Aerating static mixers prevent fouling

Armbruster, Sarah; Brochard, Armand; Lölsberg, Jonas; Yüce, Süleyman; Weßling, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2018.10.039

Cited by 21 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Further increase in flux value can be explained by gas/liquid dispersion caused by the presence of static mixer, i.e. gas flow is more evenly distributed than in the system without a mixer …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…gas flow is more evenly distributed than in the system without a mixer. 18 Influence of two-phase flow regime was studied by adjusting air superficial velocity to 0.1 m s −1 that for given feed velocity corresponds to bubble flow regime. In case of air sparging flux improvement was around 50% (permeate flux 33.2 L m −2 h −1 ).…”

Section: Flux Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…have used flocculation with cationic polyelectrolytes to enhance permeate flux during cross‐flow microfiltration of bacterial cell suspension. Besides this combined approach, there are a number of flux improvement methods developed over the years in membrane filtration . These techniques include feed pretreatment, selection of membrane material, flow manipulation using turbulence promoters, backflow, pulsing and shocking, dynamic filtration using rotational or vibrational membranes, gas sparging, etc.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since hydrodynamics methods usually result in increased energy consumption, there is trade‐off between energy demand and flux increase. Both of these methods have been proven as techniques for flux improvement; nevertheless, their actual effectiveness depends on the specific foulant involved . Interestingly, the studies on the use of flux improvement techniques in biomass cell harvesting by tubular ceramic membranes have not yet been addressed, to the extent of our knowledge.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both of these methods have been proven as techniques for flux improvement; nevertheless, their actual effectiveness depends on the specific foulant involved. [18][19][20] Interestingly, the studies on the use of flux improvement techniques in biomass cell harvesting by tubular ceramic membranes have not yet been addressed, to the extent of our knowledge. The objective of the study is to consider possibilities for the use of ceramic membranes for enhanced cell harvesting of Bacillus velezensis intended for utilization in biological control.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Improving energy efficiency of Bacillus velezensis broth microfiltration in tubular ceramic membrane by air sparging and turbulence promoter

Jokić

Pajčin

Grahovac

et al. 2019

J of Chemical Tech & Biotech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND Popularity of biocontrol has increased due to the growing environmental concerns and the demand for organic products. It is considered as a sustainable practice for efficient agricultural production. Microbial biopesticides offer environment‐friendly biotechnological alternative to chemical control of plant diseases and pests. Due to its advantages in cell separation cross‐flow microfiltration has emerged as a powerful alternative to the conventional separation methods. However, the flux enhancement remains to be addressed. This study has estimated the use of flux improvement techniques for biomass harvesting by microfiltration using tubular ceramic membranes. Investigated methods for flux enhancement were turbulence promoter, i.e. Kenics static mixer, two‐phase flow (air sparging) and the combination of these two methods. RESULTS Significant flux improvement coincides with a reduction in specific energy consumption, while at the same time Bacillus velezensis cells have retained viability and antibacterial activity. The highest values of flux and corresponding improvement, compared to the microfiltration without enhancement techniques, are obtained in the case of combining Kenics static mixer and two‐phase flow (133.4 L m−2 h−1 and 502%). Flux improvement for air sparging was 134%, for turbulence promoter alone flux increase was 434%. CONCLUSION The methods proposed herein have achieved effective flux enhancement for cell harvesting. The obtained results also suggest encouraging basis to promote large‐scale economical production of biomass for biocontrol application. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Flux Improvementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Improving energy efficiency of Bacillus velezensis broth microfiltration in tubular ceramic membrane by air sparging and turbulence promoter

Jokić

Pajčin

Grahovac

et al. 2019

J of Chemical Tech & Biotech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Porous PVDF Monoliths with Templated Geometry

Djeljadini

Bongartz

Alders

et al. 2021

Adv Materials Technologies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Additive manufacturing of complex porous polymer geometries is a new field of advanced materials processing. Such new geometries can be used to fabricate porous polymer monoliths serving as a support for other material functions. Here, a novel fabrication technology to manufacture tailored 3D porous monoliths via additive manufacturing and templating is presented. The method is based on replicating a 3D‐printed mold with a polymer solution of polyvinylidenfluorid‐triethyl phosphate (PVDF‐TEP) and induce phase separation of the polymer solution subsequently. In a second step, the mold is removed without affecting the porous PVDF phase. As a result, porous monoliths with a templated 3D architecture are successfully fabricated. The manufacturing process is successfully applied to complex structures and can be applied to any conceivable geometry. Coating the porous 3D monoliths with another PVDF solution allows applying a skin layer yielding an asymmetric membrane monolith. As a showcase, a polydimethylsiloxane coating even leads to a smooth and dense layer of micrometer size. The methodology enables a new generation of complex porous polymer monoliths with tailored surface coatings. For the combination of poly(dimethylsiloxane) on a porous support, gas/liquid mass transfer is used in blood oxygenation with reduced diffusion limitation is within reach.

show abstract

The implications of 3D‐printed membranes for water and wastewater treatment and resource recovery

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is widely acknowledged that three-dimensional (3D) printing or additive manufacturing will revolutionize many industries. However, the broad implications of 3D printing on water treatment membranes are not appreciated. 3D printing will transform the traditional membrane fabrication methods, reducing costs and industrial waste from manufacturing processes, with substantial benefits to treatment performance. In particular, 3D printing provides a high potential for radical decentralization. Remote communities, hospitality resorts, military bases, and oil and gas extraction operations could significantly benefit from the on-site fabrication of membrane units tunable to their specific wastewater challenges. Acute drinking water contamination events, like those associated with toxic by-products from algal blooms, chemical spills, forest fires, and extreme weather, cause adverse health effects on humans and shutdowns of piped water supply. 3D printing of customized membranes provides an opportunity for a fast response to such disastrous events. These membranes could be ready for installation within hours, with the vendor's role more akin to a software company installing a patch than the traditional approach, with major considerations for hardware availability, timeline, and supply chain. Despite these clear and potentially transformative advantages, 3D printing of membranes is not a panacea; countless aspects need to be taken into consideration for the successful implementation of this emerging technology. The full deployment of 3D-printed membranes in water and wastewater treatment can be achieved by extending the variety of printable materials, improving the speed and resolution of printing, creating nanoscale pores, reducing the fabrication costs, and improving the mechanical properties of the resulting membranes.

show abstract

Aerating static mixers prevent fouling

Cited by 21 publications

References 44 publications

Improving energy efficiency of Bacillus velezensis broth microfiltration in tubular ceramic membrane by air sparging and turbulence promoter

Improving energy efficiency of Bacillus velezensis broth microfiltration in tubular ceramic membrane by air sparging and turbulence promoter

Porous PVDF Monoliths with Templated Geometry

The implications of 3D‐printed membranes for water and wastewater treatment and resource recovery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About