Degree of separation of ultrafiltration

Summary of the various membrane processes

The water will be pressed through the membrane between the raw water side and

m
the filtrate side caused by a pressure difference. The selection of the membrane pro-
cess is depending on the type of water ingredients who need to be eliminated.

In principle a distinction is made between the following filtration processes:

co
- reverse osmosis
- nanofiltration
- ultrafiltration
- microfiltration

e.
product service pressure retention of

95 %

it
demineralised
al
water
• univalent ions
es
reverse osmosis
membrane
< 0,001 μm

partially
demineralised
.d

• bivalent ions
nanofiltration • organic compounds
0,01 - 0,001 μm membrane
w

drinking water,
service water,
free of germs
w

• macromolecules
ultrafiltration • viruses
0,1 - 0,01 μm membrane • colloids
w

service water,
with germs

• zooplankton
microfiltration
• algae
> 0,2 μm membrane • turbidity
• bacteria
• suspended particles

inlet raw water

2
Description and advantages

Ultrafiltration (UF)
In ultrafiltration the raw water will be Complete barrier for micro

pressed through small tubes in plas-
tic material with an inner diameter of
approx. 0.5 – 2 mm. The actual filter
medium is the porous walls of these
small tubes whose filter pores have a
m
organisms and particles.
Quality of the filtrate is independent
from the quality of the water inlet.

size of 0.01 – 0.05 µm (for comparison:
a human hair has a diameter of approx.
50 µm – this is 5000 times as much).
Contaminations larger than 0.05 µm will
be kept back reliably and washed out
again in regular time intervals. Dissolved
co
Ultrafiltration will also remove
chlorine resistant germs such as
cryptosporidium.
The concentrate (waste water) will
include only the materials removed

e.
matters and salts can pass through the from the raw water.
membranes of the filter tubes.
The compact system can
The big advantage of ultrafiltration com- considerably reduce construction
pared to conventional filtration methods costs for new developments.

it
is the absolute sterility of the filtered wa-
ter. The pores of the UF membranes are Can be easily included with existing
so tiny, that bacteria and even viruses machinery.
are too large to be able to pass the UF
membrane.
al
Full automation possible.

Bundling of many filtration tubes in filter By removal of almost all film-

modules creates the surface required forming substances all subsequent
for a higher water flow rate. Depending membrane processes, e.g. reverse
es

on the application, the modules have osmosis, can be designed for a

different sizes allowing different filter higher surface load and therefore
capacities. Therefore all water treatment reduced in size.
requirements can be covered.
.d
w

Ultrafiltration (UF) in size comparison with known water germs

Giardia approx. 8 – 15 µm
Cryptosporidium approx. 4 – 6 µm
w

Anthrax spores approx. 1 – 5 µm

w

Legionella species
0,5 - 1,5 μm
Escherichia Coli
0,5 - 1,5 μm

B. Subtilis
approx.
0,3 μm

Virus / coliphage

pore size UF approx. 0,05 μm

3
Ultrafiltration in practice

Filtration and backwashing

The shown sketches explain the prin-

m
ciple of membrane filtration and its
backwashing.

Filtration process:

co
The raw water will be pressed into the
filtration module from below. The shown Filtration
process is called dead end process.
During filtration, residuals will deposit on
the inner side of the hollow fibres while
the filtrate emerges on the outside of

e.
the hollow fibre. The clear water will be
collected between the hollow fibres and Clean water
discharged.

it
Backwashing process: al
es

Raw water
.d

Primary backwashing (forward flush)

Waste water
• cleaning of the inside of the hollow Backwash
fibres
w

• flushing of the hollow fibre

Main backwashing
w

• cleaning of the filter pores by

inversion of the water flow direction
from outside to inside
Backwash
Secondary backwashing (forward flush)
w

Same procedure as for primary

backwashing for removal of any
possible residual contaminations.

The entire backwashing procedure will

be realised fully automatic

Forward flush

4
Treatment procedure with ultrafiltration

Cross flow and dead end

There are two different procedures:

m
In the cross flow procedure, a big water
volume will be led by a circulation pump
along the membrane in a circle. A part
of it will be pressed through the memb-

co
rane and another part will be disposed Waste water
into the sewer as concentrate. These concentrate
circulation losses will continuously be approx.10%
made up by means of the feed pump.
The advantage of the cross flow is that Permanent extraction of
there is no interruption of the treatment concentrate (waste water)

e.
process for membrane backwashing
out of the loop
needed. The disadvantages are higher Cross-Flow
investment costs and higher energy
consumption.

it
In the dead end procedure the water will
be pressed through the membrane as in
a dead end road. The contaminations
Recirculation Filtrate
will be collected in the capillaries; this approx. 80%
is why the membrane must be washed
al approx.10%
in regular intervals. Even though this
procedure requires short interruptions
for backwashing, the advantages are
the lower energy consumption and the
es

low-price compact construction of the

Feed
treatment units.
Raw water
approx. 20% Membrane
In W.E.T. ultrafiltration systems the water
will be treated by means of capillary
membranes in the dead end process.
.d

The ultrafiltration modules of the treat-

ment unit contains several thousand
hollow fibres who are accommodated
in a pressure pipe. These ultrafiltration
modules are arranged in lines, so that
w

only a certain number will be opera- Backwash

ted or backwashed respectively. The approx. 5%
number of membrane modules and Membrane
treatment lines depends on the water Dead-End cleaning by regular
ingredients and the temperature.
w

backwashing

Feed Filtrate
w

Raw water approx. 95%

100%

Membrane

5
Filter types in use:

Single pore membrane

m
co
e.
it
al
Module
Pressure pipe
es

Hollow fibres Ø 1.5 mm

Permeate collecting pipe
Raw water distribution channels
.d

Raw water (feed)

Filtrate (permeate)

Waste water (concentrate)

w

Capillaries
Backwash water
grouted in resin
for fixing

Capillary membranes PVC pressure pipe

w
w

Perforated filtrate collecting pipe

Filtration layer with pores 0,01 – 0,05 µm

Inside diameter
0,5 or 2 mm
Depending on the use

Supporting material

6
Filter types in use:

Muli pore membrane

m
co
e.
it
al
PVC pressure pipe
es
Grouting resin
Multi pore hollow fibre 7 x 0,9 mm Ø
Outlet treated water
.d

Raw water (feed)

Filtrate (permeate)

Waste water (concentrate)

w

Capillary membranes Backwash water

w

The filtrate will be

collected in the Capillaries
w

external annular gap. grouted in resin

for fixing

PVC pressure pipe

Multi pore
membrane

Supporting material
Filtration layer with
pores 0,01 – 0,05 µm
Inside diameter
0,9 mm

7
 m
Ultrafiltration in comparison

co
Ultrafiltration
No 100 % disinfection (barrier) Completely germ free in the filtrate

e.
Chlorine dioxide disinfection

Elimination of Legionella in amoeba is not guaranted. Complete elimination of parasites, complete elimination of all
particles > 0,05 micrometer

it
Total failure of ClO2 disinfection possible, all germs can pass Only partial failure possible e.g. in case of fibre rupture; the
without any treatment majority of germs will be held back

From bad to no disinfection in case of turbidity Will remove turbidity completely, no disturbance of disinfection at

al
all by turbidity

High operating costs caused by power and chemical
consumption and work expenditure in case of failures (rejection
of the prepared solution)
es
The killed germs (dead bodies) will remain within the system
Low consumption in power and chemicals, no regular changing
of parts; no pumping energy required when used as bacteria
barrier in drinking water networks
Complete removal of the germs out of the drinking water

Disinfecting effects in the distribution system Complete removal of the germs at the start, the distribution
system will remain totally unaffected
.d

No 100 % disinfection Completely free of germs

UV disinfection

Not efficient for parasites (cryptosporidium) Complete removal of parasites

w

No effect on sheathed germs, e.g. legionella in amoeba Complete removal of all particles > 0,1 micrometer
© Copyright - W.E.T. GmbH 2005 – No copying and/or propagation, also in extracts, without permission by the author.

Total failure of UV disinfection possible, all germs can pass Only partial failure possible e.g. in case of fibre rupture; the
w

without any treatment majority of germs will be held back

From bad to no disinfection in case of turbidity Will remove turbidity completely, no disturbance of disinfection at
all by turbidity
w

Operating costs caused by power consumption and spare lamps Low consumption in power and chemicals, no regular changing
of parts; no pumping energy required when used as bacteria
barrier in drinking water networks

Damage to the germ DNS, but regeneration is possible Complete removal of germs

Author:

W.E.T. GmbH

Krumme Fohre 70
D-95359 Kasendorf

Fon: +49 (0) 9228 / 9 96 09-0

Fax: +49 (0) 9228 / 9 96 09-11

E-Mail: info@wet-gmbh.com
Internet: www.wet-gmbh.com