| Literature DB >> 28406468 |
Dawood Eisa Sachit1, John N Veenstra2.
Abstract
In this work, three different types of ReverEntities:
Keywords: brackish water; foulant analysis; fouling; reverse osmosis
Year: 2017 PMID: 28406468 PMCID: PMC5489857 DOI: 10.3390/membranes7020023
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the experimental RO system.
Water quality analysis of prepared feed waters of locations 1, 5 and 6.
| Parameter | Location # 1 | Location # 5 | Location # 6 |
|---|---|---|---|
| pH | 7.4–8.2 | 8.2–8.31 | 7.02–8 |
| Electrical Conductivity (mS/cm) | 2.4–2.7 | 1.1–1.4 | 3.4–3.7 |
| Total Hardness as CaCO3 (mg/L) | 390–438 | 192–202 | 579–645 |
| Total Organic Carbon (TOC) (mg/L) | 1.4–2.3 | 1.2–1.4 | 4.6–4.8 |
| Calcium (Ca2+) (mg/L) | 77.4–82 | 42.1–47 | 98.4–115.8 |
| Magnesium (Mg2+) (mg/L) | 47–53.5 | 17.2–19.4 | 81.4–88.2 |
| Sodium (Na+) (mg/L) | 320–356 | 178.1–189 | 682–714 |
| Total Alkalinity as HCO3− (mg/L) | 73–94.2 | 95.4–111.2 | 72–82.4 |
| Sulfate (SO42−) (mg/L) | 312–320 | 88.8–91.4 | 681–687.4 |
| Chloride (Cl−)(mg/L) | 509–522 | 257–284.4 | 954–968.5 |
| Nitrate (NO3−) (mg/L) | 0.1–0.2 | 0.1–0.3 | 0.1–0.4 |
| Phosphate (PO43−) (mg/L) | 0.03–0.2 | 0.01–0.05 | 0.03–0.21 |
| Iron (Fe2+) (mg/L) | 0.0–0.05 | 0.01–0.03 | 0.01–0.13 |
| Potassium (K+) (mg/L) | 0.2–0.4 | 0.2–0.34 | 0.4–0.8 |
| Zinc (Zn2+) (mg/L) | 0.01–0.03 | 0.01–0.03 | 0.01–0.05 |
| TDS (mg/L) | 1338–1428 | 679–742 | 2569–2657 |
| Saturation Index (SI) at 11 °C | (−0.95)–(−0.012) | (−0.19)–(0.026) | (−1.3)–(−0.23) |
| Saturation Index (SI) at 37 °C | (−0.41)–(0.53) | (0.36)–(0.57) | (−0.79)–(0.31) |
Summary of all the implemented runs for the experimental RO system.
| Run’s Number | Location | Type of RO Membrane | Temperature (°C) | Run’s Number | Location | Type of RO Membrane | Temperature (°C) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 6 | SE | 37 | 13 | 1 | SE | 37 |
| 2 | 6 | SE | 11 | 14 | 1 | SE | 11 |
| 3 | 6 | CE | 37 | 15 | 1 | CE | 37 |
| 4 | 6 | CE | 11 | 16 | 1 | CE | 11 |
| 5 | 6 | AD | 37 | 17 | 1 | AD | 37 |
| 6 | 6 | AD | 11 | 18 | 1 | AD | 11 |
| 7 1 | 6 | SE | 37 | 19 | 5 | SE | 37 |
| 8 1 | 6 | SE | 11 | 20 | 5 | SE | 11 |
| 9 1 | 6 | CE | 37 | 21 | 5 | CE | 37 |
| 10 1 | 6 | CE | 11 | 22 | 5 | CE | 11 |
| 11 1 | 6 | AD | 37 | 23 | 5 | AD | 37 |
| 12 1 | 6 | AD | 11 | 24 | 5 | AD | 11 |
1 Run conducted with MF membrane as a pretreatment unit of the feed water.
Figure 2SEM image and EDSX spectrum of unused membrane: (a) CE; (b) SE and (c) AD.
Figure 3SEM images and EDSX spectra of (a) run 1 at a magnification of 200×; (b) run 1 at a magnification of 1000×; (c) run 13 at a magnification of 200×; (d) run 13 at a magnification of 1000×; (e) run 19 at a magnification of 200×; (f) run 19 at a magnification of 1000×.
Figure 4SEM image and EDSX spectrum of fouled SE membrane for location 6 (run 1). Run 1 was conducted at a feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm, a temperature of 37 °C and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 5SEM image and EDSX spectra of fouled CE membrane for location 6 (run 3). Run 3 was conducted at a feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm, a temperature of 37 °C and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 6SEM image and EDSX spectra of fouled AD membrane for location 6 (run 5). Run 5 was conducted at a feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm, a temperature of 37 °C and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 7SEM image and EDSX spectrum of fouled CE membrane for location 6 (run 4).
Figure 8SEM images of fouled RO membranes: (a) CE membrane at 37 °C for location 6 (run 3); (b) CE membrane at 11 °C for location 6 (run 4); (c) SE membrane at 37 °C for location 1 (run 13); (d) SE membrane at 11 °C for location 1 (run 14); (e) SE membrane at 37 °C for location 5 (run 19); (f) SE membrane at 11 °C for location 5 (run 20); (g) CE membrane at 37 °C for location 5 (run 21) and (h) CE membrane at 11 °C for location 5 (run 22).
Figure 9EDSX spectra of fouled RO membranes: (a) SE membrane at 37 °C for location 1 (run 13); (b) SE membrane at 11 °C for location 1 (run 14); (c) SE membrane at 37 °C for location 5 (run 19); (d) SE membrane at 11 °C for location 5 (run 20); (e) CE membrane at 37 °C for location 5 (run 21) and (f) CE membrane at 11 °C for location 5 (run 22).
Figure 10Evolution of the permeate calcium concentration of run 19 at 37 °C and run 20 at 11 °C. Runs 19 and 20 were conducted at a feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm of location 5 and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 11(a) SEM image of the fouled CE membrane by the un-pretreated feed water of location 6 by MF membrane (run 3); (b) SEM image of the fouled CE membrane by the pretreated feed water of location 6 by MF membrane (run 9); (c) EDSX spectrum of run 3 and (d) EDSX spectrum of run 9. Both runs were conducted at a feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm, a temperature of 37 °C and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 12Evolution of the permeate (a) and concentrate (b) calcium concentration of runs 3 (without MF pretreatment) and 9 (with MF pretreatment). Runs 3 and 9 were conducted at a temperature of 37 °C, feed flow rate of 2.27 Lpm of location 6 and a range of feed pressure of 2620–2757 kPa.
Figure 13SEM images and EDSX spectrum of the cross section of the clean SE membrane.
Figure 14SEM images and EDSX spectrum of the cross section of the fouled SE membrane for location 6 (run 1).
Figure 15SEM images and EDSX spectrum of the cross section of the fouled SE membrane for location 1 (run 13).
Figure 16SEM images and EDSX spectrum of the cross section of the fouled SE membrane for location 5 (run 19).
Figure 17FTIR spectra for the RO membranes fouled by the feed water of location 6 at 37 °C: (a) SE membrane (run 1); (b) CE membrane (run 3) and (c) AD membrane (run 5).
Figure 18FTIR spectra for the RO membranes fouled by the feed water of location 6 at 11 °C: (a) SE membrane (run 2); (b) CE membrane (run 4); (c) AD membrane (run 6).
Figure 19FTIR spectra for the SE membranes fouled by the feed water of location 6 at 37 °C (run 7 with MF pretreatment and run 1 without MF pretreatment).