Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Micro- and
WATER TREATMENT
ultrafiltration
permeate
membrane
concentrate
colloïds
dissolved substances
water
pre-treatment filtration
2 1
Framework
This module explains micro- and ultrafiltration.
Contents
This module has the following contents:
1. Introduction
2. Principle
2.1 Membrane material
2.2 Membrane module
2.3 Dead-end filtration mode
2.4 Inside-out filtration
3 Theory
3.1 Mass balance
3.2 Kinetics
3.3 Membrane fouling
3.4 Cleaning
4 Practice
4.1 Module design
4.2 Choosing a module design
5 Operation
5.1 Constant pressure or constant flux mode
5.2 Cross-flow filtration
5.3 Fouling prevention
80
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
Membrane filtration can be divided into two catego- The removal of microorganisms is referred to in
ries based on the pore sizes of the membrane: log units. A removal of one log unit corresponds
- micro- and ultrafiltration (MF and UF) remove to a 90% removal. The removal of 4 log units cor-
colloidal substances and microorganisms responds to a 99.99% removal.
- nanofiltration and reverse osmosis (NF and In Table 1 the log removal capacity of MF and UF
RO) remove colloidal substances and microor- is shown for different microorganisms.
ganisms but also dissolved substances like
micropollutants and ions. The so-called molecular weight cut-off (MWCO)
can also be used as an indication of the ability
Micro- and ultrafiltration remove substances from of membranes to reject compounds. MWCO is
the water phase by a sieve mechanism. defined as the molecular weight of spherical mol-
size, µm
0.001 0.01 0.1 1.0 10 100 1,000
approximate
molecular 100 200 1000 10,000 20,000 100,000 500,000
weight
viruses bacils
relative
size of dissolved salts algae
materials
in water metal ions humic acids cysten sand
clay
silt
∆P (bar)
conventional filtration processes 0.01
microfiltration 0.05
treatment ultrafiltration 0.1
nanofiltration 5
reverse osmosis 30
ED and EDR
81
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
Bacteria
- E.coli 0.5 - 2 5 5
- Pseudomonas 0.5 - 1.5 5 5
Viruses
- Enterovirus 0.02 0 4
- MS2 - virus 0.025 0 4
82
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
pre-treatment filtration
2 1
Figure 3 - Possibilities for the use of MF and UF for drinking water production
The treatment steps used are aeration and rapid 2.1 Membrane material
sand filtration. The backwash water of the rapid Most of the membranes used are synthetic mem-
sand filters is loaded with high concentrations of branes made of organic polymers (also called
iron hydroxide and biomass. polymeric membranes).
The backwash water can be concentrated by The thermal, chemical and mechanical proper-
ultrafiltration. The permeate of ultrafiltration can ties of the polymer determine the properties of
then be used directly as drinking water or it can be the material.
treated further in the existing groundwater treat- There are several techniques to produce mem-
ment process. In this way a significant amount of brane materials. The production of membranes,
valuable water is saved. however, will not be discussed here.
83
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
possible.
quence, the resistance of permeation will increase
in time.
Different module designs are possible. It is pos-
The water flux decreases if the pressure is
sible to compare modules based on the specific
constant, or the pressure increases if the flux is
surface of the modules.
constant.
inlet permeate
resistance
flux
time
Figure 5 - Membranes put together in modules Figure 6 - Principle of dead-end filtration modules
84
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
in which:
γ = recovery (-)
Vp = volume of produced permeate (m3)
Vbw = volume used for backwash (m3)
3.2 Kinetics
The most important process parameter in MF- and
UF installations is flux.
feed Flux is defined as the water flow through a square
permeate meter of membrane surface.
85
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
Pr ef
Jnorm = Jcor × 3.3 Membrane fouling
Pmeasured During filtration the resistance increases as a result
of fouling of the membrane surface. The resis-
in which: tance increases because the pores in the mem-
Jnorm = normalized flux (l/(m2.h)) brane are blocked and because caked suspended
Pref = reference pressure (bar) matter is built up on the membrane surface. This
Pmeasured = actual pressure (bar) resistance increase is referred to as fouling.
The definition of fouling, given by the IUPAC, is: the
Trans membrane pressure deposition of suspended or dissolved substances
The trans membrane pressure (TMP) is the pres- on the membrane surface or in front of the pores
sure difference between permeate and the feed or in the membrane pores.
From this definition it is clear that fouling can be
side of the membrane expressed in bar (Figure
subdivided into different mechanisms. In Figure 9
8).
different resistances are defined:
DPhydr
TMP = Pf − − Pperm - membrane resistance
2
- pore blocking
- adsorption in the pores
in which: - cake resistance
Pf = feed pressure (Pa) - high concentration of dissolved substances
near the surface.
dead-end filtration
The sum of all resistances is the total resistance
Pf Pc (Rtot). Due to the accumulation of solids on and
in the membrane during dead-end filtration, the
total resistance increases with time. If the Rtot-time
relation is known, the flux of an installation can be
calculated. Prediction and minimization of the total
P perm resistance is an important research topic.
λc
DPhydr = Pf −Pc = r vc2 L
2 dc Membrane resistance
λc = 0.316 Re −0.25 As a new membrane is permeated with deminer-
Pf +Pc P alized water, the measured resistance is only the
TMD = −Pperm = Pf − hydr −Pperm membrane resistance. There are no particles in the
2 2
Figure 8 - Pressure difference between permeate and water to block the pores or to form a cake layer.
feed size The flux measured as a function of pressure gives a
86
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
(1- ε)2
rc = 180 ×
ds 2 × ε3
in which:
ε = porosity of the cake layer (-)
ds = diameter of a particle (m)
The thickness of a cake layer is given by:
ms
lc =
ρs × (1- ε) × A mem
87
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
88
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
Table 2 - Needed cross-flow rate in order to get turbu- Table 3 - Cross-flow rate at the rear end of a 1 meter
lence (L = 1 m) module with a back flush flux of 250 l/(m2•h)
Diameter Cross-flow rate Pressure difference
Rear flow at the Required time
(mm) (m/s) (Pa)
d (mm) end of a module for flushing a
5.2 0.58 1473 (m/s) module (s)
1.5 2.01 61,370 5.2 0.05 19
1.0 3.01 207,120 1.5 0.19 5
0.7 4.3 603,850 1.0 0.28 4
0.7 0.40 3
permeate side of the membrane free of particles.
With permeate the dirt is removed from the pores flush is commercialized as AirFlush and is actually
and from the membrane surface. The backwash a forward flush with a combination of air and water
flux is 2 to 2.5 times the flux during filtration. (Figure 12). The air is used to create a turbulent
flow in the membrane under process conditions
After removing the particles from the pores and where no turbulence is attained with the water
the membrane surface, the particles and the cake flow.
have to be transported out of the module. Because
the amount of permeate used for a backwash is The cleaning efficiency depends on the kind of two-
limited (because of the recovery), the transport phase flow obtained in the membranes (Figure 13).
of dirt may be insufficient. A combined back flush If the water/air ratio is high, only small air bubbles
and forward flush can be used to overcome this are present in the water and the turbulence is only
problem. First, a back flush is used to clean the slightly enhanced. When the water/air ratio is too
pores and to lift the cake. Then, a forward flush is small, the air flows through the middle of the mem-
used to transport the dirt out of the module. brane (chimney effect) and the cleaning effect is
low. The best cleaning is obtained with bullet-like
air bubbles (Figure 13).
With the backwash, the recovery of the system
decreases because permeate is used to remove
the accumulated compounds.
Air/water flush
An air/water flush can be used to clean the mem-
brane wall from adhering fouling. The air/water
back flush
flush water
product
air
product
water
inlet
89
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
4 Practice
90
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
91
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
membrane
feed
membrane transport
support plate
Figure 17 - Cushion module
membrane
tween cushions. The distance can be adapted to
the quality of the feed water.
spacer A cushion module can be cleaned with both a
forward flush and with a back flush.
Figure 16 - Plate membranes
Spiral-wound membranes
rather low (about 100-400 m /m ), resulting in high
2 3
In spiral-wound membranes several flat sheet
investment costs. membranes are wound around a central perme-
The sealing of the membranes in the modules is ate tube. The distance between two membranes
also a weak point in this membrane design. is small (0.25 to 1.0 mm), and membrane clogging
Plate membranes are seldom used in drinking is a serious problem in the feed spacer.
water production or wastewater treatment. Spiral-wound membranes are not backwashed.
This module design, therefore, is not used in MF/
Cushion membranes UF, but only in NF/RO.
A modification of the plate membrane is the
cushion membrane. A spacer is placed between
two membranes; the edges of the membranes 4.2 Choosing a module design
are glued together resulting in a cushion shape. The choice of a module design will be determined
A permeate tube is fixed through the membrane by economical reasons.
and the spacer. There is a difference between investment costs
Feed water is forced outside-in through the mem- and exploitation costs. The investment costs are
branes and is collected on the inside of the cushion minimal with modules having the highest specific
and transported through the permeate tube. surface area and low module costs. The exploita-
The specific surface area of a cushion module is tion costs are minimal at low energy costs and a
100 to 400 m2/m3, depending on the distance be- high fouling resistance.
92
drinking water treatment micro- and ultrafiltration
5.1 Constant pressure or constant flux The drawback of a cross-flow mode is that it uses
mode more energy compared to the dead-end mode.
Dead-end filtration can be performed in two modes: This energy is used to pump 90% of the feed water
with a constant flux or with a constant pressure. across the membrane. The energy consumption of
With a constant flux mode the pressure is increas- a cross-flow system is about 5 kWh/m3 permeate.
ing in time. For dead-end filtration the energy consumption is
In constant pressure mode the flux is decreasing only 0.1 to 0.2 kWh/m3 permeate.
in time (Figure 18).
The typical flux-time diagram for cross-flow filtra-
Constant pressure mode is not preferred because tion is drawn in Figure 20. The flux decreases as
water production is not constant. It is better to in- a function of time which is a result of the cake
crease the pressure during permeation to keep build-up and the pore blocking. Because of the
the flux (and the production) constant. high cross-flow rate, the cake layer thickness is
The backwash can be started either at a constant constant after a while and the flux does not de-
time or if a maximum pressure is reached. The crease as fast as in the dead-end mode.
filtration time in dead-end mode depends on the Critical flux is the flux achieved at a certain cross-
suspended solid concentration, usually 15 to 20 flow rate. At this rate the cake layer has a certain
minutes. Cleaning lasts several seconds to one thickness. If the cross-flow rate is increased, the
minute. cake layer decreases as a result of the high shear
Depending on the type of cleaning, feed water (for- stresses and the flux increases (Figure 21). The
ward flush) or permeate (backwash) is used. The increase in flux is rather small. Above a certain
pressure during a cleaning is in the range of 0 to cross-flow rate the flux will become constant.
1 bar. For the treatment of surface water, a flux of
70 l/(m2.h) is used. Backwash water of rapid sand Membrane systems with cross-flow mode are also
filtration is treated with a flux of 120 l/(m2.h). cleaned. Backwash and chemical cleaning are
time time
Figure 18 - Constant pressure versus constant flux Figure 19 - Flows in cross-flow filtration
mode
93
micro- and ultrafiltration drinking water treatment
flux
1200
600
400
fouling
200
0
19-02 26-02 5-03 12-03 19-03 26-03 2-04 9-04 16-04 23-04 30-04 7-05
no flocculation aid added FeCl3 added date
time
Figure 22 - Flux decline with and without FeCl3-dosing
Figure 20 - Flux decline with cross-flow filtration
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
vcr= 1 m/s vcr= 2.4 m/s time (min)
Further reading
94