| Literature DB >> 35877907 |
Huarong Yu1,2, Siyuan Shangguan1,2, Chenyu Xie3, Haiyang Yang1,2, Chunhai Wei1,2, Hongwei Rong1,2, Fangshu Qu1,2.
Abstract
Membrane bioreactors have been widely used in textile wastewater treatment. Intensive chemical cleaning is indispensable in the MBR for textile wastewater treatment due to the severe membrane fouling implied. This work investigated the aging of three different membranes, polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), polyether sulfone (PES), and polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), in the MBRs for textile wastewater treatment. Pilot-scale MBRs were operated and the used membrane was characterized. Batch chemical soaking tests were conducted to elucidate the aging properties of the membranes. The results indicated that the PVDF membrane was most liable to the chemical cleaning, and the PES and PTFE membranes were rather stable. The surface hydrophobicity of the PVDF increased in the acid aging test, and the pore size and pure water flux decreased due to the elevated hydrophobic effect; alkaline oxide aging destructed the structure of the PVDF membrane, enlarged pore size, and increased pure water flux. Chemical cleaning only altered the interfacial properties (hydrophobicity and surface zeta potential) of the PES and PTFE membranes. The fluoro-substitution and the dehydrofluorination of the PVDF, chain scission of the PES molecules, and dehydrofluorination of the PTFE were observed in aging. A chemically stable and anti-aging membrane would be of great importance in the MBR for textile wastewater treatment due to the intensive chemical cleaning applied.Entities:
Keywords: chemical cleaning; membrane aging; membrane bioreactor; textile wastewater
Year: 2022 PMID: 35877907 PMCID: PMC9316503 DOI: 10.3390/membranes12070704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Water quality of the influent of pilot-scale MBRs.
| CODcr
| Ammonia Nitrogen | Total Phosphorus | pH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low loading | 145 ± 23 | 0.26 ± 0.12 | 0.41 ± 0.31 | 7.98 ± 0.53 |
| Medium loading | 187 ± 35 | 0.89 ± 0.26 | 1.94 ± 1.13 | 8.12 ± 0.29 |
| High loading | 560 ± 91 | 17.35 ± 3.84 | 6.10 ± 2.93 | 8.29 ± 0.65 |
Parameters of the membrane modules and the corresponding MBRs.
| Membrane Material | Membrane Module | Membrane Area | Flux | Operation Mode | MLSS in MBR Tank | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MBR 1 | PVDF | Flat sheet | 420 | 15 | 8 min on, 2 min off | 12 |
| MBR 2 | PES | Flat sheet | 470 | 15 | 8 min on, 2 min off | 12 |
| MBR 3 | PTFE | Hollow fiber | 360 | 15 | 8 min on, 2 min off | 12 |
Calculation of CT values of cleaning frequency, cleaning duration, and chemical concentration.
| Chemical | Chemical Cleaning Procedures in Real MBR Operation | CT Value (gh/L) | Batch Tests | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Offline Cleaning | Online Cleaning | 1 Month | Chemical | Soaking Time in a Continuous Batch-Test Matched with the CT Value in Real MBRs Clean | ||||||
| 1-Month Equivalent | 3-Months Equivalent | 1-Year Equivalent | 2-Years Equivalent | 3-Years Equivalent | 5-Years Equivalent | |||||
| Sodium Hypochlorite (mg/L) | 3000 | 500 | 36.5 | 3000 | 12.16 h | 36.48 h | 6.08 days | 12.16 days | 18.24 days | 30.40 days |
| Sodium hydroxide (mg/L) | 40,000 | 480 | 39,452 | 12.16 h | 36.48 h | 6.08 days | 12.16 days | 18.24 days | 30.40 days | |
| Hydrochloric acid (mg/L) | 20,000 | 500 | 240.5 | 19,767 | 12.16 h | 36.48 h | 6.08 days | 12.16 days | 18.24 days | 30.40 days |
Figure 1(a) Pore size, (b) pure water flux, and (c) contact angle of the pristine membrane and used membrane from the pilot MBRs.
Figure 2(a) Pore size, (b) pure water flux, (c) contact angle, and (d) zeta potential of the pristine membrane and aged membrane in the acid aging test.
Figure 3SEM photograph of the pristine membrane and aged (five-years equivalent) membrane in the acid aging test. (a) Pristine PVDF membrane, (b) prestine PES membrane, (c) pristine PTFE membrane, (d) aged PVDF membrane, (e) aged PES membrane, (f) aged PTFE membrane.
Figure 4The FTIR of pristine and aged (five-years equivalent) membranes in the acid aging test.
Figure 5(a) Pore size, (b) pure water flux, (c) contact angle, and (d) zeta potential of the pristine membrane and aged membrane in the alkaline oxide aging test.
Figure 6SEM photograph of the pristine membrane and aged (five-years equivalent) membrane in the alkaline oxide aging test. (a) Aged PVDF membrane, (b) aged PES membrane, (c) aged PTFE membrane.
Figure 7Photographs of the pristine and aged (five-years equivalent) membrane in the batch aging test.
Figure 8The FTIR of pristine and aged (five-years equivalent) membranes in the alkaline oxide aging test.