iwa 3018 poster

of 1 /1
Characterization of nanofiltration membranes for scale prevention in seawater reverse osmosis L. Llenas*, G. Ribera*, A. Yaroshchuk** . ***, X. Martínez-Lladó *, M. Rovira* . ***, J. De Pablo* . *** * CTM Centre Tecnològic; Av. Bases de Manresa 1, 08242 Manresa, Spain (E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]) ** Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats (ICREA) ***Department of Chemical Engineering, Polytechnic University of Catalonia; Av. Diagonal 647, 08028 Barcelona,Spain One of the major problems in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) and a limiting factor for its proper operation is membrane scaling (Schäfer et al. 2006). Hassan et al (Hassan et al. 1998), proposed the use of nanofiltration (NF) as a pretreatment of desalination. Feeding of the NF permeate to desalination plants, not only made possible their operation with less chemicals and raising significantly their permeate and distillate recovery ratios, but also allowed for lowering their energy consumption. Several studies have shown that the rejection of scale-forming ions is not the same for various membranes (Hassan et al. 2000). The aim of this work is to study the productivity and the selectivity of eleven different nanofiltration membranes to prevent fouling in SWRO caused by inorganic compounds presents in seawater. All membranes have been characterized in terms of surface roughness by Atomic Force Microscopy. INTRODUCTION All the experiments were carried out in a laboratory scale cross-flow test cell in total recirculation mode. See Fig. 1: The rejection of divalent ions is good in most of membranes tested and that is very important for the prevention of scaling. Roughness have been measured with AFM. Membranes with a higher roughness present a high conductivity rejection and vice versa. Colloidal fouling in NF membranes is strongly correlated with membrane surface roughness. Membranes with high surface roughness are more prone to fouling. The most suitable NF membranes as pretreatment for scaling prevention are: NF270 (Dow Chemical), K-SR2 (Koch) and NF99HF (Alfa Laval). METHODOLOGY ION REJECTION RESULTS AND MODEL FITTING Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) has been used to characterize nanofiltration membranes tested in terms of surface roughness. Analytical methods for the analysis of ion rejections: Ionic Chromatography (Dionex ICS-2100); Total Carbon Analyzer. Shimadzu TOC-5050A. was used to analyze inorganic carbon and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). Agilent 9500cx Fig.1. Flow sheet of experimental system used ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY RESULTS Table 1. Surface roughness of membranes at a scan size of 5 x 5 μm 2 compared with permeate flow and conductivity rejection NF270 NF200 NF NF90 ESNA 1- LF2 K-SR2 K-SR3 K-TFCS NF99 NF99HF CONCLUSIONS Fig.6. AFM images for ten membranes characterized 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 % Sulphate rejection Permeate flow (l·h -1 ·m -2 ) NF270 NF200 NF ESNA 1-LF2 K-TFCS K-SR2 K-SR3 ALNF99 NF99HF NF90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 % Calcium rejection Permeate flow (l·h -1 ·m -2 ) NF270 NF200 NF ESNA 1-LF2 K-TFCS K-SR2 K-SR3 ALNF99 NF99HF NF90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 % Magnesium rejection Permeate flow (l·h -1 ·m -2 ) NF270 NF200 NF ESNA 1-LF2 K-TFCS K-SR2 K-SR3 ALNF99 NF99HF NF90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 50 100 150 % Bicarbonate rejection Permeate flow (l·h -1 ·m -2 ) NF270 NF200 NF ESNA 1-LF2 K-TFCS K-SR2 K-SR3 ALNF99 NF99HF NF90 Fig.2. Calcium rejection and SK fit Fig.3. Sulphate rejection and SK fit Fig.4. Magnesium rejection and SK fit Fig.5. Bicarbonate rejection and SK fit Figures 2-5 show the scaling forming ions rejections of different NF membranes tested, as well as the fitting with the Spiegler Kedem model. Membrane Rms (nm) Permeate flow (lmh) % Rejection NF90 103.3 10.7 60.8 K-TFCS 50.17 26.3 52.8 ESNA 1-LF2 49.07 137.9 22.1 NF99HF 12.29 104.3 28.6 NF99 11.87 50.0 31.3 NF 7.43 58.0 29.6 NF200 7.39 59.5 23.2 NF270 5.35 108.8 20.5 K-SR3 1.78 49.0 32.8 K-SR2 0.76 127.0 15.7 Hassan A.M, et al (1998) A new approach to membrane and thermal seawater desalination processes using nanofiltration membranes (Part 1). Desalination 118, 35- 51 Hassan A.M, et al (2000) A demonstration plant based on the new NF-SWRO process, Desalination 131, 157-171 Schäfer A.I, Fane A.G, Waite T.D (2006) Nanofiltration principles and applications. Elsevier publications Spiegler K.S., Kedem O.; Thermodynamics of hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis): criteria for efficient membranes (1966) Desalination 1, 311-326 REFERENCES For the parameterization of our experimental data we used the Spiegler Kedem model (Spiegler and Kedem. 1966). Within its scope the solute rejection. R. is related to the trans-membrane volume flow in this way: The fitting parameters obtained with the Spiegler Kedem model are apparent ones, in particular, because they depend on the cross-flow velocity. However, if this is not varied (as it was the case in the present study) the apparent reflection coefficients and solute permeabilities can be used for the quantitative comparison of performance of various membranes as well as for the interpolation of rejection data between the available experimental points. This study was financially supported by Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona (AGBAR) within the scope of CENIT project “Des arrollos tecnológicos hacia un ciclo del agua urbano auto-sostenible (SOSTAQUA)”.

Author: fundacio-ctm-centre-tecnologic

Post on 12-Jul-2015

238 views

Category:

Technology


2 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Characterization of nanofiltration membranes

    for scale prevention in seawater reverse

    osmosisL. Llenas*, G. Ribera*, A. Yaroshchuk**.***, X. Martnez-Llad*, M. Rovira*.***, J. De Pablo*.***

    * CTM Centre Tecnolgic; Av. Bases de Manresa 1, 08242 Manresa, Spain

    (E-mail: [email protected], [email protected])

    ** Instituci Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avanats (ICREA)

    ***Department of Chemical Engineering, Polytechnic University of Catalonia; Av. Diagonal 647, 08028

    Barcelona,Spain

    One of the major problems in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) and a limiting

    factor for its proper operation is membrane scaling (Schfer et al. 2006). Hassan et

    al (Hassan et al. 1998), proposed the use of nanofiltration (NF) as a pretreatment of

    desalination. Feeding of the NF permeate to desalination plants, not only made

    possible their operation with less chemicals and raising significantly their permeate

    and distillate recovery ratios, but also allowed for lowering their energy consumption.

    Several studies have shown that the rejection of scale-forming ions is not the same

    for various membranes (Hassan et al. 2000). The aim of this work is to study the

    productivity and the selectivity of eleven different nanofiltration membranes to

    prevent fouling in SWRO caused by inorganic compounds presents in seawater. All

    membranes have been characterized in terms of surface roughness by Atomic

    Force Microscopy.

    INTRODUCTION

    All the experiments were carried out in a laboratory scale

    cross-flow test cell in total recirculation mode. See Fig. 1:

    The rejection of divalent ions is good in most of membranes tested and that isvery important for the prevention of scaling.

    Roughness have been measured with AFM. Membranes with a higher roughnesspresent a high conductivity rejection and vice versa. Colloidal fouling in NF

    membranes is strongly correlated with membrane surface roughness. Membranes

    with high surface roughness are more prone to fouling.

    The most suitable NF membranes as pretreatment for scaling prevention are:NF270 (Dow Chemical), K-SR2 (Koch) and NF99HF (Alfa Laval).

    METHODOLOGY ION REJECTION RESULTS AND MODEL FITTING

    Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) has been used to characterize

    nanofiltration membranes tested in terms of surface roughness.

    Analytical methods for the analysis of ion rejections: Ionic

    Chromatography (Dionex ICS-2100); Total Carbon Analyzer.

    Shimadzu TOC-5050A. was used to analyze inorganic carbon

    and Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS).

    Agilent 9500cx

    Fig.1. Flow sheet of experimental system used

    ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY RESULTS

    Table 1. Surface roughness of membranes at a scan size of 5 x

    5 m2 compared with permeate flow and conductivity rejection

    NF270

    NF200

    NF

    NF90

    ESNA 1-

    LF2

    K-SR2

    K-SR3

    K-TFCS

    NF99

    NF99HF

    CONCLUSIONS

    Fig.6. AFM images for ten membranes characterized

    30

    40

    50

    60

    70

    80

    90

    100

    0 50 100 150

    % S

    ulp

    ha

    te r

    ejec

    tio

    n

    Permeate flow (lh-1m-2)

    NF270

    NF200

    NF

    ESNA 1-LF2

    K-TFCS

    K-SR2

    K-SR3

    ALNF99

    NF99HF

    NF90

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    60

    70

    80

    90

    100

    0 50 100 150

    % C

    alc

    ium

    rej

    ecti

    on

    Permeate flow (lh-1m-2)

    NF270

    NF200

    NF

    ESNA 1-LF2

    K-TFCS

    K-SR2

    K-SR3

    ALNF99

    NF99HF

    NF90

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    60

    70

    80

    90

    100

    0 50 100 150

    %

    Ma

    gn

    esiu

    m r

    ejec

    tion

    Permeate flow (lh-1m-2)

    NF270

    NF200

    NF

    ESNA 1-LF2

    K-TFCS

    K-SR2

    K-SR3

    ALNF99

    NF99HF

    NF90

    0

    10

    20

    30

    40

    50

    60

    70

    80

    90

    100

    0 50 100 150

    %

    Bic

    arb

    on

    ate

    rej

    ecti

    on

    Permeate flow (lh-1m-2)

    NF270

    NF200

    NF

    ESNA 1-LF2

    K-TFCS

    K-SR2

    K-SR3

    ALNF99

    NF99HF

    NF90

    Fig.2. Calcium rejection and SK fit Fig.3. Sulphate rejection and SK fit

    Fig.4. Magnesium rejection and SK fit Fig.5. Bicarbonate rejection and SK fit

    Figures 2-5 show the scaling forming ions rejections of different NF membranes tested, as well

    as the fitting with the Spiegler Kedem model.

    Membrane Rms (nm) Permeate flow (lmh) % RejectionNF90 103.3 10.7 60.8

    K-TFCS 50.17 26.3 52.8

    ESNA 1-LF2 49.07 137.9 22.1

    NF99HF 12.29 104.3 28.6

    NF99 11.87 50.0 31.3

    NF 7.43 58.0 29.6

    NF200 7.39 59.5 23.2

    NF270 5.35 108.8 20.5

    K-SR3 1.78 49.0 32.8

    K-SR2 0.76 127.0 15.7

    Hassan A.M, et al (1998) A new approach to membrane and thermal seawaterdesalination processes using nanofiltration membranes (Part 1). Desalination 118, 35-

    51

    Hassan A.M, et al (2000) A demonstration plant based on the new NF-SWROprocess, Desalination 131, 157-171

    Schfer A.I, Fane A.G, Waite T.D (2006) Nanofiltration principles and applications.Elsevier publications

    Spiegler K.S., Kedem O.; Thermodynamics of hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis):criteria for efficient membranes (1966) Desalination 1, 311-326

    REFERENCES

    For the parameterization of our experimental data we used the Spiegler Kedemmodel (Spiegler and Kedem. 1966). Within its scope the solute rejection. R. is

    related to the trans-membrane volume flow in this way:

    The fitting parameters obtained with the Spiegler Kedem model are apparent ones,

    in particular, because they depend on the cross-flow velocity. However, if this is not

    varied (as it was the case in the present study) the apparent reflection coefficients

    and solute permeabilities can be used for the quantitative comparison of

    performance of various membranes as well as for the interpolation of rejection data

    between the available experimental points.

    This study was financially supported by Sociedad General de Aguas de Barcelona (AGBAR) within the scope of CENIT project Desarrollos tecnolgicos hacia un ciclo del agua urbano auto-sostenible (SOSTAQUA).