Cleaning and regeneration of membranes in desalination and wastewater applications: State-of-the-art

Ebrahim, S.

doi:10.1016/0011-9164(94)85174-3

Cited by 95 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fouling through suspended oil and grease, particles and colloids, salts and various other trace metals is one of the most common problems and a major operational factor encountered in produced water treatment applications of membranes [10]. To reduce membrane fouling, the effect of chemical cleaning and back flushing on ceramic membranes was investigated.…”

Section: Fouled Membranes and Cleaning Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigations on the use of different ceramic membranes for efficient oil-field produced water treatment

Ebrahimi¹,

Willershausen²,

Ashaghi³

et al. 2010

Desalination

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efficient performance of the combination of treatment processes for oilfield produced water generated from oil tank dewatering was investigated in the study presented below. Byproduced wastewater is generated in significant quantity during exploitation of crude oil and gas from onshore and offshore production operations. This wastewater, commonly referred to as "produced water", has distinctive characteristics, due to their organic and inorganic compounds. However, these characteristics change from well to well. The treatment process investigated here consists of a pre-treatment step utilizing microfiltration (0.1 and 0.2µm pore size filters) and/or a simulated batch dissolved air flotation (DAF), and a multistage posttreatment step utilizing cross-flow ultra-(0.05µm pore size and 20kDa molecular weight cutoff filters), and nanofiltration (1 and 0.75kDa MWCO filters). Filters used were ceramic membranes. To determine the separation capability of the processes described, various parameters, such as trans-membrane pressure varying from 0.5 to 2 bar, cross-flow velocity in the range of 0.6 to 1.3m/s, influent oil concentration ranging from 32 to 5420 parts per million (ppm) and different membrane cleaning methods used were investigated. The average permeate flux varied from 3.4 to 3300 l/h*m²*bar, total oil removal was up to 99.5% and total organic carbon removal reached 49%.

show abstract

Section: Fouled Membranes and Cleaning Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigations on the use of different ceramic membranes for efficient oil-field produced water treatment

Ebrahimi¹,

Willershausen²,

Ashaghi³

et al. 2010

Desalination

230

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The cost of producing fresh water with this technology is greater than water purchased from the municipal fresh water plant but less than the cost of buying, then transporting water to a field site to be used for drilling operations 5 . Testing on our larger desalination system showed the relative operating cost …”

Section: Darst Fieldmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…fouling of or loss of flux through the membrane surface, poor rejection characteristics, and membrane failure due to chemical reactions with the membranes. Fouling is a major operational factor that requires periodic cleaning [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Produced water and oily water can cause severe fouling problems on most membranes.…”

Section: Membrane Technology In Produced Water Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Novel Cleanup Agents Designed Exclusively for Oil Field Membrane Filtration Systems Low Cost Field Demonstrations of Cleanup Agents in Controlled Experimental Environments

Burnett¹,

Vance²

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Physical methods include sponge ball cleaning, hydraulic cleaning (forward, reverse flushing and backwashing), air flushing (also called air sparging, air scouring or air bubbling), vibration, and CO 2 back permeation [10][11]. Non-conventional physical cleaning methods are the application of ultrasonic [12][13][14], electrical fields [15] and magnetic fields [16][17] with different results.…”

Section: Physical 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

Cleaning and regeneration of membranes in desalination and wastewater applications: State-of-the-art

Cited by 95 publications

References 18 publications

Investigations on the use of different ceramic membranes for efficient oil-field produced water treatment

Investigations on the use of different ceramic membranes for efficient oil-field produced water treatment

Novel Cleanup Agents Designed Exclusively for Oil Field Membrane Filtration Systems Low Cost Field Demonstrations of Cleanup Agents in Controlled Experimental Environments

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About