .
Applying Laplace transform to equations (3.277) and (3.278), the following equations
are resulted.
SCiD =
Am Dim
LVD
(
CiF CiD ) (3.279)
SCiF CiF0 =
Am Dim
LVF
(CiF CiD ) (3.280)
Am Dim
Let us take, = K and the above equations become
L
SCiD =
K
VD
(
CiF CiD ) (3.281)
SCiF CiF0 =
K
VF
(
CiF CiD ) (3.282)
K 0
CiF
CiD = VD (3.283)
1 1
S 2 + SK +
VF VD
1 1
Considering, a = K + , the above equation becomes,
VF VD
K CiF0 1 1
CiD = (3.284)
VD a S S +a
Taking inverse laplace, the solution becomes,
K CiF0
CiD ( t ) = (1 e at )
VD a
K + t
1 1
VF
=C 0
iF 1 e VF VD
(3.285)
VF + VD
Now, with measured values of CiD at different time, a plot of CiD with time is shown in
Fig. 3.21.
CiD
Time (t)
C
ln 1 iD = KR2t (3.286)
R1
C
Thus, a plot of time vs ln 1 iD , is a straight line as shown in Fig. 3.22.
R1
C
ln 1 iD
R1
Time (t)
C
Fig. 3.22: Typical variation of time vs ln 1 iD in a batch dialyzer
R1
Am Dim
We get a straight line with a negative slope of KR2, where, K =
L
1 1 D
and R2 = + . Therefore, im can be estimated.
VF VD L
Continuous Dialysis:
3) Film thickness depend upon the geometry and velocity profiles in channel
Design Equations:
mi = k0 Am ( Ci ) LMTD (3.287)
(
mi = VF CiFi CiFe )
= L (C
D iDe CiDi) (3.288)
Using above equations, one can design membrane area for a given separation.
=
(
VF CiFi CiF0 ) (3.289)
VF CiFi LD CiDi
In a dialyzer chamber, select a dialyzer such that diffused components react and
product ions cannot diffuse back and therefore, a maximum concentration gradient is
Mass balance:
dC1F D
VF = Am im ( C1F C1D ) (3.290)
dt L
The above equation is rearranged as,
dC1F Am Dim
= ( C1D C1F ) (3.291)
dt LVF
Solute balance in the dialysis chamber becomes,
dC1D Am Dim dC
= ( C1F C1D ) 3D (3.292)
dt LVD dt
Am Dim
Considering = K , the above equations become,
L
dC1F K
= ( C1D C1F ) (3.293)
dt VF
dC3 D dC1D K
+ = ( C1F C1D ) (3.294)
dt dt VD
C1D = 0
C3 D = 0
At any timet, C3D is in equilibrium. So that,
C3 D
K eq = (3.295)
C1D C2 D
Here, C2D is constant because it is in excess.
Take laplace transform to equations (3.293) and (3.294), the following equations are
obtained.
K
VF
( )
C1D C1F = SC1F C10F (3.296)
K
VD
( )
C1F C1D = SC1D C10F + SC3 D C30D (3.297)
K K V
C1D = + S 1 + D (1 + C2 D ) S C1D C10F (3.298)
VF VF K
By simplifying the above equation finally we get it as,
C10F
C1D = (3.299)
AS + BS 2
VD VD
Where, A = (1 + C2 D ) ; B= (1 + C2 D )
VF K
Laplace inverse can be taken of Eq.(3.299) to obtain the variation of C1D as a function of
time.
C1D = f (t ) (3.300)
Dialysate side
Blood
in x Concentrati
laminar on profile
y
flow
x=0
Dialysate side
impermeable membrane
entrance
A typical dialysis channel with the coordinate system is shown in Fig. 3.24. The origin at
3 y2
u ( y ) = u0 1 2 (3.301)
2 h
C 2C
u =D 2 (3.302)
x y
At x = 0, C = C0 (3.303)
C
=0 at y = 0 (3.304)
y
at y = h; molar flux = PC
Where, P is membrane permeability.
(ii) P includes a partition coefficient for species between blood and membrane
extremely dilute.
C
D = PC at y = h (3.305)
y
Here both terms in the above equation are positive. This is a standard eigen value
C y D Ph
C = ; y = ; x* = x 2
; P* = = Membrane Biot number
C0 h u0 h D
If we substitute the above non-dimensional numbers in the above equation we get
( *2 C
) 2C *
*
3
1 y = *2 (3.306)
2 x* y
Boundary conditions are:
C* = 1 at x* = 0, y* (3.307a)
C *
=0 at y* = 0, x* (3.307b)
y*
C *
+ P*C * = 0 at y* = 1, x* (3.307c)
y*
Analytical solution of the above equation is:
2
C * = Am exp m2 x* anm y*
n
(3.308)
m =1 3 n =0
It is a series solution where, eigen values = m .
3 y2
H
0 2 u0 1 h2 C ( x, y ) dy
Ccm = (3.310)
3 y2
H
0 2 u0 1 h2 dy
The non-dimensional cup-mixing concentration becomes,
Ccm
*
Ccm =
C0
2 2 x* anm
= 3 Am exp m (3.310)
m =1 3 n =0 ( n + 1)( n + 3)
2 5 1 1
0 = P* + P* m2 + + P* m4 (3.311)
3 12 20 45
m2
Here, a0 m = 1; a1m = 0; a2 m = ; a3m = 0
2
m2 ( 2 + m2 ) m4
a4 m =
24
; a5 m = 0; a6 m =
720
(14 + ) ;
2
m a7 m = 0
anm
( n + 1)( n + 3)
n=0
Am = p=n a pm a n p m
( n + 1)(( n +) 3)
n =0 p =0
Simplifications:
Exponential terms decay rapidly and so, use first eigen value,
P*
=
1
2
(3.312)
2 5 *
+ P
3 12
and consider first term of series. A typical plot of cupmixing concentration with axial
*
log Ccm
P*= 1
P* 0
P*= 0.1
0 1 2 3 4
Px
P *x* =
u0h
Simplistic approach:
Take the flow as plug flow. This can be realized at higher flow rate of blood in the feed
1. Plug flow
2. dialysate is dilute
3. steady state
C 2C
u0 =D 2 (3.313)
x y
C y
Take, C * = ; y* = , x*=x/L, the above equation is made non-dimensional.
C0 h
C * 2C *
A = *2 (3.314)
x* y
u0 h 2 1 d
Where, A = = ReSc e .
DL 4 L
C *
At y* = 0; =0 (3.315a)
y*
C
At y = h; D + PC = 0 (3.315b)
y
C *
At y* = 1; + PemC * = 0 (3.315c)
y *
Ph
Where, Pem =
D
At x* = 0; C* = 1 (3.315d)
( ) ( )
Using a separation of variable type solution, C * = X x* Y y*
A dX 1 d 2Y
*
= *2
= n2 (3.316)
X dx Y dy
dX n2 *
Therefore, the X varying part is = dx (3.317)
X A
n2 x*
The solution is X = c1 exp (3.318)
A
d 2Y
The y-varying part is , *2
+ n2Y = 0 (3.319)
dy
The solution is ( )
Y = c3 sin n y * + c4 cos n y* ( ) (3.320)
dY
At y* = 0; =0 (3.321a)
dy*
dY
At y* = 1; + PemY = 0 (3.321b)
dy*
(
Y = c4 cos n y* ) (3.322)
2 x*
C * ( x* , y * ) = cn cos ( n y * ) exp n (3.324)
n =1 A
Initial condition is At x* = 0; C* = 1
1 = cn cos ( n y* ) (3.325)
n =0
functions.
cos ( y ) dy
* *
n
cn = 1
0
(3.326)
cos ( y ) dy
2 * *
n
0
1
sin n y* sin n
1
(
Numerator = cos n y dy = *
) *
n
=
n
0 0
1
1
Denominator =
2 0
(
1 + cos 2n y* dy* )
1 sin 2n
= 1 +
2 2n
1 Pem2 + Pem + n2
Denominator =
2 Pem2 + n2
2sin n Pem2 + n2
So, cn = (3.327)
n Pem2 + Pem + n2
2 x*
( )
C * x* , y * = cn cos n y * exp n
A
( )
n =1
Thus, the cupmixing concentration becomes,
n2 x*
*
Ccm ( ) n A cos ( n )
x *
= c exp
n =1
Ccm =
V ( y ) C ( x, y ) dA
x
V ( y ) dA x
=
u C ( x, y ) dy.W
0
u0 .Wh
h
1
C ( x, y ) dy
h 0
Ccm =
1
*
Ccm = C * x* , y* dy* ( )
0
n2 x* 1
= cn exp
A 0
cos n y
*
( )
By simplifying the above equation we get,
sin n n2 x*
C*
cm (x ) = c
*
n
n
exp
A
(3.328)
( )
M x* = Rate of removal of pollutant
= 2u0 hW ( C0 Ccm )
sin n 2 x*
= 2u0 hWC0 1 cn exp n (3.329)
n A
C
k ( Ccm + Cm ) = D (3.330)
y y* = h
D C *
(
k Ccm
*
+ Cm* = ) h y* y* = h
C *
kh y*
y* = h
Sh = =
D Ccm + Cm*
*
C * n2 x*
y*
= n n
c ( ) sin ( n y *
) exp
A
C * 2 x*
= cn n sin n exp n
y* y* =1 A
C * 2 x*
= c11 sin 1 exp 1
y* y* =1 A
sin 1 12 x*
C *
= c1 exp
cm
1 A
2 x*
( )
Cm* x* = c1 exp 1 cos n
A
2 x* sin n
Cm* Ccm
*
= c1 exp 1 cos n
A n
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 100 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
2 x*
c1 1 sin 1 exp 1
A
Sh =
2 x* sin n
c1 exp 1 cos n
A n
1 sin 1
Sh = (3.331)
sin n
cos n
n
Solved Problems
pure distilled water flux is found to be 4.14x10-6 m3/m2.s at 276 kPa and 8.28x10-6
m3/m2.s at 552 kPa pressure. Under high stirring speed and at 138 kPa pressure and for
0.5 kg/m3 solute concentration, the permeate concentration is obtained as 0.04 kg/m3. The
2 2
osmotic pressure of the solute is given as, = 37.5 10 c + 10c , where, is in Pa and c
is in kg/m3.
Steady state cross flow UF of the solute is now conducted in a rectangular cell with
pressure drop 345 kPa, cross flow velocity 0.5 m/s and solute diffusivity 10-11 m2/s. Find
out the permeate flux and permeate concentration. How much membrane area is required
to produce 500 L/hr of filtrate under the same operating conditions with this solute?
Assume validity of the film theory and the solute concentration in the permeate and the
membrane surface can be related through real retention. Assume viscosity and density are
Solution:
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 101 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
J w = Lp P
Jw
Lp =
P
1 4.14 106 8.28 106
Lp = + = 0.015 109
2 276 103 552 103
m
L p = 1.5 1011
pa.s
Cm Rr
K ln = L p ( P )
C0 Cm (1 Rr )
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 102 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
= B1 ( Cm C p ) + B2 ( Cm2 C p2 )
= B1Cm Rr + B2Cm2 1 (1 Rr )
2
0.92Cm
6.82 107 ln = 1.5 1011 3.45 105 3450Cm 9.94Cm2
10 0.08Cm
0.92Cm
ln = 7.6 1 0.01Cm 2.88 105 Cm2
10 0.08Cm
Cm 11 20 50 60
LHS 0.104 0.784 2.036 2.36
RHS 6.7 6 3.25 2.25
Cm 58 kg / m3
C p = Permeateconcentration = Cm (1 Rr )
= 0.08 58 = 4.64 kg / m3
Cm Rr 58 0.92
J = K ln = 6.82 107 ln
C0 C p 10 4.64
= 1.57 106 m3 / m 2 .s
Productivity = 500 L/hr
500 106 103 3
= m / s = 1.39 104 m3 / s
3600
1.39 104
Area required = 6
= 88.5 m 2
1.57 10
Filtration is gel layer controlled, with gel concentration 300 kg/m3. Filtration takes place
in a thin channel with equivalent diameter 2 mm and width 4 cm. The cross flow velocity
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 103 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
is 0.5 m/s and protein diffusivity is 2 x 10-11 m2/s. If the filtrate rate is 100 L/day, find the
1
d 3
Sh = 1.86 Re Sc e for laminar flow
L
Solution:
C0 = 10 kg / m3 ; Cg = 300 kg / m3 ; d e = 2 103 m; W = 4 cm
u0 = 0.5 m / s; D = 2 1011 m 2 / s
2.92 106
J=
L1/ 3
A = W .L = 0.04 L m 2
J . A = Filtration rate
2.92 106
0.04 L = 1.157 106
L1/ 3
2
L3 = 9.9058
L = 31 m
3. Consider, a batch gel layer controlling cross flow ultrafiltration. The permeate is not
recycled back. The feed is getting concentrated and the feed volume is reduced as time of
operation progresses. Assume, film theory is valid in the cross flow ultrafiltration unit.
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 104 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
The mass transfer coefficient in the ultrafiltration unit is 2 x 10-5 m/s, initial feed
concentration is 1 kg/m3. Effective filtration area of the membrane is 0.2 m2. Gel layer
concentration of the solute is 500 kg/m3. Initial feed volume is 5 liters. Assume that in the
permeate, there is no solute present and always the retentate concentration is much less
than gel concentration (cb<<cg). Find the time required concentrating the feed
concentration 10 times and what is the volume remaining in the feed chamber?
Solution:
C0 = 1 kg / m3 ; Cg = 500 kg / m3 ; K = 2 105 m / s; A = 2 m2
Cg
J = K ln (A1)
Cb
Overall mass balance,
d
( V ) = JA p
dt
By assuming p
dV
= JA (A2)
dt
Overall species balance,
d
( CV ) = 0
dt
C0V0 = CbV (A3)
From equation (A2),
d C0V0 Cg
= KA ln
dt Cb Cb
1 dCb Cg
C0V0 2 = KA ln
Cb dt Cb
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 105 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
dCb KA 2 Cg
= Cb ln
dt C0V0 Cb
dCb KA 2 Cb
= Cb ln
dt C0V0 Cg
KA 2 Cg Cb
= Cb ln 1
C0V0 Cg
KA 2 Cg Cb
= Cb ( )
C0V0 Cg
KA Cb 2
= 1 Cb
C0V0 Cg
KA 2 Cb3
= Cb
C0V0 Cg
dCb KA 2 Cb3
= Cb
dt C0V0 Cg
dCb KA
= dt
C C0V0
Cb2 1 b
C
g
Cb
Cb Cg 1 1
Cg
10 C0
KA
C0
Cb2 dCb = t
C0V0
1 1 KA
= t
C0 10C0 C0V0
V
t = 0.9 0
KA
5 103 106
= 0.9 = 1125 sec
2 105 0.2
18.75 min
C0V0 = CbV
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 106 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
1
V = 5 = 0.5 L
10
channel of length 1m, width 5cm, half height 1mm at a flow rate of 40L/h and
The feed concentration of the membrane is 10 kg/m3 and real retention Rr=1.0.
Solution:
= 2 wh
= 2*0.05*103 m 2 = 104 m 2
Q = 40 L / h = 1.11105 m3 / s
1.11 105
uo = m / s = 0.11m / s
104
de uo d e d e
Re Sc = = 2.93 104
L D L
= 1.5 104 cm Rr
= 1.5 104 cm co
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 107 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
1.5 105 *
= cm = 0.3cm*
p 5 105
From equation (3.123), Pew = B1 1
P
Pew
From equation (3.108), 1 = 1/3
de
Re Sc L
833.33
1 = (1 0.3c )
*
( 2.93 10 )
m
4 1/3
parameter,
Pew 1
1 = 1/3
= 1.85 1 + 0.321 + 0.0212 8.05 104 13 1 * (A2)
de cm
Re Sc L
1 <18.94
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 108 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
1
1 = 1.85 1 + 0.321 + 0.0212 8.05 104 13 1 (A3)
3.33 0.1231
Therefore, 1 =2.24
1
So, Pew =69.05 and w = 69.05 6 104 3
= 1.035 106 m3 / m 2 .s
4 10
So, cm = 30.5kg/m3
S hL = 103.1
k L de
=
D
and B is partially retained by the membrane. The feed mixture contains 10 ppm of A and
B each. The average feed velocity in the channel is 0.3 m/s and channel geometry is
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 109 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
membrane for solute B is 0.8 and the operating pressure is 300 kPa. Use stagnant film
theory. Calculate the permeate flux and permeate quality. A=6000 cA and . B=6000 cB.
Solution viscosity and density are taken to be same as those for water.
Solution:
C A0 = 10 103 = 102 kg / m3 = CB 0
0.5
u0 = 0.3m / s; de 4h = 4 102 m = 3 103 m
2
L = 30 cm = 0.3 m; Lp = 2 1011 N .s / m3
DA = 2 1010 m 2 / s; DB = 4 1010 m 2 / s
A = 6000C A ; B = 6000CB
CmA C pA CmB C pB
J = k A ln = k B ln
C A0 C pA CB 0 C pB
But C pA = 0
CmA CmB C pB
So, J = k A ln = k B ln
C A0 CB 0 C pB
1/3
u D2
k = 1.85 0
de L
1/3
0.3 4 1020
k A = 1.85 3
3 10 0.3
= 4.387 106 m / s
1/3
0.3 16 1020
k B = 1.85 3
3 10 0.3
= 6.96 106 m / s
CmA 0.8CmB
4.387 106 ln 2
= 6.96 106 ln 2
10 10 0.2CmB
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 110 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
80CmB
ln (100CmA ) = 1.586 ln (B1)
1 20CmB
J = L p ( P )
CmA
J = k A ln
C A0
CmA
4.387 106 ln = 6 106 [1 0.02CmA 0.016CmB ]
102
ln (100CmA ) = 1.37 [1 0.02CmA 0.016CmB ] (B2)
1 20CmB ln (100CmA )
= exp
80CmB 1.586
1 1 ln (100CmA )
= + exp
80CmB 4 1.586
1
80CmB =
ln (100CmA )
0.25 + exp
1.586
0.0125
CmB = (B3)
ln (100CmA )
0.25 + exp
1.586
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 111 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
CmA = 0.039 kg / m3
CmB = 0.0187 kg / m3
In permeate = 0.0187 0.08 = 1.496 ppm
0.039
J = 4.387 106 ln
0.01
= 5.97 106 m3 / m 2 .s
6. Water is flowing through a rectangular channel of half height 1 mm and width 8 cm. The
inlet flow rate is 40 L/h. Inlet transmembrane pressure of 500 kPa results in a constant
(e) For a fractional recovery of 0.92 what is the length of the module is required? What is
the axial pressure drop and flow rate at the module exit?
Solution:
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 112 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
3 2v wx
Paxial = 3
Qi x1 w
2h w 2Qi
3 10 3 1.11 10 5 2 2 10 5 0.08 2
= 1
2 ( )3
10 3 0.08 1.11 10 5
= 416.25(1 0.29)
= 296 Pa
2v w wL 2 2 10 5 8 10 2 2
f = = = 0.576
Qi 1.11 10 5
d P 3 Qi 2vw wx
= 1
dx 2 h3 w 2Qi
Combining the above equation with respect to Eq.(3.190), the expression of cross flow
rate is obtained.
2v wx
Q = Qi 1 w
2Qi
Substituting the values of various parameters in the above equation, at the channel exit,
i.e., at x=L,
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 113 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
5 2 2 10 5 0.08 2
Q = 1.11 10 (1 )
1.11 10 5
= 5 10 5 m 3 / s = 28.5 L / h
2v w wL
(e) f = 0.92 =
Qi
For the same flow rate, channel width and suction rate, length required,
1.11 10 5
L = 0.92 = 3.19 3.2 m
2 2 10 5 0.08
3 2v wx
Paxial = 3
Qi x1 w
2h w 2Qi
By putting the numbers in the above equation, axial pressure drop becomes
Paxial = 360 Pa
7. In the above problem, if the half channel height of 0.5 mm. find the (a) axial pressure
drop, (b) transmembrane pressure drop at the module outlet, (c) fractional recovery of the
Solution:
3 10 3
P axial = 1.11 10 5 2(1 0.29 )
2 (0.5 10 3 )3 0.08
= 2364.3 Pa
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 114 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
(c) since, in the expression of fractional feed recovery, channel height does not appear,
f remains as 0.576
(d) Similarly, the flow rate at the channel outlet remains same as 28.5 L/h.
Note: The pressure drop across the module increases as the channel height decreases due
operating pressure at the channel inlet is 5x105 Pa, width 0.08m and channel half length is
1mm. The membrane permeability is 10-11 N.s/m2. The feed flow rate at the channel
entrance is 40 L/h. The length of the channel is 2m. Find out (a) Pressure drop across the
channel (b) Fractional recovery of feed (c) Velocity and (d) concentration at channel
outlet.
Solution:
Pi= 5x105 Pa ; w= 0.08m ; h= 10-3m ; Lp= 10-11 N.s/m2 ; Q= 40 L/h = 1.11x10-5 m3/s ;
L= 2m
Q 1.11 105
uo = = = 0.07 m / s
2hw 2 103 0.08
3 Lp 3 103 1011
= 3
= 9
= 5.48 103
h 10
3 Qi 3 103 1.11105
= = = 0.076
2 h3 wPi 2 109 0.08 5.48 103 5 105
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 115 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
P( L)
= cosh( L) sinh( L) = 1 0.076 0.011 = 0.999
Pi
P( L) =499.50kPa
2 wLp P
f = [sinh( L) (cosh( L) 1)]
Qi
u ( L) L p Pi
= 1 [sinh( L) (cosh( L) 1)]
uo huo
1011 5 105
= 1 [0.011 0] = 0.86
103 5.85 103 0.07
C ( L) u 1
= o = = 1.16
Co u ( L) 0.86
9. In a gel layer controlling ultrafiltration, the specific gel layer resistance is given as,
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 116 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
density is 1050 kg/m3 and gel layer porosity is 0.7. Membrane permeability is 5x10-11
m/Pa.s.
Find the value of limiting operating pressure and what are the values of flux and gel layer
Solution:
P
J=
( Rm + Rg )
Rg = (1 g ) g L
= 0 ( P )
0.3
(1 ) L ( P )
g g 0
0.8
= 0 (1 g ) g L0 ( P )
1.1
= 4.36 108 ( P )
1.1
Rg = Rg 0 ( P ) ,
1.1
where Rg 0 = 4.36 108
P
J=
(
Rm + Rg 0 ( P )
1.1
)
P.Rg 0 1.1( P )
0.1
dJ 1 =0
=
(
d P Rm + Rg 0 ( P )1.1
Rm + Rg 0 ( P )
1.1
) (
2
)
Rm + Rg 0 ( P ) = 1.1Rg 0 ( P )
1.1 0.1
Rm = 0.1Rg 0 ( P )
1.1
10 Rm
( P )
1.1
=
Rg 0
1
0.91
10 Rm 1.1 10 2 1015
P = =
R 8
4.63 10
g0
= 8.876 106 pa
= 8876 kPa
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 117 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
8876 103
J=
2 1015 + 4.63 108 88761.1
= 4.41106 m / s
Rg = 2 1016 m 1
10. In a steady state, counter current dialyzer of rectangular cross section, urea is removed by
pure water as dialysate. Inlet feed concentration is 1500 mg/L. Feed and dialysate flow
rates are 18 L/h and 90 L/h, respectively. Durea in the membrane is 10-12 m2/s and in the
bulk is 10-10 m2/s. membrane thickness is 1 micron. Feed and dialysate chambers are
identical in shape. Width of each channel is 5 mm and height 5 mm. In the feed side, the
urea concentration has to be reduced from 1500 (inlet) to 300 mg/L (outlet).
Find the membrane area required. Neglect mass transfer resistances on both sides.
( ) (
m = VF CiFi CiFe = VD CiD0 CiDi )
(
18 (1500 300 ) = 90 CiD0 0 )
18 1200 = 90CiD0
18 1200
CiD0 = = 240 mg / l
90
(i) Neglecting mass transfer resistance on both sides
k0 = overall mass transfer coefficient
Dim 1012
= = 6 = 106 m / s
L 10
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 118 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
( C )i ( C )0
( C ) LMTD =
( C )i
ln
( C )0
( C )in = CiF i
CiD0 = 1500 240 = 1260 mg / l
( C )out = CiF e
CiDi = 300 0 = 300 mg / l
1260 300
( C ) LMTD = 1260
= 668.95 mg / l
ln
300
l mg
( )
m = VF CiFi CiFe = 18 1200
h l
mg
= 18 1200 = 21.6 g / h
h
m = k0 Am ( C ) LMTD
m 2 mg
= 106 Am 668.5 .m .
s l
g m3
= 106 668.5 Am 10-3 3600
h 103 m3
= 106 668.5 3600 Am g / h
= 2.41Am g / h
21.6 = 2.41Am
Am = 8.96 m 2
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 119 of 120
NPTEL
Novel Separation Processes
References:
2005.
119-131, 1997.
suction for turbulent flow in cross flow ultrafiltration", Journal of Membrane Science,
incorporating the effects of suction in the mass transfer coefficient under laminar flow
(2010) 434-443
Joint Initiative of IITs and IISc - Funded by MHRD Page 120 of 120