See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/268584348

Sustainability Base Graywater Recycling System

Conference Paper · July 2011

DOI: 10.2514/6.2011-5145

CITATIONS READS
3 1,475

8 authors, including:

Sherwin Gormly Justine Richardson

28 PUBLICATIONS   317 CITATIONS   
NASA
14 PUBLICATIONS   107 CITATIONS   
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Los tell project View project

Bigelow Aerospace, Environmental Control and Life Support (ECLSS) View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sherwin Gormly on 25 October 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Sustainability Base Graywater Recycling System

Michael T. Flynn, Mark Hightower, and Lance Delzeit

NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035

Sherwin Gormly
Hydration Technologies, Albany, OR, 97322

Mona Hammoudeh, Hali Shaw and Tra-My Justine Richardson

Universities Space Research Association, Moffett Field, CA 94035

and

Kevin Howard8
Dynamac Corporation, Moffett Field, CA 94035

This paper describes the design history, prototyping, and predictive testing of a graywater recycling system
designed for the new NASA Ames green Federal building. The goal of developing this water recycling system is to
both reduce the building’s water consumption and provide a laboratory for the long duration testing of a next
generation spacecraft water recycling system. The project will also demonstrate the feasibility of recycling
graywater inside an office building and will help to define a permitting and monitoring process that can be applied to
other sites. The Sustainability Base water recycling system has been designed to treat hygiene water and reuse it as
toilet flush water. The technology is based on the integration of forward and reverse osmosis membrane systems.
The system is expected to reduce water consumption in the building by about 60%. The graywater treatment system
is a larger version of a technology developed by NASA for the treatment of spacecraft wastewater. Operational
testing of this system in the Sustainability Base building will provide the long duration performance data which is
required to evaluate the technology for future human space flight applications.

Nomenclature
DOC = direct osmotic concentration
dupp = daily use per person
FO = forward osmosis
FO-WRS = forward osmosis water recycling system
FO/RO = integrated forward osmosis reverse osmosis system
gpf = gallons per flush
gpy = gallons per year
LPH = liters per hour
na = not applicable
NaCl = sodium chloride
NASA = National Aeronautics and Space Administration
nd = not detected
nt = not tested
OA = osmotic agent
ppm = parts per million
RO = reverse osmosis
TOC = nonpurgable total organic carbon
UNR = University of Nevada Reno
UV = ultraviolet

1
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 I. Introduction

S ustainability Base is a new NASA office building that uses innovations and technology developed for the space
program to expand the possibilities of building sustainability on Earth. The Sustainability Base building is
shown while under construction in Figure 1. In addition to providing working offices for 225 employees it also
serves as a test bed for emerging NASA technologies. Some of the NASA technologies that will be investigated
include intelligent control approaches, anomaly detection algorithms, aero-thermal computational modeling, and
techniques to predict equipment degradation. The building is energy self sufficient using solar panels, a small wind
turbine, natural lighting, geothermal heat pump heating and cooling, natural ventilation, and a fuel cell power
generation system.

Figure 1: Sustainability Base under construction.

The graywater recycling system included in Sustainability Base will collect and treat all graywater from
sinks and showers, treat it, and then use the purified water as toylet flush water. The system should reduce the
buildings water consumption by about 60%. The graywater recycling system is called the forward osmosis water
recycling system (FO-WRS). Details of the building’s water requirements and the impact of FO-WRS on the
building are provided in Table 1.

The graywater recycling system is based on a technique called forward osmosis (FO). FO is a process
where the osmotic potential between two fluids of differing solute/solvent concentrations equalize by the movement
of solvent from the less concentrated solution to the more concentrated solution [1-4]. This is typically
accomplished through the use of a semi-permeable membrane that separates the two solutions.

2
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Table 1: Sustainability Base Expected Water Balance.

Parameter
 Per
 Use
 Units #
of
uses

Value
Occupants
Total 225 Persons
Days
of
operation 250 Days
Fixtures
Water
Use
per
Flush dupp




Toilet
Female 1.6 gpf 3




Toilet
Female
(urine) 1.1 gpf 3




Toilet
Male 1.6 gpf 1




Toilet
Male
(urine) 0.1 gpf 2
Total
Flush
Water
Required 156,092 gpy
Graywater dupp




Lavatory 0.5 gpf 3.5




Shower 1.5 gpf 0.1




Kitchen
Sink 2.5 gpf 1




Janitor
Sink 2.5 gpf 0.1
Total
Graywater
 99,765 gpy
Water
Recovery
Ratio 95 %
Recycled
Water
Produced 94777 gpy
%
Reduction
in
Water
Use 61 %
dupp= daily use per person, gpf=gallon per flush, gpy=gallon per year

In wastewater treatment applications where the solvent is usually water and the solutes are the
contaminants, the semi-permeable membrane should be designed to maximize the flux of water across the
membrane and the rejection of contaminates. In such a system the wastewater, or feed, is passed on one side of the
membrane and an osmotic agent, such as salt water, is passed on the other. The osmotic agent (OA) can use any
solute as long as it can produce an osmotic pressure is higher than that of the feed and the solute used is well
rejected by the membrane.

A continuous flow FO process can be achieved by removing the water that flows from the feed across the
membrane and into the OA. This can be done by treating the OA in a reverse osmosis (RO) system. This both
produces a purified product and reconstitutes the OA. The combined FO and RO configuration is shown in Figure
2.

Figure 2: Simplified FO/RO Flow Diagram

3
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 Advantages of the FO process include its relatively low fouling potential, low energy consumption,
simplicity, and reliability. Due to the fact that the only pressure involved in the FO process is due to flow resistance
in the membrane module, the equipment used can be quite simple. The membranes used in FO are a type of RO
membrane adapted for use in the FO process [5 & 6].

Unlike RO, which utilizes a hydraulic pressure difference, FO utilizes an osmotic potential pressure
differences as the driving force for water diffusion across the membrane. As long as the osmotic potential of water
on the permeate side of the membrane is higher than that on the feed side, water will be drawn in from the feed side
through the semi-permeable membrane and in to the osmotic agent (OA). Resistance to fouling and the ability to
treat high solid feeds occur because the feed stream flows are maintained at a very low hydraulic pressure and a high
cross flow velocity. Therefore, potential fouling contaminates, such as solids, are not forced into the membrane pore
spaces, such as occurs in RO process.

This is important because the FO-WRS system is designed to achieve high water recovery ratios and it can
be expected that solids will precipitate out of the feed as it is concentrated. The process is operated in a semi batch
mode where the feed tank is first filled and then re-circulated through the FO module until about 95% of the water is
removed. During a run no new feed is added to the feed tank. The resulting byproduct is then disposed of down the
sanitary sewer.

Maintenance requirements typically consist of periodic replacement of the osmotic agent, NaCl, addition of
anti scale chemicals to the feed, addition of chlorine tablets to the product storage tank, and periodic cleaning of the
membrane. In addition, every few years or so the FO and RO membranes will have to be replaced. Depending on
the soap used in the building there may also be a requirement for pH adjustment and the addition of an anti-foam
chemical to the feed. We predict that all this will require about ½ to 1 person hours a day to operate the system. At
this point membrane life, cleaning requirements, and chemical resupply requirements are undefined. These
parameters will be determined as a result of long term testing of the system in Sustainability Base.

II. Background
NASA has been developing the FO process and FO membranes since 1995. Previous work used a FO
laboratory test apparatus which was part of an integrated wastewater system called the Direct Osmotic
Concentration (DOC) system. The original DOC system was developed and constructed by then Osmotek Inc. [5],
now Hydration Technologies, Inc., through a Phase II SBIR. Osmotek delivered a laboratory test system to NASA
Ames Research Center in 1999 where it underwent acceptance testing. This laboratory unit was then transferred to
and extensively tested at the University of Nevada, Reno (UNR). The results of this testing was described in the
Journal of Membrane Science [7 & 8] and at the 33rd International Conference on Environmental Systems (ICES)
2003 [9]. UNR then optimized individual subsystems and constructed many of the components of the final system.
The DOC was then transferred back to NASA ARC where the final systems were fabricated, and further
development and testing was completed [10]. The final system was then transferred to NASA Johnson Space Center
(JSC) in 2009 where it is currently undergoing performance testing.

The DOC consists of three processes integrated into a single system. It uses a membrane evaporator to
treat urine, a FO/RO system to treat hygiene wastewater, and a catalytic reactor to post treat the combined product
from the membrane evaporator and the FO/RO system. This FO/RO system is the prototype of the Sustainability
Base FO-WRS.

Prior to NASA’s development of the DOC technology, FO was developed for use in the food processing
industry to concentrate fruit and vegetable juices [11 through 14] and was then applied for direct desalination [15
through 17] of brackish water and seawater. A wastewater treatment process using FO technology was also
developed by Osmotek, Inc. to treat landfill leachate [18]. A version of this landfill leachate treatment system was
later developed into the first DOC test apparatus from which the new prototype was developed. Hydration
Technologies has also recently commercialized a number of FO water purification products which are available at
http://www.htiwater.com/. More recently FO has also been used as a renewable energy technology where the
potential energy between freshwater, such as a river, and contaminated water, such as seawater, is converted into
electricity [19 through 22].
4
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 III. Process Description
The NASA Sustainability Base graywater recycling system is shown in Figure 3. In this system graywater
is first passed though a setting feed tank and then filtered. It is re-circulated through an FO module where it is
contacted with an osmotic agent (OA) across a semi permeable membrane. The OA is a 10% sodium chloride
(NaCl) salt solution. Water passes from the feed across the membrane into the higher osmotic potential OA. The
OA is then re-circulated and treated through an RO system where the water that passed through the FO membrane is
removed from the OA. Chlorine is then added to the RO product water in the product water storage tank. The
product is then used as the flush water for the toilets in the building. A UV light is used to control organics and
biological growth in the OA. The FO-WRS system is operated as a semi-batch system.

The OA is maintained in a closed loop at a predetermined salt concentration by balancing the water flux
into the OA across the FO membrane with the product water yielded by the RO subsystem. This control is
maintained by measuring the height of water in the OA tank and adding salt to keep it at a predetermined set point.
Most of the energy invested in the FO process is actually consumed by the RO subsystem when it re-concentrates
the OA and harvests the product water from the OA. In order to reduce energy consumption an energy recovery RO
system is used to minimize power consumption.

Selection of the proper FO membranes is also a key issue. Although mass transfer of water in FO is
diffusive in nature, most conventional RO membranes are not capable of performing FO efficiently. Several studies
of the mass transfer in FO indicated internal concentration polarization in standard RO membranes as the main
reason for poor performance of these membranes in FO mode [23 through 25]. In the current system cellulose
triacetate membranes developed specifically for FO applications are being used. The FO membranes are packaged
into a custom spiral wound elements. Figure 4 shows the membrane contactor for the FO-WRS and Figure 5 shows
the spiral wound membrane. The contactor contains 18 spiral wound membrane elements.

Figure 3: Sustainability Base Grey Water Recycling System.

5
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Figure
4:
Spiral
Wound
Membrane
Contactor. Figure
5:
Spiral
Wound
Membrane.

IV. Methodology

The experimental program was completed using the FO/RO subsystem of the NASA DOC system. A
picture of this unit is shown in Figure 6. The flow diagram is essentially the same as shown if Figure 3, with the
exception of the UV lamp in the re-circulating OA and the automated pH and anti-scale dosing systems. The DOC
FO/RO system is otherwise essentially just a smaller version of the FO-WRS. The testing was done using shower
water only and contained no hand wash water. A detailed description of the DOC test system and testing
methodology is available in [10].

During the testing, shower water was collected from male and female volunteers. The volunteers showered
with tap water and 40-100mL of the selected NASA International Space Station (ISS) body wash soap. This soap is
a proprietary low foaming soap designed to be used with either running water or as a sponge bath. It is provided as
a 10% concentrate and is composed of sulfochem B-NBB, PEG 80 sorbitan laurate, cocamidopropyl betaine, sodium
trideceth sulfate, glycerin, disodium lauroamphodiacetate, PEG-150 distearate, sodium laureth-13 carboxylate.
Methylparaben, propylparaben, and propylene glycol; exact concentrations are proprietary. The test subjects used
this soap in a regular shower with a plug in the drain. Water was pumped from the shower pan when the subject was
finished. The amount of water allowed was not restricted but the volunteers were asked to minimize water use and
shower head shut off valves were provided. All tests were conducted the same day the water was collected.

During the test samples were collected from the feed, product, and brine. The system operated as a semi-
batch process, meaning the feed tank was first filled and then concentrated by recirculating it through the FO
membrane element. No feed was added to the feed tank during the run. When the targeted recovery rate was
achieved the run was stopped and the feed tank was drained. This was the brine or concentrated byproduct of the
system. All runs targeted a 95% water recovery ratio.

Three batch runs were conducted at the maximum water recovery rate. Process variables were kept constant
during the run to simulate an unattended operational run. Elapsed time data sets were collected for all runs and are
available in [Flynn 2010]. A summary of the initial and final data for the three batch runs is shown in Table 2 and
Table 3. Table 3 lists the cations and anions results for the three FO/RO runs. Tap water was used in the feed so the
chloride concentration includes the chlorine in the tap water, tap water quality tables available at
http://q.arc.nasa.gov/qe/compl/dwater/08_Water_Qual_Report.pdf.

6
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 FO Modules

RO Modules

Figure 6: NASA DOC FO/RO Subsystem Prototype Used For Predictive Testing of FO-WRS System.

V. Results

Table 2: Summary of the FO/RO data for three batch runs using shower water.
Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
Water recovery [%] 97.8 95.6 96.1
Average production rate [LPH] 4.2 4.8 3.9
Initial Final Initial Final Initial Final
TOC of the hygiene feed tank [ppm] 52.8 337.4 183.5 755.7 84.4 535.6
TOC of the OA tank [ppm] 4.3 24.9 5.5 79.2 2.3 26.8
TOC of the product [ppm] 0.8 0.8 nd nd nd 1.8
pH of the hygiene feed tank 6.6 nt 5.2 5.2 5.3 6.7
pH of the OA tank 6.0 nt 4.4 5.6 5.2 6.6
EC of the hygiene feed tank [µS/cm] 63.6 27,810 56.2 21,580 73.5 32,520
EC of the OA tank [µS/cm] 24,880 17,300 9,189 22,810 8,314 24,550
EC of the product exiting the RO
modules [µS/cm] 3.4 19.3 5.4 7.8 13.8 23.9
nd < 0.5 ppm, nt = not tested

7
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Table 3: Summary of FO/RO data for three batch runs using shower water.
Parameter Run 1 Run 2 Run 3
Water recovery [%] 97.8 95.6 96.1
Feed Product Feed Product Feed Product
Na+ 2426 2.1 18523 1 18781 2.1
NH4+ 94.2 nd nd nd nd nd
K+ 28.6 nd 63.8 nd 1090 nd
Mg2+ nd nd 4.6 nd 6.8 nd
Ca2+ 9.8 nd 18.3 nd 26.3 nd
Cl- 4160 1.1 22610 1.9 31674 0.5
NO3- nd nd nd nd nd nd
PO42- nd nd nd nd nd nd
SO42- 14.4 nd 29.6 nd 54.5 nd

%TDS 0.66 nd 3.57 0.04 5.46 nd

nd < 0.5 ppm (0.05 % for TDS), nt = not tested

Although no bacterial testing was completed during this test, tests conducted by the membrane
manufacturer and contracted through Pacific Analytical Lab of Corvallis, OR, have shown FO membranes to
produce an average 6-log reduction in bacteria, a 4-log reduction on viruses, and a 3-log reduction in parasites [26].
This is a typical level of microbial rejection for a 5 angstrom pore size membrane. The FO-WRS has two such
membranes operating in series as a double membrane barrier. It also uses a re-circulating OA that can be spiked
with anti-microbial chemicals and an UV anti-microbial lamp. In addition, chlorine will be added to the product
water to ensure prolonged sterility of the product water.
VI. Discussion

The results of this testing demonstrates that the FO/RO process is an effective method of treating hygiene
water for reuse as toilet flush water. TOC reductions in excess of 99.8% were achieved. Electrical conductivity was
reduced by 99.9% and specific ion concentrations were reduced to below detection limits of 0.5 ppm. The exception
to this is Na+ and Cl- which are used in high concentrations as osmotic agents and which had levels in the product as
high as 2.1 ppm. The systems performance appears to meet applicable water quality standards.

The Sustainability Base is located in California. Therefore, California regulations apply. However, there
currently are no official State of California permitting procedures that are applicable for systems that recycle
graywater to flush toilets. There are building codes for reuse of graywater for irrigation but none for reuse as toilet
flush water. Therefore, in the absence of a State permitting authority NASA is the responsible agency for defining a
permitting requirement.

The regulatory path that NASA has decided to follow for permitting the treatment and reusing the
graywater is to treat it to disinfected tertiary treatment standards for recycled water as defined by the California
Code of Regulations, and then follow Chapter 16A Part II of the California Plumbing Code (CPC) that applies to
using recycled water for flushing toilets.

§60301.230. Disinfected tertiary recycled water.

"Disinfected tertiary recycled water" means a filtered and subsequently disinfected wastewater that meets the
following criteria:

(a) The filtered wastewater has been disinfected by either:

8
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 (1) A chlorine disinfection process following filtration that provides a CT (the product of total chlorine
residual and modal contact time measured at the same point) value of not less than 450 milligram-minutes per
liter at all times with a modal contact time of at least 90 minutes, based on peak dry weather design flow; or

(2) A disinfection process that, when combined with the filtration process, has
been demonstrated to inactivate and/or remove 99.999 percent of the plaque forming units of F specific
bacteriophage MS2, or polio virus in the wastewater. A virus that is at least as resistant to disinfection as
polio virus may be used for purposes of the demonstration.

(b) The median concentration of total coliform bacteria measured in the disinfected
effluent does not exceed an MPN of 2.2 per 100 milliliters utilizing the bacteriological results of the last seven
days for which analyses have been completed and the number of total coliform bacteria does not exceed an
MPN of 23 per 100 milliliters in more than one sample in any 30 day period. No sample shall exceed an MPN
of 240 total coliform bacteria per 100 milliliters.

The FO-WRS should meet these specifications. It will use chlorine disinfection via tablets dissolved in the
product storage tank. Chlorine levels will target 450 milligram-minutes per liter. We will also be collecting
samples and verifying specified MPN levels. Validating that the FO-WRS meets these standards will be the
objective of the early stages of testing at Sustainability Base and will be part of the commissioning of the system.
After that periodic sampling will be completed to ensure that the system meets these specifications.

NASA also has recycled hygiene water specifications for spacecraft that can be used to assess the
performance of the system. These are not applicable for terrestrial use but they do provide an indicator of how well
the system purifies the wastewater. A list of some of these standards and the FO/RO product water quality data are
provided in Table 4. The FO-WRS meets or exceeds all listed standards.

Table 4. FO/RO product water and applicable subset of NASA hygiene water specifications [27].

FO/RO *NASA
Product Hygiene
Analysis Water Water Stds.
pH 6 5.0-8.5
Dissolved Solids (ppm) 0.04 500
Total Organic Carbon 1.1 10
(ppm)
Ammonia nd 0.5
Ammonium (ppm) nd ns
Sodium (ppm) 1.7 ns
Potassium (ppm) nd 340
Magnesium (ppm) nd 0.05
Calcium (ppm) nd 30
Chloride (ppm) 1.2 200
Nitrate (ppm) nd 10
Sulfate (ppm) nd 250
Phosphate (ppm) nd ns
nd = not detected, ns = not specified

By combining the engineering specification of the FO-WRS and the results of the DOC RO/FO testing it is
possible to come up with a set of system specifications. These specifications are provided in Table 3.

9
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Table 3: Specification for Sustainability Base FO-WRS System
Parameter Green
Building Units
Product
Flow 155 L/hr
FO
Feed
Recycle
Flow 781 L/hr
OA
Recycle
Flow
Rate 279 L/hr
OA
NaCl
concentration
at
start 10 g/L
Power 3000 W
Specific
Power 19 Whr/L
Weight
 ‐ Kg

Volume
 15 m3
Re‐supply
sodium
chloride 0.3 g/L
of
product
Re‐supply
of
Chlorine 450 mg/L
of
product
Maintenance
‐
labor tbd
Cleanning
schedule tbd
Membrane
life tbd
776
Maximum
Inlet
Feed
TOC ppm
Target
OA
TOC <
80 ppm
Target
product
TOC <
10 ppm
TOC
rejection 99 %
Dissolved
Solids
Rejection 99 %

Maximum
FO
Pressure 10 psi
Maximum
RO
Pressure 725 psi
Maximum
Temperature 50 °C
Minimum
Temperature 1 °C
tbd=to be determined

VII. Conclusions

The results of testing of the DOC FO/RO system provided operational data that was used to design the
Sustainability Base FO-WRS system. The FO-WRS is designed to treat graywater to meet California Disinfected
Tertiary Recycled Water standards. The system has a foot print of 150 ft2 and consumes 23 Whr/gal. The process
needs to be resupplied with 0.3 g/L of NaCl salt (or 107 kg/year). It is designed to operate at the targeted 95%
recovery ratio. It will be designed for unattended operation 24hr/day 7 days a week. We estimate that the cost per
gallon will be between $0.05/gal to $0.10/gal, based on a 5 year payback. The exact costs will ultimately be
determined by the results of long term testing of the system at Sustainability Base.

The long term testing of the FO-WRS at the Sustainability Base is warranted to determine membrane
fouling and cleaning requirements and to ultimately determine membrane life expectancies. For a space mission,
these parameters could have a big impact on the actual costs for a given mission duration. It will also provide a
platform to develop and improve control approaches for ease of operations. All testing to date has been done using
the DOC FO/RO system. This system was only operated for short durations, typically less than 24 hrs. In addition,
it was regularly cleaned between tests and was stored in preservative when not in use. It was not a very accurate
reflection of actual operating conditions.

There also are some physical differences between the DOC FO/RO and the FO-WRS. The DOC used a
multistage RO system that both slightly reduced power consumption and ensured that all permeate passed through a
minimum of two membranes. This was done to achieve NASA’s stringent inorganic ion limits. For green building
applications this creates a problem because high purity water is corrosive. For the Sustainability Base system we

10
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
will use a single stage RO. This will slightly increase the TDS of the product and should alleviate any corrosion
concerns. The FO-WRS will also utilize an energy recovery RO pump. It will use a Clark energy recovery pump
that uses the pressure of the brine to offset the energy needed to pressurize the feed.
Another difference is the soap that will be used. It is unlikely that NASA No Rinse Body soap will be
used in Sustainability Base. A commercial soap will be used. The soap will be selected based at least partly on
performance in the system but there may be an impact on system performance. The FO membranes typically will
allow more unused soap to pass that used soap. So, there will be soap usage guidelines recommendations provide to
the building as well.

The Sustainability Base is currently scheduled to be completed in August 2011. After this the FO-WRS
will be installed. It is expected that the system will be operational by late September 2011. After installation it is
planned that the system will be operated 24/7 days a week for about 3 years to fully evaluate long term operational
issues.

Acknowledgments
This work has been funded by NASA Ames Research Center. Particular acknowledgment is made to Dr. Steven
Zornetzer who has the vision and conviction to champion the concept of the Sustainability Base and without whose
support this project could never have happened.

References

[1] Loeb, S., Titelman, L., Korngold, E., and Freiman, J., (1997) Effect of porous support fabric on osmosis through
a Loeb-Sourirajan type asymmetric membrane, Journal of Membrane Science, 129 243-249.

[2] Metha, G.D., S. Loeb, Performance of permasep b-9 and b-10 membranes in various osmotic regions and at high
osmotic pressures, J. membr. Sci. 4 (3) (1979) 335-349.

[3] Loeb, S., G.D. Mehta, 2-coefficient water transport-equation for pressure retarded osmosis, J. Membr. Sci. 4 (3)
1979 351-362.

[4] Mehta, G. D., Further results on the performance of present-day osmotic membranes in various osmotic regions,
J. membr. Sci. 10 (1) 1982) 3-19.

[5] Beaudry, E., and Herron, J., Direct osmosis for concentrating wastewater, Proceedings of the 27th International
Conference on Environmental Systems, SAE 972270, Lake Tahoe, Nevada, 1997.

[6] Dalla-Rosa, M., and Giroux, F., (2001) Osmotic treatment (OT) and problems related to the solution
management, Journal of Food Engineering, 49 223-236.

[7] Cath, T., Adams, V. D., and Childress, A., (2005) Membrane Contactor Processes for Wastewater Reclamation
in Space. II. Combined Direct Osmosis, Osmotic Distillation, and Membrane Distillation for Treatment of Metabolic
Wastewater, Journal of Membrane Science, 257 111-119.

[8] Cath, T., Gormly, S., Beaudry, E., Flynn, M., Adams, V D., and Childress, A., (2005) Membrane Contactor
Processes for Wastewater Reclamation in Space. I. Direct Osmotic Concentration as Pretreatment for Reverse
Osmosis, Journal of Membrane Science, 257 85-98.

[9] Gormly, S., Adams, V. D., Cath,T., Childress, A., Flynn, M., and Beaudry, E., Direct osmotic concentration: a
primary water treatment process of space life support applications, Proceedings of the 33rd International
Conference on Environmental Systems, SAE 203-01-2332, Vancouver, Canada, 2003.

[10] Flynn, M. L. Delzeit, S. Gormly, et al, Development of the Direct Osmotic Concentration System, 40th
International Conference on Environmental Systems, AIAA 2010-6098, 2010.
11
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
[11] Beaudry, E., and Lampi, K., (1990) Membrane technology for direct osmosis concentration of fruit juices, Food
Technology, 44 121.

[12] Wrolstad, R., McDaniel, M., Durst, R., Micheals, N., Lampi, K., and Beaudry, E., (1993) Composition and
sensory characterization of red raspberry juice concentrated by direct-osmosis or evaporation, Journal of Food
Science, 58 633-637.

[13] Petrotos, K., Quantick, P., and Petropakis, H., (1999) Direct osmotic concentration of tomato juice in tubular
membrane - module configuration. II. The effect of using clarified tomato juice on the process performance, Journal
of Membrane Science, 160 171-177.

[14] Petrotos, K., Quantick, P., and Petropakis,H., (1998) A study of the direct osmotic concentration of tomato
juice in tubular membrane - module configuration. I. The effect of certain basic process parameters on the process
performance, Journal of Membrane Science, 150 99-110.

[15] Kravath, R., and Davis, J., (1975) Desalination of seawater by direct osmosis, Desalination, 16 151–155.

[16] Biberdorf, C., (2004) Filter in a pouch, The Warrior, July-August 3.

[17] McCutcheon, J., McGinnis, R., and Elimelech, M., (2005) A novel ammonia-carbon dioxide forward (direct)
osmosis desalination process, Desalination, 174 1-11.

[18] York, R., Thiel, R., and Beaudry, E., (1999) Full-scale experience of direct osmosis concentration applied to
leachate management, Proceedings of Sardinia ’99 Seventh International Waste Management and Landfill
Symposium, S. Margherita di Pula, Cagliari, Sardinia, Italy, 1999.

[19] Gormly, S., J. Herron, M. Flynn, et al, Forward osmosis for applications in sustainable energy development,
Desalination and Water Treatment, 27 (2011) , 327-333

[20] Post. J. Veerman, et al., Salinity-gradient power Evaluation of pressure-retarded osmosis and reverse
elecgtrodialysis, Journal of Membrane Sciences 288 (2007) 218-230

[21] Laeb, S., F. Vanhessen, D. Shahaf, Production of energy from concentrated brines by pressure-retarded
osmosis. @. Experimental results and projected energy costs, J. membr. Sci. 1 (3) (1976) 249-269.

[22] Øystein Skråmestø Sandvik, Petter Hersleth & Karin Seelos, The Forces of Osmosis and Tidal Currents,
HYDRO2009, October 2009

[23] Mehta, G., and Loeb, S., (1978) Internal polarization in the porous substructure of a semi-permeable membrane
under pressure-retarded osmosis, Journal of Membrane Science, 4, 261

[24] Lee, K., Baker, R., and Lonsdale, H., (1981) Membranes for power generation by pressure-retarted osmosis,
Journal of Membrane Science, 8, 141-171

[25] Loeb, S., Titelman, L., Korngold, E., and Freiman, J., (1997) Effect of porous support fabric on osmosis
through a Loeb-Sourirajan type asymmetric membrane, Journal of Membrane Science, 129 243-249.

[26] C2MHILL, Laboratory Report for Hidrations Technology, Inc. Applied Sciences Laboratory, 2005, Reference
N0. E2513.

[27] Handford, A., (2002) Advanced life support baseline values and assumptions document, NASA - Johnson
Space Center, Houston, TX.

12
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
 13
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics

View publication stats