1.

Name : Pornsak Samornkraisorakit

2. Position : Scientist 6
3. Working for Department of Water Quality Control
Metropolitan Waterworks Authority
- Educational Background :
1. Bachelor Degree in Sanitary Science from Mahidol University
2. Master Degree in Environmental Engineering from Kasetsart University
- Training course Yokohama Training Program in 2001 in Japan

History of Membranes
1748
Abbe Nollett discovered Osmosis

1865
Fick (England) made 1st Synthetic Membrane

1907

Bechold (Germany)

1919
The name of Membrane Filter

1927
MF became Commercially available

1950
1st RO Membrane Created

1957
US Public Health Service accepts MF for Coliform Testing

Membranes Enter Municipal Market

1950s
Electrodialysis

1960s
Reverse Osmosis

1980s
Nanofiltration

1990s
Membrane Filtration

A Brief US Membrane History

Prior to 1990 mostly RO in industrial applications
Historically, smaller facilities (< 1 mgd)
1st Significant MF/UF System in North America in 1993
(Saratoga, CA 3.6 mgd)
Membrane Bioreactor emerged in early 1990s
In-land brackish desalination in mid 1990s
Over 250 Membrane WTP now on-line
Trend is to more, and larger facilities
Minneapolis 70 and 95 mgd
Singapore 72 mgd

Conventionally Membrane systems are classified as

1. Microfiltration Membrane (MF)
2. Ultrafiltration Membrane (UF)
3. Nanofiltration Membrane (NF) and
4. Reverse Osmosis Membrane (RO)
based on membranes pore size, these membranes process which is
used pressure to drive water across the membrane can be used in
water treatment, wastewater treatment and pure water plants.

The Filtration Spectrum

MF membrane

UF membrane

NF membrane

RO membrane

Demineralization Processes

Filtration Comparison

Conventional Filtration
Particle

Filter
Media

Coagulant

Membrane Filtration
Particle
Feed

Membrane
Filtrate

 Membrane
(Sand Filter)

Membrane

Filtration rate = 120 250 m/d

Filtration Area

Membrane filtration flux = 0.5

1 m/d per membrane pressure
difference(98.1 kpa)
Filtration Area

Practically < 100 m2

100 300 m2/ 1 m2

Filtration Mechanism
-Interception, collision,
electrostatic attraction
-Straining only happens in
cake filtration

Filtration Mechanism
-Concentration Polarization
( Microfiltration(MF))
-Sieving/Straining

B u lk
F eed
W a te r
c

R O /N F
M e m b ran e
c

m
w

L a m in a r
F ilm

P ro d u c t
W a te r
s

m
p

B u lk
F eed
W a te r
c
U

L a m in a r
F ilm

R O /N F
M e m b ran e
c wm

P ro d u c t
W a te r

F o u lin g
L ay er

c
x

m
p

Interfacial Processes
Chemical Fouling/Biofouling
Concentration Polarization
Scaling

Concentration Polarization
z

Precipitates salts on the membrane surface if the

brine concentration becomes to great. The brine
becomes saturated with dissolved minerals and
tends to deposit them on the membrane.

Results in lower flux rates for both water and

minerals

Remedy is to increase water flow velocity and

create turbulence at the membrane boundary to
encourage minerals to diffuse back into the flow
stream.

Arrange pressure vessels in parallel/series

arrangement. (Christmas tree flow arrangement)

Concentration Polarization Effect

1. Increasing Osmotic Pressure
2. Decreasing Water Flux
3. Increasing Salt Flux
4. Decreasing RO Element Age
5. Precipitation CaCO3 or CaSO4

Membranes comparison
By

membrane material and pore size.

By driving forces employed and feed
flow direction.
By mechanisms of separation.
By the application in industries.
By the geometric configuration.

Pressure-Driven Membrane Processes

z

Low Pressure: Microfiltration(MF), Ultrafiltration(UF)

Turbidity and microbial contaminant control.
Hybrid Sorption/Membrane Processes for Control of
Dissolved Contaminants

High Pressure: Nanofiltration(NF), Reverse Osmosis(RO)

Desalination
Softening
Control of Dissolved Trace Contaminants

Pressure Driven Membrane Processes

OPERATING
PRESSURES

RO
NF
UF
MF

RECOVERY

PRIMARY
APPLICATION
DESALTING

125 TO 1,200

50 TO 85

PSIG

PERCENT

80 TO 120

70 TO 90

SOFTENING

PSIG

PERCENT

NOM REMOVAL

5 TO 30

80 TO 95

SWTR

PSIG

PERCENT

NOM REMOVAL

5 TO 15

80 TO 95

SWTR

PSIG

PERCENT

Membrane Materials
1. Organic Membrane
Polyethylene
Cellulose acetate (CA) and Cellulose Triacetate (CTA)
Polyamide
Polyethersulfone

2. Inorganic Membrane
Zirconium Oxide ( ZrO3)
Aluminium Oxide (Al2O3)
Titanium Oxide ( TiO2)

Membrane Polymers
z

Cellulose Acetate
and Derivatives

Polyamides

Reverse Osmosis Membrane

Structure and Composition
z Two

common type of membranes:

Cellulose acetate older designs

Thin Film Composites newer designs

Cellulose Acetate (CA) and Cellulose Triacetate (CTA)

1. Bacteria
2. Oxidizing Agent Cl2
Cl2 1 mg/l
3. Salt Rejection 95 %
4. Membrane

1. pH 4.5 - 7 7 Membrane
2.
3. 30

Thin Film Composite (TFC) or Aromatic Polyamide

1. pH 2 - 10
2.
45
3. Salt Rejection 99 %
4. CA CTA
5. / (fouling)

1. Bacteria CA CTA
2. Oxidizing Agent Cl2 0.1
mg/l
3. CA CTA

Reverse Osmosis Membrane Structure

and Composition
Comparison of Membrane Characteristics
Characteristics

Cellulose Acetate

Thin film Composite

Net Driving Pressures:

400 psi

200 psi

NaCl Rejection:

92-97%

98 - 99%

Flux Rate at 200 psi, 77F

25 GFD

25 - 30 GFD

Operating pH range:

4.0 - 6.0

3.0 - 10.0

Cleaning pH range:

3.0 - 6.0

2.0 - 12.0

Lower

1.0 mg/L

none

104F (40C)

113F (45C)

2X

<30%

Cost relative to tin film composite

membrane:
Allowable feedwater chlorine
concentration:
Maximum operating temperature:
Salt Passage increase after 3 years

Subject to biological attack

Not subject to biological attack

Subject to hydrolysis

Higher fouling rates than CA

Most suitable for treatment of municipal

wastes and some heavily pretreated
surface water supplies (due to lower fouling
rate vs. thing film)

Higher rejection and flux rates than CA

Sensitive to oxidants in feedwater

Membrane Materials
1. Organic Membrane
- Microfiltration (MF)
- Ultrafiltration (UF)
- Nanofiltration (NF)
- Reverse Osmosis (RO)

2. Inorganic Membrane
- Microfiltration (MF)
- Ultrafiltration (UF)

Different material
Membrane can be classified by its material: one is organic material such as organic
polymers : cellulose acetate (CA) , polyamide (PA) , polysulfide (PS), vinvlidene
fluoride (VF),acrylonitrile (AN), etc and another type is inorganic material such as
ceramic stainless steel etc

Types of Media
Nylon, PVDF, PTFE, and hollow fiber ultrafiltration media are recommended for use in DI water
applications. Photomicrographs of these media are shown here.

Polyvinylidene-fluoride(PVDF)
Medium shown at 3000X
magnification

Nylon Medium shown at 3000X magnification

Polytetrafluoroethylene(PTFE) Medium shown at 3000X

magnification

Hollow fiber ultrafiltration medium shown at

300X magnification

Membrane Construction Options

No Skin layer

Symmetric
Skin layer

Asymmetric
No Skin layer

Composite layer

Composite
Crosslinked Aromatic Polyamide

Thin-Film Composite Membranes

Polyester
Fiber
Backing
~120 m
Polysulfone
Support
~50 m
Active
NF/RO
Layer
Polysulfone Layer
Pore Size
~20-30 nm
Active
Layer
~50-250 nm

Thin Film Composite Membrane

Polyamide ultrathin barrier

layer (approx. 0.2m)
Polysulfone microporous
Support (approx. 40m)

Polyester non-woven web

Carrier (approx. 120m)

Membrane Filtration Type

1. Dead end Filtration

- low energy consumption
- quickly clogging and fouling
2. Cross-Flow Filtration
- high energy consumption
- prolong clogging and fouling

DEAD END FILTRATION

FILTER
MEDIA

FEED
WATER

F
t
FILTERED
WATER

Direct Flow Configuration

Feed Flow

Filter

Cake

Membrane

Filtrate

DEAD END FILTRATION

HIGH CAKE-LAYER BUILD UP
UNIT MUST BE STOPPED
PERIODICALLY FOR PARTICLE
REMOVAL OR FILTER REPLACEMENT
BY NATURE A BATCH PROCESS

CROSSFLOW FILTRATION
FEED

RETENTATE

PERMEATE

F
t

Crossflow Configuration

Flow

Recycle
Stream

Filter
Cake

Membrane

Filtrate

CROSSFLOW FILTRATION
CAKE-LAYER DOES NOT BUILD
INDEFINITELY
EFFECTIVE IN CONTROLLING
CONCENTRATION-POLARIZATION AND
ASSOCIATED CAKE BUILD UP
HIGH FLUXES MAINTAINED OVER
PROLONGED TIME PERIODS

Membrane Geometry
1. Sheet Module
2. Tubular Module
3. Hollow Fiber Module
4. Spiral Wound Module

Sheet Module

Tubular Module

Concentrate

Permeate

Tubular Module
Feed

Membranes Classification
(Configuration)
Tubular Membranes (OD > 3 mm)

Mostly used in Industrial MF

Hollow Fiber Module

Ultrafiltration Membranes
Hollow fiber UF MembraneInside-out

Hollow fiber UF MembraneOutside-in

Hollow Fiber Membranes

Membranes Classification
(Configuration)
Hollow Fiber Membranes (ID < 1.5 mm)

Mostly used in MF & UF

Hollow Fiber Membrane

Feed

Filtrate

Concentrate

Hollow Fiber Flow Patterns

INSIDE - OUT
Feed

OUTSIDE - IN
Feed

Feed

Hollow Fiber Module : Hydracap for UF (Hydranautics)

Hydrophilic Polyethersulfone

Filtrate

Co
tr
en
nc
ate

Lumen (Feed Side)

Spiral Wound Module

Spiral Wound Membranes

PRODUCT WATER

PRODUCT WATER SIDE

BACKING WITH MEMBRANES
ON EACH SIDE

BRINE SPACER

Membranes Classification
(Configuration)
Flat Sheet (Spiral-wound)

Mostly used in Reverse Osmosis

& Nanofiltration

Of
Module

Permeate Pipe

The Structure

Membrane Body

element cover
internal spacer

membrane

perforation
external spacer

permeate pipe

Raw Water
Permeate

Reverse Osmosis Systems

System technology and
operation parameter

Osmosis is the natural passage of water

through a semi-permeable membrane from
a weaker solution to stronger solution, to
equalize the chemical potentials in the
membrane-seperated solution, Osmotic
pressure is the driving force for osmosis to
occur.

Reverse Osmosis
z

Osmosis Normal flow from low to high

concentration
Osmotic
Pressure
Membrane

Concentrated
Solution

Fresh Water

Reverse Osmosis is the external pressure

greater than the osmotic pressure is
applied to the solution, causing water to
flow against the natural direction through
the membrane, thus producing high-quality
demineralized water

Reverse Osmosis
z

Reverse Osmosis Flow reversed by application of

pressure to high concentration solution

Membrane

Concentrated
Solution

Fresh Water

Reverse Osmosis
force water through membrane
removes many contaminants

OSMOTIC PRESSURE ()
THUMB RULE:
= 1 psi per 100 mg/l TDS
Example:
Osmotic pressure will be 25.5 psi of a
solution containing 2550 mg/l TDS.

OSMOTIC PRESSURE ()
ACCURATE CALCULATION
= 14.7 * C * R * T
where C = Solution TDS in moles/l
R = Gas constant
o
= 0.08206 (l.atm/ K.moles)
T = Temperature in degree Kelvin
o
o
= ( C + 273) K

OSMOTIC PRESSURE ()
Example:
= 14.7 * C * R * T = 23.76 psi
where C = 0.065 moles/l TDS
R = Gas constant
o
= 0.08206 (l.atm/ K.moles)
T = Temperature in degree Kelvin
o
o
= (30 + 273) K = 303 K

 Reverse Osmosis
1. Feed water RO
2. RO Product Permeate RO
3. RO Reject, Concentrate Brine RO
(TDS)
4. Recovery Rate RO Product
Feed Water RO Recovery Rate 70 %
Feed Water 100 RO Product 70 30
RO Reject
RO
5. Percent Salt Rejection
membrane Feed water
100 RO Product 5 Sodium
rejection 95 %

6. RO Element, RO Module RO Catridge RO

membrane
7. Pressure Vessel RO Element
1 7 Elements PVC,
Fiber Glass Stainless Steel
8. Stage RO
- Single Stage RO
- Two Stage RO

Brine-staging reject stage

Stage recovery rate
Product staging RO Product
Stage

9. Array pressure vessel RO

Elements Staging

- Array = 2,0 RO single stage

pressure vessle 2
- Array = 3,1 RO 2 stage pressure
vessle stage 3 stage 1
3 stage
- Array = 3,2,1 RO
10. RO Bank RO Pressure Vessels
(Supporting Frame)
Array 3,1 Bank
11. Clean-In-Place (CIP) RO
Elements RO

Membrane Performance and Properties

z

Described Mathematically:

Water Flux = Water Perm x (Membrane P Osmotic P)

Mineral Flux = Mineral Perm x (Conc Gradient across

membrane)
Water and Mineral Permeability constants are
characteristics of the particular membrane

Definition of Flux
z

Rate of water flow through a membrane

Gallons per sq ft per day (GFD)

Grams per second per sq centimeter (gm/cm-sec)

Average flux rate determines cleaning frequency

of the membrane.
Feedwater Source
Industrial/Municipal Waste
Surface Water
Well

Flux Rate, GFD

8 12
8 14
14 - 20

Calculate Flux Rate

z

The permeate flow through an arrangement (or array) of RO

membrane pressure vessels is 1,330,000 gallons per day.

Feedwater first flows to 33 vessels operating in parallel.

The concentrate from the 33 first-pass vessels is combined
and sent to a set of 11 second-pass vessels.

Each element (or tube) contains six membrane elements.

Each element is 8 inches in diameter and 40 inches long,
thus providing 325 sq ft of membrane surface area per
element.

Calculate the average membrane flux rate for the system in

gallons per day per sq foot (GFD).

Calculate Flux Rate

Known

Unknown

Permeate Flow, GPD 1,330,000

No. of Vessels

44 (33 + 11)

No of Elements
Membrane Area per
Element, sq ft

6
325

Average Flux Rate, GFD

Calculate Flux Rate

1.

Determine total membrane area in the system.

Membrane
Area, Sq Ft

No. of x
Vessels

No. of x
Elements

Surf Area
per Element

= (44 Vessels) x (6 elements) x (325 ft3/element)

= 85,800 Ft3

Calculate Flux Rate

2.

Calculate average membrane flux rate for

system
Avg Flux
Rate, GFD

Permeate Flow, GPD

Membrane Area, Sq Ft

1,330,000 GPD
85,800 sq Ft

15.5 GFD

What means Recovery ?

Recovery = permeat flow [m3/h] x 100 %

raw water flow [m3/h]

Recovery
z

A measure of the efficiency of the

membrane to produce clean water.
Recovery, % = Product Flow
Feed Flow

x 100%

Recovery rates limited by two factors:

1.

Desired product water quality

2.

Solubility of minerals in the brine

Recovery = premeate flow in relation to

raw water flow

100% raw water

75% permeate

concentrate recycling

25% drain to waste

What means salt passage ?

Salt passage (%) = Permeat salt concentration x 100
Feed salt concentration

Salt rejection (%) = 100 Salt passage

Mineral Rejection
z

Mineral rejection is the measure of the

membranes ability to remove minerals from
the water.
Rejection, % = 1 - Product Concentration
Feedwater Concentration

X 100%

Effects of Feedwater Temperature and

pH on Membrane Performance
z

Flux rates decrease as temperature decreases.

(Very steep curve! Flux rates reported based on
standard reference temperature (example: 25C)

Hydrolysis accelerated by increase in temperature

for CA membranes (not a problem with thin film
membranes). (Mineral rejection capacity decreases
as temperature increases)

Slightly acid conditions reduce rate of hydrolysis.

Membrane Design

1. Membrane Filtration Flux
0.5 1 m3/d.m2 per membrane pressure difference(98.1 kpa)
2. Water Temperature < 45 oC
Water Temperature water viscosity membrane filtration flux
Water Temperature water viscosity membrane filtration flux
3. Transmembrane Pressure Difference
membrane filtration flux Transmembrane Pressure Difference
membrane filtration flux Transmembrane Pressure Difference
4. Recovery
5. Water Quality input

 Cellulose Acetate (CA) Cellulose Triacetate (CTA)

85%
75%
50%
10%

L/m2.hr

SDI
What is the SDI (Silt Density Index or fouling index) ?
The SDI is the best parameter to determine colloidal fouling potential of
RO feed water. Colloidal matter in general means that the substance is
not dissolved but also not really suspended as such. These substances
can seriously impair the performance of the RO unit by lowering
productivity and sometimes salt rejection.
The source of colloidal fouling is varied and often includes bacteria, clay,
colloidal silica, organics and iron corrosion products. Additionally, pretreatment chemicals used in a clarifier such as alum, ferric chloride or
cationic polyelectrolytes can also cause colloidal fouling if not removed
properly prior to the RO.
The general worlwide rule is that reliable operation of an RO system can
only be granted at SDI < 3

SDI

SDI
How is SDI measured ?
First of all a special measuring device consisting of ball valve, pressure
regulator, pressure gauge and filter holder incl. 0.45m pore filterpaper
(see figure 1) plus a 500ml measuring cylinder and a stop watch is
needed.
The measurement can then be taken as following:
- Connect this device to the feed water pressure line.
- Place the filterpaper on the filter holder and bleed water pressure on
- Adjust feed pressure to 2.1 bar (30 psi) and measure initial time t0
necessary to filter 500ml of sample water (keep feed pressure constant
at 2.1 bar all times)
- Keep filter in operation for 15 minutes under 2.1 bar (30 psi) feed
pressure, discharge the filtered water
- After 15 minutes measure again time t1 necessary to filter 500ml.
- The SDI can then be calculated: SDI = [1-t0/t1] x 100/15

Silt Density Index

Direct SDI - Complete, Portable and

Affordable SDI Measurement

EZ & Enhanced Automatic SDI Monitors

Filters for Direct SDI (SDI-1000)

Spare Parts for Y-EZSDI, Y-EZSDIC, & Y-ENHSDI

SIMPLE SDI Kit

Test Kits and Meters

Chlorine Test Kit

pH Tester

Main parameters causing problems in the feed water of the RO are:

CaF2, BaSO4, CaCO3, SrSO4, CaSO4
increasing solubility
Softening or antiscalant dosing has to be applied to prevent scaling
of these sparingly soluble salts onto the membranes. The most
common problem is scaling by CaCO3. The parameter to judge
whether CaCO3 will precipitate on the membranes is the so called
LSI (Langelier saturation index):
LSI = log [Ca2+] x [CO32-]
(L = solubility product)
L
Permissible values of LSI:
LSI -0.2 without any scale inhibitor
LSI 0.5 with sodium hexametaphosphate
LSI 1.8 with organic scale inhibitor


1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

membrane module

7.
8.
9.

 Reverse Osmosis
1. Pre Treatment
2. Pre Disinfection
3. De-chlorination
4. pH Adjustment
5. Anti Scaling System
6. Cartridge Filter
7. RO Feed Pump

 Reverse Osmosis
8. RO Module & Pressure Vessel
9. Frame Structure and Skid-Mount
10. RO Product Storage
11. CIP System
12. RO Piping
13. Accessory : Flow meter, Back Pressure Valve,
Pressure Gauge, TDS Meter, Conductivity Meter,
Temperature meter

MEMBRANE PROCESS

FEED

PERMEATE

CONCENTRATE

Christmas Tree Arrangement

Vessel 1

Vessel 5

Vessel 2

Feedwater

Vessel 7

Brine to
Waste

Vessel 3

Vessel 6

Vessel 4

Product
Water

Membrane Filtration Enhancements

Pre - Treatment
Organic + Coagulant
Matter

RO Process
Membrane
Filtration

Ferrous + Oxidant
Hydrogen + Oxidant
Sulfide
Organic + PAC
Compounds

Treated
Water
Particle
Removal

Pretreatment
z Purpose:
Remove turbidity/suspended solids
Adjust pH and temperature
Remove materials to prevent scaling or

fouling
Disinfect to prevent biological growth

RO Pretreatment - Why

Feed water limiting conditions

SDI less than 5

Turbidity less than 1 NTU
Temp. less than 45 deg C
Bacteria and organics nil
Oil & Grease nil
Free chlorine nil
Fe, Mn less than 0.1 mg/l
Al less than 0.1 mg/l

Components of a Reverse Osmosis Unit

Membrane Filtration Process

Cleaning Tank

Membrane

Filtrate

Feed
Strainer

Re - Cycle
Backwash
Waste

Christmas Tree Arrangement

Membrane Staging
SINGLE STAGE

Permeate

Feed

Concentrate
DOUBLE STAGE

Permeate
Feed

Permeate

Concentrate

Concentrate

PARALLEL STAGE

Feed

Permeate
Concentrate

Membrane Filtration Process

Feed
buffer
tank

Filtrate
storage
tank
2 Racks with each 12
dizzer 5000 modules
(Capacity of 238 GPM per rack)

Residential Components

Pressure Vessels
1. PVC Pressure Vessels Max pressure 200 psi

2. Stainless Steel Pressure Vessels Max pressure 400 psi

3. Fiberglass Pressure Vessels Max pressure 400 - 1500 psi

UF or MF Performance

Physical Barrier
Removes Particles
Physical Disinfection
Reliable Performance
Automated Operation
Consistent Performance

DESIGN
Hollow Fibers

CHARACTERISTIC

SpiralWound

Tubular

Plate & Frame

Cost

Low

Low

High

High

Packing Density

High

UF-High
RO Very High

Low

Moderate

Pressure Capability

High

UF-Low
RO-High

UF-Low
RO-Medium

High

Membrane Polymer
Choices

Many

Few

Few

Many

Fouling Resistance

Fair

UF-Good
RO-Poor

Very Good

Fair

Clean ability

Good

UF-Very Good
RO-Poor

Very Good

Good

RO

NF

UF

MF

Advantages

It can removal ions.

Salt in high removal
efficiency

It can removal of
required
organics,
bacteria or viruses,
and provides salt
rejection from 50%
to 90%

It can treat ground water

,separate selected component
from mixed solution, low
pressure .Pretreat influent
before RO or NF

It can separate selected

component
Relative
long
life
Pretreat
influent before UF
Low
operation
pressure.low cost

Disadvantages

High cost ,short using

life Backwash
frequently ,fouling
problem

Cost relative lower

than RO,
fouling
problem, short using
life

Middle cost
Clog problem
Short using life

Clog problem
it cant remove small
particles

Applied areas

Semi conducting
Pure water plant
Ion recovery in industry
wastewater

Concentrate and
partially
demineralize liquid
whey . Partial ion
recovery

Water and waste water

treatment . wildly applied in
food, pharmaceutical
chemical industries

Food industry
Pharmaceutical
Chemicals separation
and recovery as well as
concentration of
hazardous waste from
wastewater. Oil
removal.

Small System Operator

Good
Operators
are BORED
with their
work

Microfiltration (MF) System

24 Module HYDRABLOC

Ultrafiltration (UF) System

Industrial Installation

Ultrafiltration (UF) System

Hydranautics has been a world leader

in custom engineered RO systems

Reverse Osmosis

6 MGD Facility
500 gpd Facility

Membranes Market
1. AMI Membranes
2. Replacement Membranes
3. Hydranautics Membranes
4. Koch Membranes
5. FilmTec (DOW) Membranes
6. Retrofit FilmTec Membranes for DuPont Permeators
7. Toray Membranes

Sea Water RO membrane market Size

Market Share by Maker

Yearly Marlet Size

250
200
Unit:
MilU$ 150

OTHERS
29%

FILMTEC
34%

100

FLUID
SYSTEM
15%
2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1990

1986

50

HYDRANAUTICS
22%

Year

Reference:
The 1998 Guide to the US Membrane Industry(Desalination Sea Water TFC Membrane Market)

CSM SW membrane

Growth of the Industry

North American MF/UF Installations - Drinking Water

Number of Facilities

250

200

150

100

50

0
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

Growth of the Industry

North American MF/UF Installations - Drinking Water
800

Cumulative Capacity (mgd)

700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Year

2000

2001 2002

2003

2004

Desalination Is Growing As Well

Number of Installations

EDR
EDR

BWNF
BWNF

SWRO
SWRO

Capacity (mgd)
EDR
EDR

BWNF
BWNF

110
20

15

71

44

SWRO
SWRO

92
250

110
BWRO
BWRO
BWRO
BWRO

Specification comparison of Sea Water RO

Model

Rejection(%)

Flux(GPD)

Surface Area(ft2)

RE-8040SN

99.2

6200

330

RE-8040SR

99.6

6000

380

HSR(Development)

99.8

5200

380

SW30-8040

99.1

6000

300

SW30HR-380

99.6

6000

380

SU820

99.75

4000

295

SU820FA

99.75

5000

335

SWC3

99.6

5900

370

SWC4

99.8

5200

370

(Filmtec)

CSM SW membrane

Transmembrane

Feed Water TDS

Range (mg/l)

Recovery Rates (%)

System

Pressure Operating
Range (psi)

Sea Water

800 1,500

10,000 50,000

15 55

Standard Pressure

400 - 650

3,500 10,000

50 85

Low Pressure

200 - 300

500 3,500

50 85

Nanofiltration

45 - 150

Up to 500

75 - 90

Source : AWWA, 1990, Water Quality and Treatment

General process of Sea Water desalination by RO membrane

CSM SW membrane

CSM SW membrane

OPERATING PARAMETERS
P pH

PERMEATE

FEED

pH

P
T

pH

REJECT

OPERATING PARAMETERS
Recovery
Concentration Factor
Salt Passage
Salt Rejection
Differential Presure

PERFORMANCE PROBLEMS
SCALING
FOULING
CHEMICAL

ATTACK

PREMATURE

MEMBRANE
REPLACEMENT
INEFFECTIVE CLEANING

Symptoms of Fouling

Higher than Design Differential Pressure

Higher than Design Feed Pressure
Lower than Projected Flux
Lower than Projected Rejection

Foulants : Plugging or deposition or bonding of

dissolved/suspended matter on the membrane
surface. It typically occurs at the front end of each
pressure vessel when the feed enters the
membrane.
Scaling : The precipitation of sparingly soluble
salts within the feed side of the membrane. It
typically occurs at the end of each pressure
vessel where concentration is greatest

General Rule of Troubleshooting

First Stage Problem - Fouling

Last Stage Problem - Scaling

Fouling and Scaling

Membrane Blocking

Scaling

Fouling
Biological Fouling

Suspended Particle

- CaCO3

- Bacteria

-Colloidal

- CaSO4

- Algae

-Organic Material

- BaSO4

- Fungi

- Silica or Silicate

Membrane Fouling Mechanisms

Organic & Inorganic
Particulate & Soluble
Various Mechanisms
z
z

Surface & Pore

Adsorption, precipitation, coagulation

Membrane Fouling

Membrane Performance

or
eF
ou

lin
g

TMP

Fouling is Part of Membranes

All membranes are subject to fouling, no

exception

Fouling is acceptable as long as it is

reversible and manageable (i.e., can be

removed in a reasonable fashion)

Potential Fouling Material

Natural Organic Matter

NOM with high SUVA

TOC > 4 mg/L would be a concern
Organic fouling is sticky and difficult to clean

Organic may serve as cement to bind other

particulates and form a strong cake layer

Caustic cleaning (e.g. NaOH) and strong

oxidant (e.g. H2O2) are effective for NOM
fouling cleaning

Potential Fouling Material

Particulate/Colloids

Inorganic particles alone would not cause much

fouling
Inorganic particle cake layer could be easily
removed by backwash
Excessive turbidity could clog membrane fiber
lumens
Inorganic particles mixed with NOM could cause
substantial fouling
Organic colloids could cause significant fouling
and could be difficult to clean

Potential Fouling Material

Inorganic Material
Precipitation of Ca, Mn, Mg, Fe, and Al

could cause significant fouling

Fine inorganic colloids (< 0.05 m) could

clog membrane pores and cause fouling

Prefer a negative Langelier Index
Acid, EDTA, SBS cleaning could be

effective for inorganic fouling

Langelier Index = Actual pH Saturation pH

Saturation pH = 2.18 - log[Ca+2] - log[HCO3-]

L.I. > 0 : Oversaturated (tend to precipitate)

L.I. < 0 : Undersaturated (tend to dissolve more)

Potential Fouling Material

Synthetic Polymers

Polymers used for coagulant/filter aids &

backwash water treatment

Presence of polymers in feed water could cause

dramatic fouling, and sometimes irreversible

Free residual polymer is worse than particleassociated polymer

Cationic polymers are worst

Some polymers can be easily cleaned with

chlorine and therefore are consider compatible
with membranes

Fouling Mitigation
Pretreatment
Reduce TOC level (< 4 mg/L)
Reduce Turbidity (< 5 NTU)
Reduce Hardness (< 150 mg/L)
Avoid substantial change in water

chemistry, such as pH and other

pretreatment chemicals
Prevent Oil and Polymers from entering
the feed water

Fouling Mitigation
Operation
Use crossflow if turbidity is high (For

Inside-out membranes)

Bleed a portion of the concentrate to

avoid solid buildup

Operate at a lower flux (lower TMP)
Enhance pretreatment

Fouling Mitigation
Cleaning Strategy
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Frequent BW (shorter filtration cycle)

Longer BW duration
Higher BW pressure
Add cleaning chemicals in BW water
Frequent chemical cleaning

Common Foulants - 1
Colloidal

Cleaning frequency is directly related to the

feedwater quality specifically colloidal
particles and organic material
Can be controlled by pretreatment process
selection and may be assisted by the
application of antiscalants with dispersing
properties

Common Foulants - 2
Biological

Causes high differential pressures

Reduces turbulent flow through the feed
spacers and traps colloidal particles

Membrane Biofouling
Causes
High Bioactivity level in feedwater
Ineffective Pretreatment
Intermittent System Operation
Ineffective Cleaning Programme

Common Foulants - 3
Chemical Fouling

Often causes reduction in flux and

increase in rejection characteristics of the
membrane
Typically associated with the use of
Cationic and Anionic materials or
filming materials such as oils or greases

Chemical Fouling
Causes
Overdosing of Pretreatment Coagulants
Incompatible Chemicals being Selected
Contamination of Chemicals
Inappropriate Cleaning Materials
Contamination of feed source

Common Scaling
Inorganic Scale
Causes high differential pressures and
reduces turbulent flow through the feed
spacers
Can affect rejection characteristics of
thin film composite membranes and
reduce flux
During cleaning deposits may cause
abrasion of membrane surfaces

Inorganic Scale Formation

Causes
High Alkalinity and High Silica
High Hardness or Metal Oxide Content
High pH
High Recovery
Dosing System Failure
Incorrect Pretreatment Chemicals

Membrane Damage
Causes

Incomplete Removal of Oxidants

Exposure to Extreme pH/Temperatures
Inappropriate Chemical Selection
Surface Abrasion
Excessive Cleaning Frequency

Troubleshooting Guide 1
Permeate Salt
Differential Direct cause Indirect
flow
passage pressure
cause
Oxidation
damage

Chlorine
ozone

Corrective
measure
Replace
element

Membrane Permeate
leak
Back
pressure
Or Abrasion

Replace
Element
Improve
filtration

O Ring
leak

Improper
Installation

Replace
O Ring

Leaking
Product
Tube

Damaged
during
loading

Replace
element

Troubleshooting Guide 2
Permeate Salt
Differential Direct
Flow
passage Pressure Cause

Indirect
cause

Corrective
measure

Scaling

Insufficient
Scale
control

Cleaning
Scale control

Colloidal
Fouling

Insufficient
pretreatment

Cleaning
Improve
pretreatment

Biofouling Contaminated
Raw water

Cleaning &
disinfection
Improve
pretreatment

Troubleshooting Guide 3
Permeate Salt
flow
passage

Differential Direct
pressure Cause

Indirect
Cause

Corrective
measure

Organic

Oil/Greases Cleaning

fouling

HMW
Polymers

Improve
pretreatment

Compaction

Water
hammer

Replace
element or
Add
elements

Taking the Total System

Approach
Troubleshooting Steps
-

Investigate
Evaluate
Solve
Prevent

Membrane Cleaning

Membrane Cleaning
Hydraulic Cleaning (10~30 minutes)
Water/Air Backwash
Air Scouring
Water Flushing

Chemical Cleaning (1~8 weeks)

Free Chlorine (Sodium Hypochlorite)

Acid/Base
Other strong oxidants, such as H2O2
Reducing agent, such as SBS
Chelating chemicals, such as EDTA
Proprietary Chemicals (surfactants)

Summary of Fouling Material & Cleaning Chemicals

Cleaning Chemical

For Fouling Material

NaOCl

Biological; NOM; Synthetic

polymers

Acids (HCl, H2SO4, Citric Acid)

Inorganic deposits

NaOH

NOM

Sodium bi-sulfite (SBS)

Reducible metals (Fe, Mn)

H2O2

NOM

EDTA

Metals

Membrane Cleaning
z

Periodic cleaning is included in the design

Cleaning is performed:

To keep operating pressures low

To keep flux rates up

To keep salt removal rates up

Typically, cleaning solution is pumped into pressure

vessels and returned to solution tanks at the end of
the process (about 1 hr)

Various types of cleaning solutions are used

depending on type of fouling that occurs.

Safety
z

Chemicals routinely used in RO systems:

Acid

Chlorine

Sodium hexametaphosphate

Formaldehyde

Citric acid

Numerous cleaning agents

Electrodialysis (ED)
z

Typically for brackish water applications

Advantages:

Proven technology

Efficient removal of inorganic constituents

Waste brine contains only salts removed plus acid

used for pH control.

Energy required for process is 0.2 0.4

kWh/1000 gals

Electrodialysis (ED)

Electrodialysis (ED)
z

Common Problems

Scaling or fouling

Precipitation of magnesium hydroxide or calcium

carbonate
z

This may cause increased electrical resistance and

damage the membranes

Acid is usually fed to ensure scale-free

operation

Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR)

Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR)

Electrodialysis (ED)

Electrodialysis (ED)

Math Assignment

Read and work the problems in Section A.34

Demineralization.

Conclusion

Today membrane technology is widely used in mixture separation, pollution

control, exhaust gas treatment, water treatment, wastewater treatment, pure
water generation etc. The main challenging of industrial use membrane is the
membrane price and the membrane clogging problems.
The selective of different type of membrane for a typical design is base on
target material to be removed and the characteristic of the membrane. These
will affect the removal efficiency, effluent quality, back washing, chemical
treatment, capital and operating cost. In the industrial utility of membrane,
normally different types of membranes are intergraded. For example, in the
water treatment plant, MF can be used to remove fine partial first, UF can be
used as partially deification, and then NF and RO can be used to remove ions.
This can improve efficiency of the whole system; increase the solid loading
rate, hydraulic loading rate

uestions ?