Crossflow microfiltration of low concentration-nonliving yeast suspensions

Keskinler, Bülent; Yildiz, Ergün; Erhan, Elif; Doğru, Murat; Bayhan, Yalçın Kemal; Akay, G.

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2003.12.014

Cited by 54 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…(15). Thus, MFI is calculated from the slope obtained by the linear approximation to the plot of the reciprocal average filtration rate (t/v) vs. the filtrate volume v per unit membrane area (Keskinler et al, 2004;Srisukphun et al, 2009). This means that MFI is defined on the assumption that the separation mechanism is controlled by cake filtration.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Degree Of Membrane Foulingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The blocking filtration law has been frequently employed in the analysis of the flux decline in crossflow filtration (Jonsson et al, 1996;Prádanos et al, 1996;Keskinler et al, 2004). In this case, the flux decline behaviors should be analyzed by introducing the term of a steady-state flux controlled by crossflow (Field et al, 1995;de Bruijn et al, 2005).…”

Section: Developments Of Consecutive Combined Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Developments of Blocking Filtration Model in Membrane Filtration

Iritani

Katagiri

2016

KONA

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Blocking filtration laws consist of four different filtration mechanisms: complete blocking, standard blocking, intermediate blocking, and cake filtration. Blocking filtration laws for describing both the pore blocking and cake formation have been extensively employed over the past several decades to evaluate the increase in filtration resistance with the progress of filtration in the field of classical particulate filtration. In recent years, blocking filtration laws become widely used also in membrane filtration such as microfiltration and ultrafiltration of colloids. This paper gives an overview of the developments of blocking filtration laws and equations under constant pressure and constant rate conditions reported for the filtrate flow of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids. The fouling index evaluating the degree of membrane fouling was examined on the basis of the blocking filtration equations. The blocking filtration laws were reexamined to extend the range of their application. Moreover, various combined models developed based on the blocking filtration laws were introduced for describing more rigorously the complicated filtration behaviors controlled by more than one mechanism which occurs successively or simultaneously.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of Degree Of Membrane Foulingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Developments Of Consecutive Combined Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developments of Blocking Filtration Model in Membrane Filtration

Iritani

Katagiri

2016

KONA

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At higher TMPs, flux plateaus off marking the transition to the pressure independent region due to cake formation, at higher pressure consolidation of the cake layer formed on the membrane surface often occurs (Keskinler et al ., 2004). The maximum stationary permeation flux which can be reached through increasing TMP is referred to as the limiting flux (Porter, 1972;Chen et al ., 1997).…”

Section: Modelling Flux Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Principles of Membrane Filtration

Hausmann

Duke

Demmer³

2012

Membrane Processing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Consequently, biocatalyst membranes and specially designed bioreactors, such as jet loop and membrane reactors, are available to intensify biochemical reactions (Giorno and Drioli, 2000;Bayhan et al, 2001;Akay et al, 2002a;Erhan et al, 2002;Keskinler et al, 2004;Pekdemir et al, 2003;Akay, 2005). Supported biocatalysts are often employed in order to enhance catalytic activity and stability, to protect enzymes/ microorganisms from mechanical degradation and deactivation (Giorno and Drioli, 2000;De Bartolo et al, 2001;Akay et al, 2002a;Erhan et al, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bioprocess intensification in flow‐through monolithic microbioreactors with immobilized bacteria

Akay

Erhan

Keskinler

2005

Biotech & Bioengineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Microporous polymers (with porosity up to 90%) with a well-prescribed internal microstructure were prepared in monolithic form to construct a flow-through microbioreactor in which phenol-degrading bacteria, Pseudomonas syringae, was immobilized. Initially, bacteria was forced seeded within the pores and subsequently allowed to proliferate followed by acclimatization and phenol degradation at various initial substrate concentrations and flow rates. Two types of microporous polymer were used as the monolithic support. These polymers differ with respect to their pore and interconnect sizes, macroscopic surface area for bacterial support, and phase volume. Polymer with a nominal pore size of 100 microm with phase volume of 90% (with highly open pore structure) yielded reduced bacterial proliferation, while the polymer with nominal pore size of 25 microm with phase volume of 85% (with small interconnect size and large pore area for bacterial adhesion) yielded monolayer bacterial proliferation. Bacteria within the 25 microm polymer support remained monolayered, without any apparent production of extracellular matrix during the 30-day continuous experimental period. The microbioreactor performance was characterized in terms of volumetric utilization rate and compared with the published data, including the case where the same bacteria was immobilized on the surface of microporous polymer beads and used in a packed bed during continuous degradation of phenol. It is shown that at similar initial substrate concentration, the volumetric utilization in the microreactor is at least 20-fold more efficient than the packed bed, depending on the flow rate of the substrate solution. The concentration of the bacteria within the pores of the microreactor decreases from 2.25 cells per microm2 on the top surface to about 0.4 cells per microm2 within 3 mm reactor depth. If the bacteria-depleted part of the microreactor is disregarded, the volumetric utilization increases by a factor of 30-fold compared with the packed bed. This efficiency increase is attributed to the reduction of diffusion path for the substrate and nutrients and enhanced availability of the bacteria for bioconversion in the absence of biofilm formation as well as the presence of flow over the surface of the monolayer bacteria.

show abstract

Crossflow microfiltration of low concentration-nonliving yeast suspensions

Cited by 54 publications

References 14 publications

Developments of Blocking Filtration Model in Membrane Filtration

Developments of Blocking Filtration Model in Membrane Filtration

Principles of Membrane Filtration

Bioprocess intensification in flow‐through monolithic microbioreactors with immobilized bacteria

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About