An experimental study for the development of a qualitative membrane cleaning model

Bartlett, Meloney; Bird, Michael R.; Howell, John

doi:10.1016/0376-7388(95)00052-e

Cited by 150 publications

(90 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, cleaning was carried out at a minimum pressure in order not to force the fouling layer onto the membrane surface making it more adhesive [33]. Several researchers reported that any applied pressure during cleaning will not result in maximum cleaning efficiency [49,50]. The results in this study showed that appropriate applied pressure (TMP = 0.10 MPa) was beneficial to the cleaning process.…”

Section: Effect Of the Transmembrane Pressure On Fluxmentioning

confidence: 64%

Cleaning ceramic membranes used in treating desizing wastewater with a complex-surfactant SDBS-assisted method

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Effect Of the Transmembrane Pressure On Fluxmentioning

confidence: 64%

Cleaning ceramic membranes used in treating desizing wastewater with a complex-surfactant SDBS-assisted method

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Some studies suggest that there is an optimal temperature for chemical cleaning [23]. Usually, increasing temperature (always below recommended membrane maximum temperature) increases cleaning efficiency, cross-flow velocity seems to have no effect on cleaning results, whereas increasing trans-membrane pressure may even decrease cleaning efficiency.…”

Section: Chemical Cleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Usually, increasing temperature (always below recommended membrane maximum temperature) increases cleaning efficiency, cross-flow velocity seems to have no effect on cleaning results, whereas increasing trans-membrane pressure may even decrease cleaning efficiency. Zero transmembrane pressure is recommended for maximum efficiency in deposit removal [23]. With regard to the time required for cleaning it varies according to the foulant and the cleaning process.…”

Section: Chemical Cleaningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cleaning of ultrafiltration membranes after the treatment of surface water: static–dynamic test

García-Fayos

Arnal

Sancho

2012

Desalination and Water Treatment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Access to safe drinkable water is a basic human right and an international development goal. AQUAPOT international project, created by Chemical and Nuclear Engineering Department of the Polytechnic University of Valencia, has been focused on research and development of low-cost and effective water treatment technologies based on membrane technology able to be used in developing countries. After several years of intensive laboratory and field research, Aquapot's UF plants have been settled in different locations of Ecuador (province of Azuay) and Mozambique (province of Maputo). At present, most of the installed plants work successfully, producing drinking water suitable for human consumption and even for industrial use. However, installation of the designed UF-drinking water treatment facilities has shown that cleaning standard protocol of ultrafiltration membranes is not effective. This fact could affect microbiological quality and volume of the pure water produced and also life of the membrane and the UF-plant. In order to develop optimized cleaning protocols based on the use of common and accessible chemicals, Aquapot started an applied research studying several cleaning methods. Previous studies have been focussed in applying different types of cleaning: chemical cleaning (by means of static tests and dynamic tests) and physico-chemical cleaning (combining chemical reagents with the hydrodynamic action of air bubbles). This work describes the experimental procedure performed in static-dynamic cleaning test which combine soaking with dynamic circulation of cleaning solutions. Sodium hypochlorite and Hydrogen Peroxide at 25 ºC performed the best results, recovering permeate flux from 10 to 12 times respectively compared with fouled membranes. Main results obtained for the different chemical solutions tested at 25 and 40 ºC were also compared with previous chemical (static and dynamic test) and physico-chemical cleanning. Results showed that the tested cleaning protocol improves the effectiveness of the cleaning and recovers UF membrane performance even until 30 times, when sequence of cleaning is Sodium hypochlorite followed by hydrogen peroxide.

show abstract

“…Efficiency of such a process is greatly affected by decrease in flux during filtration due to formation of deposit layer at the membrane surface and in the pores. Although investigations are mostly focused on the fouling, equally important are investigations on cleaning of membranes fouled with milk or whey proteins (Bartlett et al, 1995;Muños-Aguado et al, 1996;Bird and Bartlett, 2002;Blanpain-Avet et al, 2004;D'Souza and Mawson, 2005;Argüello et al, 2005;Lipnizki et al, 2005;Bansal et al, 2006;Nigam et al, 2008). As cleaning agents, alkali solutions were used (Bartlett et al, 1995;Bird and Bartlett, 2002;Blanpain-Avet et al, 2004;Argüello et al, 2005;Bansal et al, 2006;Nigam et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Kinetic models for alkali and detergent cleaning of ceramic tubular membrane fouled with whey proteins

Popović

Tekić

Djuric

2009

Journal of Food Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An experimental study for the development of a qualitative membrane cleaning model

Cited by 150 publications

References 17 publications

Cleaning ceramic membranes used in treating desizing wastewater with a complex-surfactant SDBS-assisted method

Cleaning ceramic membranes used in treating desizing wastewater with a complex-surfactant SDBS-assisted method

Cleaning of ultrafiltration membranes after the treatment of surface water: static–dynamic test

Kinetic models for alkali and detergent cleaning of ceramic tubular membrane fouled with whey proteins

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About