FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

MEMBRANE FILTRATION SEPARATION

BY:
AMMR MAHMOOD

SUPERVISOR:
Mr. ALI HOSIN

MAY 2020
Table of Contents
AIM ........................................................................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................... 2
THEORY ................................................................................................................................................ 3
Types of Membrane Processes ................................................................................................................. 4
Ultrafiltration ...................................................................................................................................... 4
Microfiltration ..................................................................................................................................... 5
Reverse Osmosis ................................................................................................................................. 6
Nanofiltration ...................................................................................................................................... 7
various configurations of operating a filtration process: .......................................................................... 9
Dead-end Filtration.............................................................................................................................. 9
Cross-flow Filtration ............................................................................................................................ 9
Hybrid-flow Filtration .......................................................................................................................... 9
Submerged Filtration ........................................................................................................................... 9
Membrane Transport Mechanism ......................................................................................................... 10
MEMBRANE CHARACTERIZATION ................................................................................................ 11
Porous Membrane.............................................................................................................................. 12
Nonporous Membrane ....................................................................................................................... 12
MEMBRANE MODULE AND PROCESS DESIGN ............................................................................ 14
Tubular Module ................................................................................................................................. 14
MENBRANE TESTING ............................................................................................................................. 16
MECHANISMIS....................................................................................................................................... 18
MEMBRANE CLEANING AND FLUX RESTORATION .................................................................................. 18
Chemical Cleaning Methods .............................................................................................................. 19
Physical Cleaning Methods ................................................................................................................ 19
CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................................................... 20
REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 21

1
AIM
Membrane filtration can be a very efficient and economical way of separating components that
are suspended or dissolved in a liquid. The membrane is a physical barrier that allows certain
compounds to pass through, depending on their physical and/or chemical properties. Membranes
commonly consist of a porous support layer with a thin dense layer on top that forms the actual
membrane. Types of Membrane filtration based on membrane pore sizes are described below

INTRODUCTION
With the rapid increase of demand in industries and daily life, water has become an increasingly
valuable but scarcer resource for human being. Take Singapore as an example. Almost half of its
water supply is being imported from Malaysia. The daily water consumption has risen eight
times while the population has only grown three times since 1950 ( 1 ). This increase has led to a
greater pressure on the use of limited raw water resources and the capacity of treatment plants.
The potential shortfall between supply and consumption needs to be addressed if domestic and
industrial customers are to continue enjoying uninterrupted supply.Apart from the continuous
searching for new water sources from other neighboring countries via diplomatic routes, the
Singapore government has already decided to encour-age the use of desalinated seawater as an
alternative water source in Singapore. However, compared with the seawater desalination,
reclamation and reuse of raw wastewater and secondary effluent using membrane technology
seems more cost-effective and is becoming a potential challenge to conventional seawater
desalination for water production. Today, membrane separation technologies are widely used in
many areas of water and wastewater treatment. Membrane processes can be used to produce
potable water from surface water, groundwater, brackish water, or seawater, or to treat industrial
wastewaters before they are discharged or reused. At the same time, membrane technologies
have moved into the area of treating secondary or tertiary municipal wastewater and oil field–
related water. Membrane separation systems have many advantages over traditional water or
wastewater treatment processes, including:

 Fewer chemicals are used in the process, which helps minimize the negative impacts of those
chemicals on the whole process.
 Formation of absolute barriers to particle and pathogens. Microorganisms such as bacteria
and viruses can be removed by size exclusion; ultra-pure water can therefore be produced.

2
  Lower operating and maintenance costs in comparison to conventional systems consisting of
coagulation, clarification, and aerobic and anaerobic treatments.
 Membrane separation systems are easy to operate and the performance is more reliable.
 Membrane systems give a compact and modular construction, which occupies less floor
space in comparison to the conventional treatment systems. This becomes extremely
attractive in the land-scarce countries such as Japan and Singapore.
 Membrane systems followed by an evaporator (for low-volume highly concentrated effluent)
can enable industries to achieve zero liquid discharge goals.
 One-stop reduction or elimination of most contaminants (impurities) in the wastewater
stream, e.g., total dissolved solids (TDS), chemical oxygen demand (COD), 5-d biochem-
ical oxygen demand (BOD5 ), total organic carbon (TOC), color, suspended solids, nitrogen,
phosphorus, and heavy metals.
 Permeate can be suitably reused resulting in water conservation, which reduces the intake of
raw water and provides savings on raw water processing costs.

THEORY
The term membrane most commonly refers to a thin, film-like structure that separates two fluids.
It acts as a selective barrier, allowing some particles or chemicals to pass through, but not others.
In some cases, especially in anatomy, membrane may refer to a thin film that is primarily a
separating structure rather than a selective barrier. A membrane is a selective barrier that permits
the separation of certain species in a fluid by combination of sieving and sorption diffusion
mechanism. Separation is achieved by selectively passing (permeating) one or more components
of a stream through the membrane while retarding the passage of one or more other components
Membrane processes are characterized by the fact that a feed stream is divided into 2 streams:
retentate and permeate. The retentate is that part of the feed that does not pass through the
membrane, while the permeate is that part of the feed that does pass through the membrane. The
optional "sweep" is a gas or liquid that is used to help remove the permeate. The component(s) of
interest in membrane separation is known as the solute. The solute can be retained on the
membrane and removed in the retentate or passed through the membrane in the permeate.The
concept of a membrane has been known since the eighteenth century, but it remained as only a
tool for physical or chemical theories development until the end of World War II, when drinking

3
water supplies in Europe were compromised and membrane filters were used to test for water
safety. However, due to the lack of reliability, slow operation, reduced selectivity and elevated
costs, membranes were not widely exploited. The first use of membranes on a large scale was
with microfiltration and ultra-filtration technologies.

Types of Membrane Processes

Ultrafiltration
Ultrafiltration (UF) is the process of separating extremely small particles and dissolved
molecules from fluids. The primary basis for separation is molecular size, although in all
filtration applications, the permeability of a filter medium can be affected by the chemical,
molecular or electrostatic properties of the sample. Ultra filtration can only separate molecules
which differ by at least an order of magnitude in size. Molecules of similar size can not be
separated by ultra filtration.Materials ranging in size from 1K to 1000K molecular weight (MW)
are retained by certain ultrafiltration membranes, while salts and water will pass through.
Colloidal and particulate matter can also be retained. Ultrafiltration membranes can be used both
to purify material passing through the filter and also to collect material retained by the filter.
Materials significantly smaller than the pore size rating pass through the filter and can be
depyrogenated, clarified and separated from high molecular weight contaminants. Materials
larger than the pore size rating are retained by the filter and can be concentrated or separated
from low molecular weight contaminants. Ultrafiltration is typically used to separate proteins
from buffer components for buffer exchange, desalting, or concentration. Ultrafilters are also
ideal for removal or exchange of sugars, non-aqueous solvents, the separation of free from
protein-bound ligands, the removal of materials of low molecular weight, or the rapid change of
ionic and/or pH environment (see Figure 1). Depending on the protein to be retained, the most
frequently used membranes have a nominal molecular weight limit (NMWL) of 3 kDa to 100
kDa. Ultrafiltration is far gentler to solutes than processes such as precipitation. UF is more
efficient because it can simultaneously concentrate and desalt solutes. It does not require a phase
change, which often denatures labile species, and UF can be performed either at room
temperature or in a cold room.

4
Microfiltration
Micro filtration (MF) is the process of removing particles or biological entities in the 0.025 μm
to 10.0μm range from fluids by passage through a microporous medium such as a membrane
filter. Although micron-sized particles can be removed by use of non-membrane or depth
materials such as those found in fibrous media, only a membrane filter having a precisely defined
pore size can ensure quantitative retention. Membrane filters can be used for final filtration or
prefiltration, whereas a depth filter is generally used in clarifying applications where quantitative
retention is not required or as a prefilter to prolong the life of a downstream membrane.
Membrane and depth filters offer certain advantages and limitations. They can complement each
other when used together in a microfiltration process system or fabricated device.The retention
boundary defined by a membrane filter can also be used as an analytical tool to validate the
integrity and efficiency of a system. For example, in addition to clarifying or sterilizing filtration,
fluids containing bacteria can be filtered to trap the microorganisms on the membrane surface for
subsequent culture and analysis. Microfiltration can also be used in sample preparation to
remove intact cells and some cell debris from the lysate. Membrane pore size cut-offs used for
these types of separation are typically in the range of 0.05 μm to 1.0 μm.

5
 Figure 1 Types of Membrane filtration processes based on membrane pore sizes

Reverse Osmosis
Reverse osmosis (RO) separates salts and small molecules from low molecular weight solutes
(typically less than 100 daltons) at relatively high pressures using membranes with NMWLs of 1
kDa or lower. RO membranes are normally rated by their retention of sodium chloride while
ultrafiltration membranes are characterized according to the molecular weight of retained solutes.
Millipore water purification systems employ both reverse osmosis membranes as well as
ultrafiltration membranes. Reverse osmosis systems are primarily used to purify tap water to
purities that exceed distilled water quality. Ultrafiltration systems ensure that ultrapure water is
free from endotoxins as well as nucleases for critical biological research.

6
 Figure 2 Schematic diagram of RO system for
seawater desalination.

Nanofiltration
Nanofiltration (NF) is a form of filtration that uses membranes to separate different fluids or
ions. NF is typically referred to as ―loose‖ RO owing to its larger membrane pore structure as
compared to the membranes used in RO, which allows more salt passage through the membrane.
Because it can operate at much lower pressures, normally 7–14 bars, and passes some of the
inorganic salts, NF is used in applications where high organic removal and moderate inorganic
removals are desired. NF is capable of concen-trating sugars, divalent salts, bacteria, proteins,
particles, dyes, and other constituents that have a molecular weight greater than 1000.
Membranes used for NF are made of cellulose acetate and aromatic polyamide with
characteristics such as salt rejections from 95% for divalent salts to 40% for monovalent salts
and an approximate MWCO of 300 for organics. An advantage of NF over RO is that NF can
typically operate at higher recoveries, thereby conserving total water usage due to a lower
concentrate stream flow rate. NF is not effective on small-molecular-weight organics, such as
methanol. NF membranes can be used to produce drinking water, because they have good
molecular rejection characteristics for divalent cations, e.g., calcium and magnesium, and they
can effectively remove hardness in place of conventional chemical softening. NF membranes can

7
also reject higher-molecular-weight organics that contribute to taste and odor or that can react
with chlorine to form trihalomethanes or other particles, which improves the efficiency of
downstream disinfection processes. In Flagler Beach, FL, a study was conducted to evaluate the
rejection of six synthetic organic compounds from a potable water sources by a NF membrane
process. In another study, an NF process was used for recovering tannins and water from
exhausted baths and reusing them as tanning agents and washings, and the advantages are
particularly significant in terms of reduction of environmental impact (up to 75% of COD
reduction of the global effluent), simplification of cleaning-up processes of wastewaters, saving
of chemicals and water, easy reuse of sludges and decrease of disposal costs. Treatment of
ground water with NF allows producing drinking water with outstanding quality at an operating
cost that is not excessive.

Figure 3 Removal of salts from cheese whey permeate by NF.

8
various configurations of operating a filtration process:

Dead-end Filtration
The most basic form of filtration is dead-end filtration. The complete feed flow is forced through
the membrane and the filtered matter is accumulated on the surface of the membrane. The dead-
end filtration is a batch process as accumulated matter on the filter decreases the filtration
capacity, due to clogging. A next process step to remove the accumulated matter is required.
Dead-end filtration can be a very useful technique for concentrating compounds.

Cross-flow Filtration
With cross-flow filtration a constant turbulent flow along the membrane surface prevents the
accumulation of matter on the membrane surface. The membranes used in this process are
commonly tubes with a membrane layer on the inside wall of the tube. The feed flow through the
membrane tube has an elevated pressure as driving force for the filtration process and a high
flow speed to create turbulent conditions. The process is referred to as "cross-flow", because the
feed flow and filtration flow direction have a 90 degrees angle. Cross-flow filtration is an
excellent way to filter liquids with a high concentration of filterable matter.

Hybrid-flow Filtration
The hybrid flow process combines the dead-end and the cross-flow principle. As in the cross-
flow filtration tubular membranes are with the filtration layer on the inside wall are used. The
filtration process has two phases: the production phase and the flushing phase. During the
production phase, the tubes are closed on one side and a dead-end filtration is performed. During
the flushing phase, the tube is open on both sides and the fraction that did not pass through the
membranes is removed in order to clean the membrane surface as in cross-flow filtration. This
filtration technique is especially suitable for treating water streams containing suspended solids
in low concentrations (polishing).

Submerged Filtration
With submerged membrane filtration the membranes are submerged in the liquid that has to be
filtered. The filtration is performed from the outside to the inside of the membrane (filtering
layer is on the outer side of the tube or plate). Sheer forces along the membrane surface are
created by a flow of air bubbles along the surface. In some cases the airflow also results in a

9
liquid flow created by the airlift principle. The driving force is a vacuum applied on the inner
side of the membrane.

Membrane Transport Mechanism

Membranes provide absolute barrier to particles greater than their pore size. A membrane
process requires two bulk phases physically separated by a third phase, the membrane. (figure
1.3).The membrane phase interposed between the two-bulk phases controls the exchange of mass
between the two bulk phases in a membrane process. The process allows the selective and
controlled transfer of a certain species from one bulk phase to another bulk phase separated by
the membrane.

Figure 4 Figure 1.3: Schematic representation of

the different phases in membrane separation
The flow of water through membranes can be modeled using empirical equations.The Hagen-
Poiseuille or Carman-Kozeny models can be used to demonstrate this flow of water.The use of
these equations depends on the shapes and sizes of the pores.

a) Hagen-Poiseuille Equation

The Hagen-Poiseuille equation considers that the membrane has a number of parallel cylindrical
pores,which are parallel or oblique to the membrane surface.It assumes that the capillaries are
uniform and cylindrical

10
Where:
2
J is the flux(L/m .hr)
2
ΔP is the pressure difference(N/m )
ΔXm is the membrane thickness(m)
2
η is the viscosity of liquid(N.s/m )
εm is the surface porosity
b) Carman-Kozeny Equations
This equation is used for membranes which consist of closely packed spheres.

Where:

2
J is the flux(L/m .hr)
Smis the pore internal surface area/unit volume(1/m)
2
ΔP is the pressure difference(N/m )
K is the Carman-Kozeny constant
ΔXm is the membrane thickness(m)
2
η is the viscosity of liquid(N.s/m )
εm is the surface porosity
8

MEMBRANE CHARACTERIZATION
Membranes need to be characterized to ascertain which may be used for a certain separation or
class of separations. Membrane characterization is to measure structural membrane properties,
such as pore size, pore size distribution, free volume, and crys-tallinity to membrane-separation

11
properties. It helps gather information for predicting membrane performance for a given
application. Membrane characterization means the determination of structural and morphological
properties of a given membrane. Because membranes range from porous to nonporous depending
on the type of separation problem involved, different characterization tech-niques are required in
each case. For example, in MF or UF membranes, fixed pores are present. MF membranes have
macropores (pore diameter > 50 nm), while UF membranes have mesopores (2 nm < pore
diameter < 50 nm). The pore size (and size distribution) mainly determines which particles or
molecules are retained or pass through. On the other hand, for dense or nonporous membranes,
no fixed pores are present and the material chemistry itself mainly determines the performance.

Porous Membrane
Two different types of characterization method for porous membranes can be distin-guished :

Structure-related parameters: determination of pore size, pore size distribution, top layer
thickness, and surface porosity
Permeation-related parameters: determination of the actual separation parameters using
solutes that are more or less retained by the membrane

There are a number of characterization techniques available for porous membranes, the
following methods are usually used:

Electron microscopy
Atomic force microscopy (AFM)
Bubble point method
Permeation measurement

The first three methods involve the measurement of structural-related parameters while the last
one is a typical permeation-related technique. Both electron microscopy and AFM can provide
qualitative measurement of membrane materials.

Nonporous Membrane
Transport through nonporous membranes follows the solution–diffusion mechanism, and
separation is achieved either by differences in solubility or diffusivity. Therefore, the

12
characterization method is different from those in the previous section. There are several
methods used for nonporous membrane:

Permeability methods
Differential scanning calorimetry/differential thermal analysis methods
Surface analysis (such as X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy)

Details of these techniques will not be discussed in this book, and readers can find relative
information in manuals of the respective analytical instruments.

Table 1

Typical Characteristics of Membrane Modules

Plate and Spiral wound Tubular Hollow

frame fiber
Packing 30–500 200–800 30–200 500–9000
density(m2/m3 )
Resistance to Good Moderate Very Poor
fouling good
Ease of cleaning Good Fair Excellent Poor
Membrane material Many Many Few Few
choices
Relative cost High Low High Low
Applications D, RO, PV, UF, D, RO, GP, UF, RO, UF D, RO,
MF MF GP, UF
MF microfiltration; ultrafiltration; D dialysis; PV pervaporation; RO reverse
osmosis.

13
MEMBRANE MODULE AND PROCESS DESIGN
As we know, large surface areas are required for industrial applications of membrane processes.
A practical solution for providing this large surface area is packing the mem-branes into a small
unit called a module, as shown in Fig. 2. The module is the base for membrane installation and
process design. During the process, a stream of feed enters the module with a specific content at
a specific flow rate. By passing through the membrane module, the feed stream is sepa-rated into
two streams, a retentate stream and a permeate stream. The retentate stream is the fraction of the
feed that retains in the feed stream and the permeate stream is the fraction that passes through the
membrane. The following membrane modules are largely used for industrial applications, of
which typical characteristics are listed in Table 1

Plate-and-frame module
Spiral-wound module
Tubular module
Hollow-fiber module

The choices of module configuration as well as the arrangement of the modules in a system are
based on economic considerations with correct engineering parameters being employed to
achieve this economy, which include the type of separation problem, ease of cleaning, ease of
maintenance, ease of operation, compactness of the system, scale, and the possibility of
membrane replacement. Next, we will discuss one of the typical membrane modules that we
need it for this year.

Tubular Module
In this type of module, a number of membranes of tubular shape are encased in a con-tainer. A
schematic diagram is given in Fig. 5. The feed solution always flows through the center of the
tubes while the permeate flows through the porous supporting tube into

14
 Figure 5 Cutaway view of hollow-fiber membrane module.

Figure 6 Schematic drawing of a tubular module.

the module housing. Ceramic membranes are mostly assembled in such tubular module
configurations. The main features of the tubular module are

Convenience membrane replacement and easy cleaning of surface contamination

High energy consumption per unit amount of liquid treated
High feed flow rate helps reduce the membrane contamination
Low packing density of the module
Simple pretreatment of feed liquid

15
MENBRANE TESTING
Before installing a membrane operation system, membrane testing is required to determine the
capability of the particular polymer for the separation, optimum membrane configuration in the
application, and optimum processing conditions (e.g., pressure, flow rates, and temperature). In
general, every stream must be tested to determine design factors such as the specific membrane
polymer, membrane element design, total membrane area, applied pressure, system recovery,
flow conditions, membrane element array, and pretreatment requirements. For an ideal system,
all contaminants to be removed are separated by the membrane and exit in the concentrate
stream. In reality, no membrane is perfect. The actual quan-tity of solute that passes through the
membrane depends on the chemistry of solute on the feed, the nature of membrane material, and
the operational conditions. Cell test, applications test, and pilot test can be used to evaluate
membrane technology with a particular stream. Cell test uses small, approx 100-cm2 cut pieces,
of sheet membrane mounted in a ―cell‖ that exposes the membrane to the test solution by cross-
flow mode. This test is effective for quick evaluation of a number of different membrane
polymers to determine the degree of separation. However, it cannot determine the long-term
chemical effect of a solution on the polymer and does not provide engineering scale-up data. An
applications test is quite similar to the cell test. It typically involves the evaluation of treatment
efficiency of a sample with a slightly higher volume, such as 100–150 L. The test can be
completed within 1–2 h. The test is fast and provides scale-up data such as flow, element
efficiency, and pressure requirements. It can also provide an indication of membrane stability.
However, it provides neither the long-term chemical effects nor sufficient data on the fouling
effects of the test solution. Figure 6 illustrates a typical applications test process.

Figure 7 Schematic drawing of a typical membrane application test.

16
of membrane stability. However, it provides neither the long-term chemical effects nor sufficient
data on the fouling effects of the test solution. Figure 6 illustrates a typical applications test
process. Unlike the above two tests, the pilot test can provide more-detailed information. The test
has a test machine in the process (similar to that in the applications test), which is operated for a
longer period (normally a minimum of 30 d). It provides long-term mem-brane operation data
such as fouling and chemical stability data. However, it can be expensive to perform, in terms of
cost of equipment, and daily monitoring.

Membrane processes are mainly used in processes where very high purity of the component is
required. Despite the technical advantages, such as being gentle to the products, the large-scale
applications of membranes processes are often affected by their cost. The cost of a given
installation is determined by two parts, the capital cost and the operational cost. The capital cost,
or the installation investment, can be further divided into three parts:

Membrane modules
Costs of piping, pumps, electronics, vessels
Pretreatment and post-treatment

In order to calculate the cost per unit (volume or mass) of product, the capital costs are
depreciated over a period of time, often 10 yr. Interest has to be paid over this time on this
amount of money. And the operational cost can be divided into four parts:

Energy requirement
Membrane replacement
Labor
Maintenance

A more detailed calculation of the cost of membrane operation can be found in some articles and
books. A computer program, named the Water Treatment Cost Estimation Programme (WTCost)
can be used to estimate costs of water treatment processes employing MF, UF, NF, RO, and ED.
The costs of pretreatment and post-treatment unit operations can also be estimated. The WTCost

17
has been tested by industry experts, and it has been shown to accurately project true water
treatment costs for a number of plants of different brackish and seawater capacities.

MECHANISMIS
The major drawback hindering the use of membranes is the reversible and irre-versible fouling
that impedes the flux of clean water through the membranes. The consequence of membrane
fouling is a reduction of permeate production rate and/or an increase in solute passage across the
membrane with time. Fouling also causes increase in energy consumption as transmembrane
pressure can increase substantially due to fouling. In addition, fouling increases downtime and
may shorten membrane life span. demonstrates membrane fouling due to the presence of organic
compounds, inorganic salts, and microorganisms. Fouling can be defined as irreversible
deposition of materials onto or into the mem-brane, causing loss of flux and altered rejection.
Membrane fouling can be caused by

Particulate deposition (colloidal fouling)

Adsorption of organic molecules (organic fouling)
Inorganic deposits (scaling)
Microbial adhesion and growth (biofilm formation)

MEMBRANE CLEANING AND FLUX RESTORATION

Fouling is almost an inevitable consequence of the nature of the RO process itself even when
good pretreatment is employed. The challenge is therefore to reduce and control fouling
sufficiently to minimize the rate of RO flux decline and prolong membrane lifetime. This can be
accomplished by a combination of good feed pretreatment and well-developed membrane
cleaning programs. It is essential to have a good knowledge of fouling to successfully clean and
regen-erate fouled membranes. Types of foulants that could occur on RO membrane surfaces
include suspended solids, colloids, metal oxides, scales, biological slime, organics, oil, and
grease. The type of fouling that could occur on the membrane surface is a function of the make-
up of the feed water, the pretreatment applied prior to the RO membrane, and the interaction
between the different foulants. The most dominant fouling that can occur in wastewater
reclamation is biological fouling and organic fouling (70). The major factor in controlling
fouling on membranes used in secondary effluent treatment is the dissolved organic content of
18
the feed water. Dissolved organics such as humic acids, proteins, carbohydrate and tannins in
addition to biological growth were the major fouling constituents of RO membranes in
wastewater reclamation.

Chemical Cleaning Methods

Most membrane manufacturers recommend chemical methods for membrane cleaning and
regeneration. Chemical cleaning is the most common method to clean NF membranes (86).
Chemical cleaning methods depend on chemical reactions to weaken the cohesion forces
between the foulants and the adhesion forces between the foulants and the membrane surface.
Chemical reactions involved in cleaning include hydrolysis, peptization, saponification,
solubilization, dispersion, chelation, sequestering, and suspend-ing . It was found that cleaning
with strong chelating agents, such as EDTA, most effectively removes the fouling layer and
restores permeate flux for NF membranes. Chemical used for cleaning membranes should ideally
serve the following functions and posses the following desirable properties:

Loosen and dissolve foulants from membrane surface

Keep foulants in dispersed and soluble form
Avoid fresh fouling
Does not cause damage to membrane material
Easily rinsed away after cleaning
Chemically stable before, during and after use
Cost effective

Physical Cleaning Methods

Physical cleaning methods depend on mechanical forces to dislodge and remove foulants from
the membrane surface. Physical methods used include forward flushing, reverse flushing,
backwashing, vibrations, air sparge, and CO2 back permeation. MF and UF used in pretreatment
to RO are more frequently cleaned by physical cleaning and less frequently by chemical
cleaning. Cleaning frequencies reported in lit-erature varied widely. Physical cleaning frequency
is approximately every 40 min with a chemical clean scheduled every 6 mo. An air backwash
frequency of 15–20 min is sufficient for hollow-fiber MF membranes. In a UF evaluation study,
backwashing was able to achieve an average flux recovery of 86.5% . It was observed in the
same study that flux restoration could be achieved even when backwash was reduced from 10 to

19
1 min. There has not been adequate investigation into physical and physicochemical cleaning
methods for RO membranes. It was commented that there is little published infor-mation on
membrane cleaning and regeneration. Most cleaning studies reported are based on trial and error.
A more systematic approach is required to study the various aspects of fouling control. A better
understanding of cleaning mechanisms and the effect of different cleaning agents on different
foulants and different types of membrane is much needed. Further efforts are needed to develop
more feasible and cost-effective cleaning and restoration procedures for different types of
membranes. A new generation of low fouling composite membranes has been introduced. The
salt rejection layer on the membrane has been modified to make it more hydrophilic thereby
reducing its affinity to organics. The novel process is the incorporation of an electro-magnetic
device, which produces an electromagnetic field surrounding the membrane elements. This
electromagnetic field reduces the precipitation of sparingly soluble salts. Organic fouling can
also be reduced by this method as the electromagnetic field can neutralize organics and affect
their ability to interact with the membrane surface.

CONCLUSION
In the conclusion use of membrane technology in water and wastewater treatment has begun to
emerge as the most significant advancement in water treatment in the past 20 yr, and its presence
is expected to become widely spread in the future. The potential to use membranes exists
whenever they provide the ability to remove contaminants that cannot be removed by other
technologies, remove contaminants at less cost than other alternatives, or require less land area
than competing technologies. The biggest single technical challenge with the use of membranes
for water treatment is the high fouling that occurs universally, which results in an increase in
feed pressure and requires frequent cleaning of membranes. This leads to a reduction in overall
facility efficiency and a shorter membrane life. Pretreatment prior to membrane filtration is
generally required for a full scale plant. With extensive research and development efforts on
tackling the membrane fouling and emerging of new cleaning technology, membrane technology
has become a more promising option for both water treatment and wastewater treatment when
considering urban reuse, agricultural reuse, industrial recycle, groundwater recharge, salinity
barriers, and augmentation of potable water or ultra-pure water supplies.

20
REFERENCES

1. H. S. Ong, Challenges ahead for Singapore’s water supply. Seminar on Ensuring Singapore’s
Water Supply: Options and Issues Shangri-la Hotel, 10–11 Nov. (1997).

2. M. Joel, E. O. Peter, and R. W. Mark, Water Treatment Membrane Process McGraw-Hill

Company, New York, 1996, pp. 17.1–17.31.
3. S. Judd and B. Jefferson (eds.), Membrane for Industrial Wastewater Recovery and Re-use
Elsevier Advanced Technology, Oxford, 2003.

4. J. P. Chen, S. L. Kim, and Y. P. Ting, Optimization of feed pretreatment for membrane filtration
of secondary effluent. Journal of Membrane Science 219 27–45 (2003).
5. S. L. Kim, J. P. Chen, and Y. P. Ting, Study on feed pretreatment for membrane filtration of
secondary effluent. Separation & Purification Technology 29 171–179, 2002.

6. R. D. Letterman (ed.), Water Quality and Treatment, A Handbook of Community Water Supplies
5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1999.
7. W. S. W. Ho and K. K. Sirkar (eds.), Membrane Handbook Chapman & Hall, New York, 1992.

8. Singapore Public Utilities Board. Singapore Water Reclamation Study, Expert Panel Review and
Findings. Singapore (2002).

9. T. Matsuura, Progress in membrane science and technology for seawater desalination—a review.
Desalination 134 47–54 (2001).

10. T. Matsuura, Synthetic Membranes and Membrane Separation Processes CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL, 1994.

11. T. Matsuura and S. Sourirajan, Studies on reverse osmosis for water pollution control. Water
Research 6 1073–1086 (1972).

12. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc. (ed.), Wastewater Engineering: Treatment Disposal and Reuse 4th ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 2002.

13. M. Mulder, Basic Principles of Membrane Technology Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands, 1996.

14. Economic Commission for Europe, Membrane Technology in The Chemical Industry United
Nations Publication, New York, 1990.

15. R. Noyes (ed.), Unit Operations in Environmental Engineering, Noyes Publications, Park Ridge,
New Jersey, 1994, pp. 239–264.

21