| Literature DB >> 26075726 |
Yali Song1, Bingzhi Dong2, Naiyun Gao3, Yang Deng4.
Abstract
Two coagulants, aluminum sulfate and ferric chloride, were tested to reduce natural organic matter (NOM) as a pretreatment prior to polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) microfiltration (MF) membranes for potable water treatment. The results showed that the two coagulants exhibited different treatment performance in NOM removal. Molecular weight (MW) distributions of NOM in the tested surface raw water were concentrated at 3-5 kDa and approximately 0.2 kDa. Regardless of the coagulant species and dosages, the removal of 0.2 kDa NOM molecules was limited. In contrast, NOM at 3-5 kDa were readily removed with increasing coagulant dosages. In particular, aluminum sulfate favorably removed NOM near 5 kDa, whereas ferric chloride tended to reduce 3 kDa organic substances. Although aluminum sulfate and ferric chloride could improve the flux of the ensuing MF treatment, the optimal coagulant dosages to achieve effective pretreatment were different: 2-30 mg/L for aluminum sulfate and >15 mg/L for ferric chloride. The scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of the membrane-filtered coagulated raw water showed that coagulation efficiency dramatically affected membrane flux and that good coagulation properties can reduce membrane fouling.Entities:
Keywords: coagulation; membrane flux; membrane fouling; microfiltration; organic matter
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26075726 PMCID: PMC4483725 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph120606700
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Basic physical and chemical parameters of the microfiltration (MF) membranes used.
| Material | Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) |
|---|---|
| Type | Hollow fiber |
| Pore size, μm | 0.1 |
| Membrane surface area, cm2 | 75 |
| Type of filtration | Dead-end |
| Type of pressure | Outside-inside |
Figure 1Schematic of the experimental setup.
Figure 2(a) Effect of aluminum sulfate on MW of organic matter; (b) Effect of ferric chloride on MW of organic matter.
Figure 3Effect of different coagulants on dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and UV254 removals.
Figure 4Effect of different coagulation pretreatments on membrane fouling decline.
Figure 5SEM images of membrane surface after different coagulations and filtration (×5000).