Chapter 3: Removal of dissolved

organic compounds
(Removal of suspended solids)
Pressure driven membrane technology:
ultrafiltration and nanofiltration
Adsorption on activated carbon
Removal of organic compounds:
pressure driven membrane
processes
100 100000
KCl retention (%)

80 10000

MWCO
60 1000
40 100
20 RO NF
NF UF 10
0 1
0 20 40 60 80 100
Objective for UF - NF
UF:
Removal of ‘large’ organic compounds
• Color & taste
• NOM
• Viruses, bacteria
Ion concentrations unchanged
Objective for UF - NF
NF:
Removal of ‘small’ organic compounds
• Toxic compounds: pesticides, hormone disruptors,…
• Degradation products of biological purification
• Dyes
• …
Ions (partly) removed:
• Hardness
• Heavy metals
• Nitrates
• Sulfates
 Ultrafiltration (UF)
Permeability 10-15
(l / h.m².bar)
Pressure difference 1–5
(bar)
Pore size (nm) 2-100
Retention
Monovalent ions -
Divalent ions -
Small organic -
compounds
macromolecules +
Particles +
Separation principle Sieving
 Nanofiltration (NF)
Permeability 1.5-15
(l / h.m².bar)
Pressure difference 5 – 20
(bar)
Pore size (nm) 0.1 - 5
Retention
Monovalent ions -
Divalent ions +
Small organic -/+
compounds
macromolecules +
Particles +
Separation principle Sieving, charge interactions,
diffusion
Mechanisms for retention
ULTRAFILTRATION: Sieving
Retention: molecular weight cut-off (MWC)
• = molar mass of a component that is retained
for 90%
• MWC = 5,000…100,000
Water flux: as for microfiltration
Mechanisms for retention
NANOFILTRATION: Sieving – charge
interactions – solution/diffusion
Retention: molecular weight cut-off (MWC)
• MWC = 150…1,000
• Uncharged compounds!
• Molecular structure!
• Modeling: pore size distribution – diffusion –
charge interactions
Mechanisms for retention
Retention in nanofiltration?
• Transport equations of Spiegler and Kedem:
Jv = Lp . (P - .)
Js = Ps. x. + (1 - ). Jv.c
• From this: with
1
 .(1  F ) F  exp(  .J v )
R Ps
1 .F
• : log-normal distribution = reflection of the pore size
distribution
• Ps, Jv experimentally determined
• Uncharged compounds!
Mechanisms for retention
Osmotic pressure:
– natural tendency to decrease a concentration difference



– Pressure driven membrane processes: applied pressure >

osmotic pressure!
– Approximate calculation: Van’t Hoff’s Law
–  = . cj. RT/M  retention of small molecules
Mechanisms for retention
Retention in nanofiltration, charged
compounds?
• Electrostatic interaction: Donnan potential
• Membrane charge: experimental determination
• Modeling: extended Nernst-Planck equation
• Mixtures of ions: qualitatively
Water flux in nanofiltration: Hagen-
Poiseuille
Implementation
Which compounds to remove?
• BOD, COD
• NOM
• Individual components
• Color
•…
Maximal concentration in permeate?
Membrane selection and lab-scale test
Scale-up: determination of configuration
Implementation
 .(1  F ) 1
Jv = Lp . (P - .) R F  exp(  .J v )
1 .F Ps

Flux:
 from concentrations in solution
 from lab tests: retention at P = 
Lp from lab tests: slope flux (P)
Retention: known components
Ps ~ r-1  Ps = P’s .r’ / r (with P’s , r’
known)
Design of membrane filtration
Flux through a membrane ~ΔP
Viscosity: flux ~η-1
Membrane resistance coefficient:
κM = ΔP / η∙J
(J is flux per m2)
Temperature dependence through viscosity
effect
Pressure is control parameter
Implementation
Choice of pressure = economic optimum
• Low pressure = low flux = high investment cost
• High pressure = high flux, high energy cost
Required membrane surface area? A = Q/Jv
Number of modules? n = A/(m² per module)

Multistep configuration: determination of

membrane surface area per module
Integrity monitoring
Online measurement of effluent concentrations
Bacterial concentrations: not possible
(measuring not instantly) while determines
dosing of disinfectant
Air pressure testing for leaks
Sonic testing
Repair of modules: capillaries, hollow fibres
Full scale membrane filtration
Dead-end (a) or cross-flow mode (b)
Configuration
Dead-end filtration?

...may look like this

Membrane fouling
Membrane fouling
Depends on specific application
Lab tests: comparison with pure water flux
(short term)
Pilot tests: flux as a function of time (mid-
long term) – increased pressure
determines point of cleaning
Establishing cleaning procedures:
• Pretreatment needed?
• Backwash (UF), air sparging (capillary UF/NF)
• Chemical cleaning
Concentrate problemacy
10-30% concentrate
Possibilities:
• (Re)use for lower quality objectives (rinsing
water,…)
• Direct discharge
• Indirect discharge (sewer)