Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

Experimental study of the memsys vacuum-multi-effect-membrane-distillation

(V-MEMD) module
K. Zhao a, 1, W. Heinzl a,⁎, M. Wenzel b, 2, S. Büttner a, 1, F. Bollen a, 1, G. Lange a, 1, S. Heinzl a, 1, N. Sarda a, 1
a
memsys clearwater Pte. Ltd., 82 Toh Guan Road, Water Hub, Singapore
b
Technische Universität München, Lehrstuhl für Thermodynamik, TU München, D-85747 Garching, Germany

H I G H L I G H T S

► Memsys has successfully commercialized the V-MEMD module.

► The solar driven memsys system illustrates good operating performance.
► Memsys module has great potential in increasing the Gain Output Ratio (GOR).

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: The memsys has successfully commercialized the vacuum-multi-effect-membrane-distillation (V-MEMD) mod-
Received 8 April 2012 ule. This compact memsys module employs hydrophobic membranes as a separating medium and makes use of
Received in revised form 8 August 2012 vacuum to enhance membrane distillation process. This novel V-MEMD module enables highly efficient heat re-
Accepted 3 December 2012
covery. Compared with conventional thermal desalination processes, the memsys module shows advantages in
Available online 11 January 2013
lower investment and operational cost, and higher energy efficiency. In this paper, solar and diesel heater were
Keywords:
used as heating sources to drive the memsys V-MEMD module. The solar driven memsys system illustrates
Membrane distillation good operating performance with a flux at approximately 7 LMH on a sunny day using seawater as feed. The diesel
V-MEMD heater driven memsys system was used to investigate the effects of heating, cooling and feed conditions on the
Memsys module performance using tap water as feed at a relatively low operating temperature (45~60 °C). The results
Solar driven MD show that heating and cooling temperature are the main factors affecting flux and energy efficiency. The optimi-
Hydrophobic membrane zation of number of module stage and size of each stage were also studied. The experimental results show that
GOR the memsys module has great potential in increasing the Gain Output Ratio (GOR), which is one of the most
important criteria for industrialization of MD technology.
© 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction successfully developed a commercial membrane distillation product,

Membrane distillation (MD) is a thermally driven process which al-
lows water vapor transport through hydrophobic porous membranes
[1,2]. MD produces high quality distillate from wastewater or seawater
under non-pressurized condition and at moderate temperatures (50–
80 °C) [3,4]. Vacuum membrane distillation (VMD) is an approach to
reduce heat losses and achieve higher vapor flow rates as compared
with direct contact MD [5–7]. In VMD, vacuum is applied at the down-
stream side to maintain the pressure below the equilibrium vapor pres-
sure, enhancing mass transfer [8]. The memsys vacuum-multi-effect-
membrane-distillate (V-MEMD) technology combines the advantages
of multi-effects and vacuum to achieve highly efficient heat recovery
[9]. Compared with the conventional MD processes, memsys has
named as the memsys module. The memsys module shows enormous
potential in increasing the Gain Output Ratio (GOR) and reducing the
energy requirement in the desalination process.
In this paper, the memsys systems with 4-stage module were
installed, and the systems were driven by solar thermal [10] and die-
sel heaters as heating sources respectively. The solar driven memsys
system was used in seawater desalination process in the field to eval-
uate the performance and compatibility of the module. The diesel
heater driven memsys system was used to investigate the effects of
heating, cooling and feed conditions on the module performance
using tap water as feed at a relatively low operating temperature (45–
60 °C). The module design including the number and size of the mem-
brane stage for module optimization was also discussed.

2. Theory
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +65 91085258, fax: +65 66864267.
E-mail address: contact@memsys.sg (W. Heinzl).
1
Tel.: +65 91085258; fax: +65 66864267. One set of standard memsys V-MEMD module consists of a steam
2
Tel.: +49 8928916217; fax: +49 8928916218. raiser, multiple stages, and a condenser. The membrane frames and

0011-9164/$ – see front matter © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.12.003
 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160
Table 1
Terminology of memsys module.
Terminology Descriptions
Membrane Two pieces of membranes (one piece size: 600 × 360 mm) are
frame welded onto two sides of one PP (polypropylene) frame in a single
production step, as shown in the Fig. 1(a)
Foil frame PP films (~20 μm thickness, same size as membrane) are welded
onto two sides of one PP frame in a single production step, as
shown in the Fig. 1(a)
Single stage The membrane and foil frames are alternatively friction-welded
together to form stage (number of foil frames = number of
membrane frames + 1). When welding the frames together, the
necessary channels are formed and supported by a PP-spacer, as
shown in Fig. 1(b), two PP cover plates were used to alter the
direction of feed and vapor flows
Multiple Stages were stacked to form multiple stages with vacuum tight
stages silicon gaskets, as shown in the Fig. 1(c)
Steam raiser The steam raiser is fabricated by a certain number of membrane
frames and installed in front of the first stage. The heat produced by
the external heat source (e.g. solar thermal) is exchanged in the
steam-raiser. The water in the steam raiser was evaporated at
lower pressure (e.g. 600 mbar) and the produced hot vapor flows
to the first stage.
Condenser The condenser is fabricated by certain number of foil frames and
installed after the final stage. The vapor produced in the final stage
is condensed in the condenser, using the coolant (e.g. fresh water)
flow.
Memsys One set of standard memsys module consists of a steam raiser,
module multiple stages, and a condenser
foil frames are friction-welded together to form a single stage.
A number of single stages are stacked up and vacuum sealed using
silicon gaskets to form multiple stages. The terminology of memsys
module parts is shown in Table 1, whereas Fig. 1 shows the photos
of a frame and stages.
2.1. Flow diagram in the single membrane stage
Fig. 2 shows the structure of a single stage, with alternating
membrane frames and foil frames for evaporation and condensa-
tion. The spaces inside each frame and between neighboring frames,
act as channels. Foil frames function as a condenser and provide a
means as ‘distillate channels’, while membrane frames serve as ‘vapor
channels’. ‘Feed channels’ are created between foil frames and mem-
brane frames.
(a) (b)
Fig. 1. Photos of memsys frame and stages. (a) Frame, 2 pieces of membranes or PP foils were weld onto both sides of the frame; (b) single stage with welded frames and two
covering plates; (c) multiple stages.
151
Vapor enters the stage and flows into the parallel foil frames. The
vapor in the foil frames heats up the feed and is then condensed.
The small channel at the bottom of frame facilities the removal of
non-condensable gases and application of vacuum.
The condensed vapor then flows into a distillate channel. The heat
energy of condensation is transported through the foil and is immedi-
ately converted into evaporation energy, generating new vapor in the
vapor channel. The vapor leaves the vapor channels and enters the
next stage. This process is repeated in the remaining stages.
2.2. Basic working principle of the memsys module
In a working memsys module, each stage recovers the heat from
the previous stage. Distillate is produced in each stage and in the
condenser.
As shown in Fig. 3, heat energy produced by the external heating
source (e.g. solar thermal or other waste heat) is exchanged in the
steam raiser. The water in the steam-raiser is under vacuum pressure
(e.g. 600 mbar). The hot vapor generated by steam raiser flows to
stage 1, meanwhile feed is also introduced to stage 1 and flows seri-
ally through the remaining stages. At the end of the final stage, feed
is concentrated as brine. Vacuum is always applied to the permeate
side of the membranes. The vapor pressure and temperature gradual-
ly decreases from the steam raiser to the condenser. The vapor pro-
duced in the final stage is condensed in the condenser, using the
coolant (e.g. fresh water) flow.
3. Experimental
3.1. Preparation of memsys frames and modules
As the memsys process works at modest temperatures (b90 °C)
and moderate negative pressure, all module components are made
of polypropylene (PP). This minimizes corrosion and scaling and al-
lows large-scale cost efficient production. The memsys has developed
a highly automated production line for the modules.
The hydrophobic membrane used in the module is made of PTFE
with a pore size of ~ 0.2 μm. The effective dimension of one piece of
membrane is about 335 mm × 475 mm. The condensation foil is
made of PP with a thickness of ~ 20 μm. The feed channel has a
width of 1.0 to 1.5 mm which can be adjusted during the welding
process. There is polypropylene mesh spacer in the feed channel
between each membrane and foil. Upon being welded on both sides
of the frame, the effective surface area of one membrane frame is
(c)
152 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160

Fig. 2. Feed, brine and vapor flows in the single stage.

Fig. 3. Basic principle of memsys process.

Fig. 4. Diagram of standard memsys testing system.

 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160 153

Table 2 Table 4
Equipment list of a typical memsys testing system. Formulas of main performance indicators.

Symbol Name Function Parameters Calculation formulas

B1 Heating tank Water was pre-filled in B1 to receive the energy from Distillate ¼ F4
S
external heat source GOR⁎ ¼ C⋅F1⋅½ðT1
60⋅F4⋅L
1Þ−ðT1 2Þ
B2 Feed tank Contains the feed
Product ratio ¼ F4
B3 Brine tank Contains the brine from the final stage F2
½ðT6 2Þ−ðT6 1Þ
B4 Distillate tank Contains the distillate from stages Cooling energy ratio ¼ F6⋅
F1⋅½ðT1 1Þ−ðT1 2Þ
B6 Cooling tank Water was pre-filled in B6 as coolant in the condenser F3⋅½ðT3 1Þ−ðT2 1ÞþF4⋅½ðT4 1Þ−ðT2 1Þ
Feed energy ratio ¼ F1⋅½ðT1 1Þ−ðT1 2Þ
P1 Heating pump The heated water in B1 was recirculated through
the steam raiser by P1 Lost energy ratio ¼ 1− F6⋅½ðT6 2Þ−ðT6 1ÞþF3⋅½ðT3 1Þ−ðT2 1ÞþF4⋅½ðT4 1Þ−ðT2 1Þ
F1⋅½ðT1 1Þ−ðT1 2Þ
P1_D Refilling pump Transfers the distillate back to B1, this distillate is
produced by the water in B1 and not the part of Note:
product distillate * S=membrane area (m2), C=water specific heat capacity (4.19 kJ/kg), L=latent heat
P3 Brine pump Transfers the brine from brine tank B3 (kWh/l, depending on the boiling temperature of feed under different vacuum pressure).
P4 Distillate pump Transfers the distillate from distillate tank B4 * All the energy discussed in the paper is thermal energy, electricity consumption is not
P5 Vacuum pump Provides vacuum to the whole system included.
P6 Cooling pump The water in B6 was recirculated through the
condenser by P6
MV1 Heating control Solenoid valve MV1 is used to top up the B1 when
valve the water level in the B1 is low fresh water in tank B6 recirculates as coolant and transfers heat to
MV2 Feed control Solenoid valve MV2 is used to top up the B2 when the external cooling water by heat exchanger 2. The pre-filled fresh
valve the feed level in the B2 is low water in tank B1 recirculates and receives heat from heat exchanger
SR Steam raiser Refer to Table 1
S1–S4 Stage 1–stage 4 Refer to Table 1
1. The feed was automatically sucked in B2 through control by sole-
CR Condenser Refer to Table 1 noid valve MV2, the brine was collected in the tank B3 and pumped
out by pump P3. Vacuum was applied to the whole module and
tanks. The distillate production is transported via siphons at the bot-
tom of each stage by pressure differences between stages.
about 0.31 m 2, the membrane area is around 1.25 m 2 for 11-frame The flux and product ratio is used to evaluate the performance and
stage, and 2.5 m 2 for a 17-frame stage. efficiency of the system. GOR and energy consumption of heating,
Modules can be of varying capacity, depending on the number of cooling and feed were used to evaluate the energy efficiency. The cal-
stages and the number of frames per stage. All the stages, steam raiser culation of energy and performance were shown in Table 4.
and condenser are sealed with vacuum silicon gaskets when vacuum
is applied. 3.3. Operation of the memsys testing system

3.2. Structure of memsys testing system 3.3.1. Solar driven memsys field testing system
Seawater is used as external coolant and feed. Brine is ejected to
The four-stage module were used for the testing, each stage in- the sea at ~ 40 °C. The membrane module consists of 4 stages and
cludes 11 frames (1.25 m 2 membrane area) or 17 frames (2.5 m 2 each stage has 11 frames. The total membrane area is around 5 m 2.
membranes area). The schematic of the whole system is shown in The system collects thermal and electrical solar energy (12 solar
Fig. 4, the descriptions of main components and testing parameters thermal collectors with average thermal energy production of
are shown in Tables 2 and 3. 80 kWh/day and 1.5 kW peak electricity by 6 solar cells). Seawater
As shown in Fig. 4, the solar system or diesel heater was used to is drawn by a submerged pump approximately 1 m from the shore-
provide the heat source to drive the memsys testing system. Heat line and 2 m below sea-level. Raw seawater is first pre-treated by
was transferred to the system by heat exchanger 1. The pre-filled an ultra-filtration system (Hollow fiber polyacrylonitrile membrane,
MWCO is about 100,000 Da). The power needed for the electrical
equipment (pumps, PLC) is supplied by solar cells, with consumption
varying from 0.9–1.2 kW.
Table 3
Main operating parameters and descriptions.
3.3.2. The memsys lab testing system using diesel heater
Parameters Unit Descriptions To study the effects of heating, cooling and feed conditions, a die-
P1_1, T1_1 mbar, °C Inlet temperature and pressure of the water flowing sel heater was used to provide the stable heating temperature T1_1.
into the steam raiser The relatively low T1_1 was selected to evaluate the performance
P1_2, T1_2 mbar, °C Outlet temperature and pressure of the water flowing and energy efficiency of the module. Tap water (25 °C, conductivity
out the steam raiser about 200 μS/cm) is used as external coolant and feed. The membrane
P2_1, T2_1 mbar, °C Feed temperature and pressure before flowing into stage 1
P3_1, T3_1 mbar, °C Brine temperature and pressure after flowing out the final
module consists of 4 stages and each stage has 17 frames. The total
stage membrane area is around 10 m 2. The optimization of number and
P4_1, T4_1 mbar, °C Distillate temperature and pressure size of stage were studied using a 2-stage system with 7, 9 and 17
P5_1 mbar Pressure produced by vacuum pump P5 frames for each stage.
P6_1, T6_1 mbar, °C Inlet temperature and pressure of the water flowing into
the condenser
P6_2, T6_2 mbar, °C Outlet temperature and pressure of the water flowing out 4. Results and discussion
the condenser
P7_1–P7_5 mbar Vapor pressure from the steam raiser and each stage
4.1. Typical seawater desalination operation of solar driven memsys field
T7_1–T7_5 °C Vapor temperature from the steam raiser and each stage
F1 l/h Water flow rate flowing into the steam raiser testing system
F2 l/h Feed flow rate
F3 l/h Brine flow rate (by manual measurement) The solar driven memsys system was operated for 5 to 8 h per day.
F4 l/h Distillate flow rate (by manual measurement) Fig. 5 shows the heating and vapor temperature curves in each stage.
F6 l/h Coolant (fresh water) flow rate flowing into the condenser
Normally, the system requires about 30 min for temperature and
154 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160
Fig. 5. Temperature distribution in the steam raiser and each stage for the solar driven memsys MD system.
pressure stabilization until the last membrane stage starts to create
vapor. T1_1 is the temperature of vapor created by hot water circulat-
ing in the solar collectors, the energy of this vapor is used to heat up
Fig. 6. Pressure distribution in the module for the solar driven memsys MD system.
(a) Pressure distribution in the steam raiser and each stage, (b) pressure distribution
in the heating and cooling part.
the seawater in stage 1 and generates new vapor at stage 2, then the
similar process will happen in stages 3 and 4, so T1_1 is the leading
temperature to drive the whole membrane distillation process, any
fluctuation of T1_1 will strongly affect the temperature in the each
stage and condenser.
The level of sun radiation is the critical factor affecting the inlet
heating temperature T1_1. Based on the weather conditions, a good
product output can be obtained if the vapor temperature in stage 1
(T7_1) is higher than 65 °C, which implies heating temperature
T1_1 must be higher than 70 °C. During the peak hours of the day,
T1_1 can reach 80–85 °C. During cloudy moment, T1_1 could go
below 60 °C, which will reduce the distillate output significantly.
Fig. 6 shows the vapor pressure curves in the different stages,
steam raiser and condenser. The vapor pressure curves show similar
trend with vapor temperature, as shown in Fig. 6(a), the vapor vacu-
um pressure in stage 1 (P7_1) is always the highest and decreases in
the following stage. The vapor pressure fluctuates with the vapor
temperature. Higher vapor temperature leads to larger pressure dif-
ferences between neighboring stages, thereby producing a higher dis-
tillate output.
This solar driven memsys system produces about 35 l of distillate
per hour under a good weather condition (~ 75 °C T1_1). Therefore,
given the 5 m 2 membrane surface area, the flux is about 7 LMH. The
pre-treated seawater was used as both the external coolant through
heat exchanger 2 and feed. The quality of raw seawater, pre-treated
seawater and distillate were analyzed and the results are shown in
Table 5. Based on the analysis results, the ultra-treated seawater
shows very low turbidity of 0.15 NTU and no suspended solids are
detected, but the conductivity of pre-treated seawater remained at
the same value as raw seawater. The conductivity of distillate from
memsys module is 8–10 μS/cm.
Table 5
Quality analysis of raw seawater, ultra-filtrated seawater and distillate.
Testing items Units Sample reference
Raw seawater Seawater after UF Distillate
Conductivity μS/cm 47,000 47,300 8–10
TSS mg/l 10.8 0 –
Turbidity NTU 5.5 0.15 –
SDI15 – 5.73 3.93 –
 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160
Fig. 7. Two testing ways of heating influence.
4.2. Effects of heating flow rate and temperature on the module performance
and energy efficiency using memsys lab testing system
Generally, the more vapor energy produced in the steam raiser,
the more energy is available for the distillation process. Heating
flow rate F1 and heating temperature T1_1 are the two main heating
Fig. 8. Temperature and pressure of vapor in the each stage using constant inlet heating
temperature T1_1=60 °C and changing heating flow rate F1=8.0, 15.2 and 27.7 l/min.
(a) Vapor temperature distribution in each stage, (b) vapor pressure distribution in
each stage.
155
Fig. 9. Influence of heating flow rate F1 to product flux and energy efficiency (a) effects
of F1 on flux and GOR, (b) effects of F1 on energy and product ratio.
parameters. Fluctuation in F1 and T1_1 will affect the amount of
vapor energy generated by the steam raiser and therefore affect the
temperature/pressure distribution in each stage and final distillate
flux. Fig. 7 shows the two testing methods which involve constant
F1 with decreasing T1_1, and constant T1_1 with increasing F1.
4.2.1. Effect of heating flow rate F1
In this test, the heating temperature T1_1 (60 °C), cooling temper-
ature T6_1 (25 °C), feed temperature T2_1 (25 °C), cooling flow rate
F6 (7.5 l/min), feed flow rate F2 (1.5 l/min), and the vacuum P5_1
(80 mbar) are maintained constant. The heating flow rate F1 is step-
wise increased, and three testing points of F1 (8.0, 15, and 27.7 l/min)
are chosen to run the test.
As shown in Fig. 8, the pressure and temperature of the vapor gen-
erated by the first three stages (P7_2 to P7_4, T7_2 to T7_4) increases
with F1, but the pressure and temperature from the last stage (T7_5
and P7_5) are comparably stable, which means the cooling tempera-
ture T6_1 and vacuum pressure P5_1 have stronger influence to the
last stage than other stages. The pressure differences between stages
1–2, and stages 2–3 are about 10 mbar, and the pressure difference
between stages 3 and 4 is about 15 mbar, which are the driving
force to transport the vapor and produce the distillate. When the
heating flow F1 is increased to 27.7 l/min, the pressure differences
between stages 1–2 and 2–3 are slightly increased by 5 mbar and
the difference between last two stages rises by 10–15 mbar, these in-
creases in pressure differences provide higher driving force and
156 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160

Fig. 10. Temperature and pressure of vapor in each stage using constant heating flow
Fig. 11. Influence of inlet heating temperature to product flux and energy efficiency
F1 = 15 l/min and changing inlet heating temperature T1_1 = 60, 50 and 45 °C.
(a) effects of T1_1 on flux and GOR, (b) effects of T1_1 on energy and product ratio.
(a) Vapor temperature distribution in each stage, (b) vapor pressure distribution in
each stage.

produce more distillate. As shown in Fig. 9(a), the distillate flux is
increased from 1.7 to 3.5 LMH, but GOR did not change significantly fol-
lowing F1. If F1 is increased, both the heating energy (C· F1· [(T1_1) −
(T1_2)]) and distillate flow (F4) will be increased proportionally, so
based on the equation of GOR (see Table 4), GOR would not be im-
proved. This increased heating energy is mostly transferred to the
cooling flow (the cooling ratio increased from 60 to 70% as shown in
Fig. 9(b)), which means the entire energy efficiency is not improved
by increasing F1.
decreases, which implies that energy efficiency is lower at low
heating temperature. GOR at heating temperature T1_1 of 50 °C and
60 °C is rather stable, but the flux at 50 °C is much lower than
60 °C, which means GOR would not be improved by increasing
heating temperature T1_1, that is because temperature difference
((T1_1) − (T1_2)) and distillate flow (F4) are increased proportional-
ly based on the equation of GOR in Table 4. As shown in Fig. 11(b), the

4.2.2. Effect of heating temperature T1_1

In this test, the heating flow rate F1 (15 l/min), cooling tempera-
ture T6_1 (25 °C), feed temperature (25 °C), feed flow rate F2
(1.5 l/min), cooling flow rate F6 (14 l/min), and vacuum P5_1
(60 mbar) are maintained constant, the heating temperature T1_1
decreases at three temperature points, 60 °C, 50 °C and 45 °C, as
shown in Fig. 7. The oscillation of the temperature curve is due to
the inefficient internal temperature controlling system, but this effect
does not influence the test results because of the constant average
values.
The vapor pressure and temperature from all four stages (P7_2 to
P7_5, T7_2 to T7_5) decreases with T1_1. As shown in Fig. 10, T1_1
shows dominant influence on the vapor pressure and temperature
from each stage. The pressure differences between each stage reduce
by over 20 mbar when T1_1 decreases to 45 °C, which means that the
driving force is very weak. As shown in Fig. 11(a), the distillate flux is
reduced to below 1 LMH when T1_1 is 45 °C, meanwhile the GOR also Fig. 12. Two testing ways of cooling influence.
 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160
Fig. 13. Temperature and pressure of vapor in each stage using constant inlet cooling
temperature T6_1 and changing cooling flow rate F6. (a) Vapor temperature distribution
in each stage, (b) vapor pressure distribution in each stage.
cooling, feed and lost energy ratio are quite similar at T1_1 50 °C and
60 °C. The flux is higher at 60 °C because that around 50% of feed is
evaporated and condensed to distillate, which is higher than 30%
product ratio achieved at 50 °C T1_1. Fig. 11(b) also shows that the
energy lost for the low temperature heating (45 °C) is almost 30%
which is far more than 10% normal energy lost ratio at higher temper-
ature. This is probably due to the fact that the cooling energy ratio is
only 50%, the energy is lost before the vapor transfers the energy to
the next stage.
4.3. Effects of cooling flow rate and temperature on the module performance
and energy efficiency using memsys lab testing system
Based on the discussions in Section 4.2, the external coolant will
take away over 70% of the energy from the heating side, hence the re-
quired amount of external coolant is high. Generally the ambient tap
water or seawater is used as a coolant to reduce the operating cost,
therefore there is no special temperature control on the cooling
flow. In this section, the effects of cooling flow rate F6 and cooling
temperature T6_1 (naturally be warmed during the operation, not
by purposely heating up) will be discussed. The testing condition is
shown in Fig. 12.
4.3.1. Effects of cooling flow rate F6
In this test, the heating temperature T1_1 (60 °C), heating flow
rate F1 (15 l/min), feed temperature (25 °C), cooling temperature
157
Fig. 14. Influence of cooling flow rate F6 to product flux and energy efficiency (a) effects of
F6 on flux and GOR, (b) effects of F6 on energy and product ratio.
T6_1 (25 °C), feed flow rate F2 (1.5 l/min), and the vacuum P5_1
(60 mbar) are maintained constant, the cooling flow rate F6 is in-
creased, five testing points of F6 are chosen to run the test.
As shown in Fig. 13, the vapor pressure and temperature from all
stages (P7_2 to P7_5, T7_2 to T7_5) show little fluctuation, which
means the cooling flow F6 has very limited influence on the vapor
pressure and temperature distributions. Compared with normal
cooling flow rate 7.5 l/min, the higher F6 (around 9 l/min) results in
a mild increase in flux, but when the F6 is larger than 9 l/min, there
is no improvement on flux and GOR, as shown in Fig. 14(a). In addi-
tion, the high cooling flow rate will also take more energy away
from heating side and results in very low energy lost at around 5%
as shown in Fig. 14(b).
4.3.2. Effects of cooling temperature T6_1
In this test, the heating flow rate F1 (15 l/min), heating tempera-
ture T1_1 (60 °C), cooling flow rate F6 (9 l/min), feed temperature
(25 °C), feed flow rate F2 (1.5 l/min) are maintained constant, the
cooling flow is recirculated and continuously heated up by energy
from the vapor in the condenser. The temperature curve is shown in
Fig. 12.
The vapor pressure and temperature from all four stages (P7_2 to
P7_5, T7_2 to T7_5) increases with T6_1, as shown in Fig. 15. Because
the heating temperature T1_1 is constant at 60 °C, the increase of
vapor temperature results in lower pressure difference and weaker
driving force, therefore the flux and GOR are reduced as shown in
Fig. 16(a). Since the coolant cannot absorb sufficient heat from
158 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160

Fig. 16. Influence of inlet cooling temperature T6_1 to product flux and energy efficiency
Fig. 15. Temperature and pressure of vapor in each stage using constant cooling flow (a) effects of T6_1 on flux and GOR, (b) effects of T6_1 on energy and product ratio.
rate F6 and changing inlet cooling temperature T6_1=25–40 °C. (a) vapor temperature
distribution in each stage, (b) vapor pressure distribution in each stage.

heating side when T6_1 is increasing, more energy is wasted (~ 20%) At the low feed flow rate 0.8 l/min, 64.5% of feed is evaporated and
as shown in Fig. 16(b). then condensed as distillate. The temperature of brine T3_1 fluctuates
because the feed is insufficient to fill up the feed channel and it causes
unstable brine flow (see Fig. 17). When the feed flow is 1.2 l/min, the
4.4. Effect of feed flow rate F2 on the module performance and energy product ratio reduces to 40%, but the flux remains unchanged. As
efficiency using memsys lab testing system shown in Fig. 18, when the F2 is 1.5 l/min, the flux is slightly in-
creased, but the product ratio and other energy efficiency have no
Feed flows into the first stage. In stage 1, feed is firstly pre-heated
from ambient temperature to the boiling point and then partially
evaporated. The energies of both pre-heating and evaporation are
from the heating source, therefore if the temperature of feed is natu-
rally high, a higher GOR will be achieved because energy consump-
tion during pre-heating is reduced. In this section, the effect of feed
flow rate F2 at ambient temperature is discussed.
The feed flow rate is a sensitive parameter which has to be adjust-
ed more precisely. If the feed flow rate is higher than needed, more
energy will be wasted on pre-heating the feed, and the product out-
put will be also low and it will produce extra unnecessary high tem-
perature brine. If the feed flow is too low, some feed will be over
concentrated and may result in crystallization inside the module
and shortening of the module life span.
In this test, the heating flow rate F1 (15 l/min), heating tempera-
ture T1_1 (60 °C), cooling flow rate F6 (9 l/min), feed temperature
(25 °C), cooling temperature T6_1 (25 °C), and the vacuum P5_1
(60 mbar) are maintained constant. Different feed flow rate F2 (0.8,
1.2 and 1.5 l/min) are tested and the brine temperature T3_1 is also
monitored as shown in Fig. 17. Fig. 17. Influence of feed flow rate F2 to feed and brine temperature.
 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160
Fig. 18. Influence of feed flow rate F2 to product flux and energy efficiency (a) effects of
F6 on flux and GOR, (b) effects of F6 on energy and product rate.
significant change, which indicates that 1.5 l/min is an optimized feed
flow rate based on these testing conditions.
4.5. Optimization of number of module stage and size of each stage
As described in Section 2, the memsys module can easily be al-
tered by inserting or removing one or more stages and replacing a dif-
ferent size of stage. In this test, the size of steam raiser and condenser
are kept unchanged, the number and size of stage were varied to
Fig. 19. Comparison of temperature distribution in 2 stage and 4 stage systems (a) two stage system, (b) 4 stage system.
159
study the performance and pressure/temperature distribution in the
modules. The number of stage is a critical configuration parameter
that has an impact on the energy efficiency, the size and the invest-
ment costs of the whole MD system. More stages imply higher invest-
ment costs for the module, but it is advantageous for specific energy
consumption and product rate.
In this test, the heating flow rate F1 (15 l/min), heating tempera-
ture T1_1 (60 °C), cooling flow rate F6 (9 l/min), feed temperature
(25 °C), feed flow rate F2 (1.5 l/min), cooling temperature T6_1
(25 °C), and the vacuum P5_1 (65 mbar) are maintained constant.
The temperature/pressure distributions of two stage and four stage
systems are compared in Figs. 19 and 20, the pressure and tempera-
ture in the 2-stage module are more sensitive and unstable than the
4-stage module. Since the heating temperature T1_1 and cooling tem-
perature T6_1 are the same in the 2-stage and 4-stage modules, the
vapor pressure differences in the 2-stage module are higher than
the 4-stage module, hence the flux of the 2-stage module is higher
than the 4-stage, but the higher flux is based on the lower product
ratio and lower GOR, as shown in Table 6.
The size of the stage affects the built-in number of frames which is
another critical parameter for the investment cost and energy effi-
ciency. Large transfer areas minimize the required temperature dif-
ference but it results in extra cost and higher foot print. In this test,
the heating flow rate F1 (15 l/min), heating temperature T1_1
(60 °C), cooling flow rate F6 (9 l/min), feed temperature (25 °C),
feed flow rate F2 (1.5 l/min), cooling temperature T6_1 (25 °C), and
the vacuum P5_1 (65 mbar) are maintained constant. The perfor-
mance of the 2-stage modules with different stage size (7, 9 and 17
frames) respectively is shown in Table 7. The GOR for different
stage sizes are similar, but the flux of the 7-frame module is higher
than the 9-frame and 17-frame modules due to higher pressure dif-
ference, which means that the module design has a significant impact
on pressure distribution and module performance.
5. Conclusions
The memsys vacuum-multi-effect-membrane-distillation (V-MEMD)
module is a novel, compact and high energy efficiency technology to
produce high quality distillate using solar and waste heat as driving
forces. The conditions (temperature and flow rate) of heating, cooling
and feed are the main operating parameters affecting module per-
formance and energy efficiency. The number of stages and the size of
each stage are the key parameters in optimizing module design and sys-
tem scaling-up.
The experimental results show that heating and cooling temperatures
have a more significant impact on module flux and energy efficiency
160 K. Zhao et al. / Desalination 323 (2013) 150–160

Fig. 20. Comparison of pressure distribution in 2 stage and 4 stage systems (a) two stage system, (b) 4 stage system.

Table 6 Acknowledgments
Performance comparison of 2 stage and 4 stage systems.

2 stage 4 stage The authors of this work and memsys wish to gratefully acknowl-
GOR 1.84 2.79
edge the support of PUB (Public Utilities Board, Singapore) and the
Flux 3.8 3.0 Aquiva foundation for a grant to partially support this study.
Cooling energy ratio (%) 78.7 75.8
Feed energy ratio (%) 14.6 16.7 References
Lost energy ratio (%) 6.7 7.5
Product ratio (%) 24 40 [1] K.W. Lawson, D.R. Lloyd, Review: membrane distillation, J. Membr. Sci. 124
(1997) 1–25.
[2] M.S. El-Bourawi, Z. Ding, R. Ma, M. Khayet, A framework for better understanding
membrane distillation separation process, J. Membr. Sci. 285 (2006) 4–29.
Table 7 [3] F. Macedonio, E. Drioli, Pressure-driven membrane operations and membrane
Performance comparison of the 2 stage systems with different numbers of membrane distillation technology integration for water purification, Desalination 223 (2008)
frames. 396–409.
[4] M. Khayet, Membranes and theoretical modeling of membrane distillation: a review,
7 frames 9 frames 17 frames Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 164 (2011) 56–88.
2
[5] S. Cerneaux, I. Struzynska, W.M. Kujawski, M. Persin, A. Larbot, Comparison of
Membrane area (m ) 1.88 2.50 5 various membrane distillation methods for desalination using hydrophobic ce-
Flux (l/m2·h) 8.7 6.4 3.9 ramic membranes, J. Membr. Sci. 337 (2009) 55–60.
GOR 1.66 1.52 1.60 [6] K.W. Lawson, D.R. Lloyd, Membrane distillation II. Direct contact MD, J. Membr.
Sci. 120 (1996) 123–133.
[7] T. Na, H. Zhang, W. Wang, Computational fluid dynamic numerical simulation of
vacuum membrane distillation for aqueous NaCl solution, Desalination 274
(2011) 120–129.
under maximum vacuum capacity (e.g. 50 mbar). If the heating temper-
[8] K.W. Lawson, D.R. Lloyd, Membrane distillation I. Module design and per-
ature is limited, increasing heating flow rate and optimizing feed flow rate formance evaluation using vacuum membrane distillation, J. Membr. Sci. 120
could be the alternative ways to improve the process (e.g. increase the (1996) 111–121.
flux). The optimization of module design shows that the memsys module [9] W. Heinzl, Membrane distillation device, patent WO 2010127819, 2010.
[10] J. Mericq, S. Laborie, C. Cabassud, Evaluation of systems coupling vacuum mem-
has great potential in increasing the Gain Output Ratio (GOR), which is brane distillation and solar energy for seawater desalination, Chem. Eng. J. 166
one of the most important criteria for industrialization of MD technology. (2011) 596–606.