Tight ceramic UF membrane as RO pre-treatment: The role of electrostatic interactions on phosphate rejection

Direct water reclamation from sewage using ceramic tight ultra- and nanofiltration

“…The ceramic tight UF membrane (TAMI Industry, France) had a MWCO of 3 kDa or mean pore size of 3.06 nm [26], 2 mm diameter channels, and an effective filtration area of 0.013 m 2 . The ceramic NF membranes (Inopor, Germany) had a MWCO of 450 Da or mean pore size of 0.9 nm with 3.5 mm diameter channels, an open porosity of 30-40%, and an effective filtration area of 0.25 m 2 .…”

“…Biofouling is caused by biological growth on the membrane and in the feed spacer. Not only the biofilm itself but also the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by the microorganisms, can deteriorate the membrane performance [9,26,28]. Membrane fouling is directly linked to the feed water quality, therefore extensive pre-treatment of RO-feed water is required [6,17].…”

“…Ceramic tight UF or ceramic NF is considered a potential alternative of interest for water reclamation in the sewer mining concept [26]. Ceramic membranes, compared to polymeric membranes, are robust; they have a high mechanical strength, a high chemical and thermal resistance, and a homogeneous distribution of narrow pores [32].…”

“…Other benefits are the long life of the membrane (>15 years) and the recyclability of the membrane material. To date, ceramic membranes are less frequently utilised than polymeric membranes due to their higher price per m 2 [26]. In literature, conclusive definitions cannot be found to distinguish ceramic UF from ceramic NF.…”

Hydraulically irreversible fouling on ceramic MF/UF membranes: Comparison of fouling indices, foulant composition and irreversible pore narrowing

“…1 and Eq. 2, the pore radius of the UF membranes can be determined by obtaining 90 percentile retention of the dextran with a molecular weight equal to the MWCO of the membrane (in kDa) [40], as calculated by:…”