Performance evaluation of different ultrafiltration membranes for the reclamation and reuse of secondary effluent
Research highlights
► Low pressure UF membranes were used to recover the water from secondary effluent. ► Spiral polymeric membrane is more sensitive to TMP compared to tubular ceramic. ► Tubular ceramic membrane obtained high rejection compared to spiral polymeric. ► Significant differences in the performance of the membranes were observed.
Introduction
Water recycling is a way of moving towards sustainable management of our resources and environment by adopting the concept of using water that is ‘fit for purpose’. The reuse of treated municipal effluent for non potable purposes is therefore considered vital in alleviating the demand on existing and limited water supplies while helping to protect remaining water sources from being polluted. In recent decades, advanced membrane technology has become increasingly attractive for reclamation of secondary wastewater as it is highly efficient, easy to operate, economical and satisfies more stringent discharge regulations and supply limitations [1], [2]. Porous membranes like ultrafiltration (UF) and microfiltration (MF) membranes present significant operational advantages such as reduced sludge, a high quality of permeate and a small space requirement due to high packing density. Moderate capital costs and ease of operation make it a very competitive alternative to conventional technologies [3], [4]. In many cases, UF alone or in combination with physico-chemical or biological treatment, have provided reclaimed wastewaters that were able to meet the established wastewater reclamation criteria [5].
One important issue that presents a major impediment to the progress of the membrane technology is membrane fouling by organic, inorganic and biological fouling materials. Membrane fouling causes a decrease in membrane performance and in turn limits the application of membrane filtration of wastewater effluent during wastewater reclamation/reuse [6]. Membrane fouling is characterised as a reduction of permeate flux through the membrane or higher TMP across the membrane, as result of increased flow resistance due to pore blocking, concentration polarisation, and cake formation [7]. This results in the reduction of the productivity of the membrane, a significant requirement for increase in transmembrane pressure (driving force), biodegradation of membrane materials and system failure, and ultimately increases the cost of operation [8]. While several studies have been performed to enable a better understanding of the fouling phenomenon, it is generally accepted that the performance of UF is influenced by the feed water characteristics, membrane type and operational conditions [9]. Currently membrane fouling encountered in reclamation of municipal wastewater is a major operational concern as a result of the large variability of wastewater quality and the complex and unstable nature of the organic materials present in the wastewater. Several investigations have been conducted considering size distribution, characterisation and quantification of organic materials that are assumed as major foulants in low pressure membrane processes [10], [11].
Currently, hollow-fiber membranes made up of polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and polyether sulfone (PES) are predominantly used in large scale water treatment facilities because of their high chlorine and acid resistance. Structural modification of these membranes has also been a common practice used to reduce the membrane fouling. However little information is available in the literature on the specific chemical and physical factors that govern the fouling of low pressure tubular or spiral PVDF or PES treating secondary wastewater. Further the use of UF to treat municipal secondary treated wastewater has almost exclusively focused on polymeric membranes, while little research has been conducted with ceramic membranes. It is well known that ceramic membranes have inherently superior physical integrity, chemical resistance and thermal stability compared to polymeric membranes. Recent research using ceramic membranes treating secondary wastewater demonstrated a high permeate flux, high water recoveries and with less frequent chemical cleaning. [9], [12].
It has also not been specifically established previously whether ceramic and polymeric membranes tested under similar conditions on pilot scale will yield similar results with respect to fouling and removal efficiency. The objective of this manuscript is to describe pilot scale experiments where tubular ceramic and spiral polymeric UF membranes were tested with the same water sources to determine their filtration performance under similar operating conditions. Therefore this study has focused on (1) selecting commercially available polymeric and ceramic UF membranes as representative samples (2) carrying out comparison of their operation and performance (3) interpreting the results. The effectiveness of filtration treatments under different operating conditions were assessed on the basis of a decrease in various pollution indices of the wastewater such as chemical oxygen demand (COD), colour, turbidity and absorbance at 254 nm. Finally, the fouling mechanism in the present case was assessed by fitting the experimental data to a resistance in series model [12], [13].
Section snippets
Characteristics of synthetic secondary wastewater
A synthetic wastewater similar to the quality of secondary treated wastewater was used throughout this study to ensure a consistent quality of influent to the pilot scale membrane system. The synthetic wastewater was prepared from a sterile concentrated solution with the composition shown in previous study [14]. The synthetic secondary wastewater contains organic compounds such as humin, tannin, lignin, protein and high molecular carbohydrates (Table 1). The concentrated feed solution was
Analytical method
Permeate samples were collected at predetermined intervals and stored at 4 °C until analysis. The parameters that measure the pollutant content of the wastewaters in both feed and permeate samples were analysed according to the procedures outlined in the standard methods [18]. All experiments were conducted in duplicate. The COD in the samples was determined by spectroquant Nova 60. Absorbance was measured as the absorbance values at 254 nm by spectroquant Photo 300. Absorbance at 254 nm provides
Comparison of tubular ceramic and spiral polymeric UF membranes
Flux decline of synthetic secondary wastewater was investigated using tubular and spiral UF membranes. It was observed that the permeate flux decreased over time for both the cases as shown in Fig. 3. During the initial stage of filtration, while the membrane is clean, the undesired particulate pollutants are rejected by the size of the membrane pores. After this stage, the particles start to accumulate near the membrane surface form a cake layer which assists in pollutant removal. Both the
Conclusion
Two different types of Ultrafiltration membranes such as tubular ceramic membrane with 1 kDa and spiral polyethersulfone membrane with 25 kDa were evaluated in treating synthetic secondary wastewater with a view to recovering water from secondary effluent and to understand how the transmembrane pressure, feed composition and membrane configuration influence the permeate quality and flux rate in a cross-flow mode filtration. This study provides the comparison between these membrane configurations
Acknowledgements
The principal author acknowledges with gratitude the assistance of Professor Stephen Gray, Victoria University, for the helpful guidance during the preparation of the final version of this paper.
References (25)
- et al.
Dead-end ultrafiltration for pretreatment of RO in reclamation of municipal wastewater effluent
J. Membr. Sci.
(2004) - et al.
Application of ultrafiltration hybrid membrane processes for reuse of secondary effluent
Desalination
(2007) - et al.
Effect of permeate flux and tangential flow on membrane fouling for wastewater treatment
Sep. Purif. Technol.
(2005) - et al.
Use of submerged microfiltration membranes for glass industry wastewater reclamation: pilot-scale testing and membrane cleaning
Desalination
(2006) - et al.
Fouling characteristics of wastewater effluent organic matter (EfOM) isolates on NF and UF membranes
Desalination
(2002) - et al.
The application of ultrasound to dairy ultrafiltration: the influence of operating conditions
J. Food Eng.
(2007) - et al.
Natural organic matter fouling of low pressure hollow-fiber membranes: effects of NOM source and hydrodynamic conditions
Water Res.
(2007) - et al.
Application of ceramic membranes with pre-ozonation for treatment of secondary wastewater effluent
Water Res.
(2009) - et al.
Fouling of ultrafiltration membranes by effluent organic matter: a detailed characterisation using different organic fractions in wastewater
J. Membr. Sci.
(2006) - et al.
Biological powdered activated carbon (BPAC) microfiltration for wastewater reclamation and reuse
Desalination
(1996)
Cited by (68)
Impact of sewer overflow on public health: A comprehensive scientometric analysis and systematic review
2022, Environmental ResearchUltrafiltration as tertiary treatment for municipal wastewater reuse
2021, Separation and Purification TechnologyPhotocatalytic ultrafiltration membrane reactors in water and wastewater treatment - A review
2021, Chemical Engineering and Processing - Process Intensification