COMBINED RESISTANCE AND OSMOTIC PRESSURE MODEL … · Large molecules bound by Vander Waals forces...
Transcript of COMBINED RESISTANCE AND OSMOTIC PRESSURE MODEL … · Large molecules bound by Vander Waals forces...
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 160 [email protected]
International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET) Volume 5, Issue 5, May 2014, pp. 160–173, Article ID: IJARET_05_05_018
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijaret/issues.asp?JType=IJARET&VType=5&IType=5
ISSN Print: 0976-6480 and ISSN Online: 0976-6499
© IAEME Publication
COMBINED RESISTANCE AND OSMOTIC
PRESSURE MODEL MODELS FOR
ULTRAFILTRATION USING DYE SOLUTION FOR
PREDICTION OF MEMBRANE FOULING IN SPS,
SPES, SPEEK AND NAFION MEMBRANES
B. Chirsabesan*, M.Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
Department of Chemical Engineering, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, India
*Corresponding Author, [email protected]
ABSTRACT
Experiments were performed in four poly electrolyte membranes (PEM) such
SPES, SPS, SPEEK and Nafion at optimized condition. The SPES, SPSf, SPEEK were
prepared with different ion exchange capacity. In the present study, Eosin B dye was
chosen for effective investigation of fouling, resistances due to pore blocking, pore
constriction, caking mechanisms. The understanding of both combined caking and
complete blockage model was the most useful for membrane performances. The
individual model prediction was investigated to provide good fits of all SPES, SPS,
SPEEK and Nafion membranes. The resistance series model was provided good fits of
a broad range of curves where the flux declines in a manner by cake filtration and
complete blocking. The osmatic pressure models models also provided good data fits
and may be applicable to systems where these models are consistent with the
experimentally observed fouling mechanisms.
Keywords: Dye solution, resistance series model, osmatic model, poly electrolyte
membranes (PEM)
Cite this Article: B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan, Combined
resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution
for prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes,
International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology, 5(5),
2014, pp 160–173.
http://www.iaeme.com/ijaret/issues.asp?JType=IJARET&VType=5&IType=5
1. INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, when care of the environment is a major issue, it is tempting to assume that the
use of natural colours is an environmental friendly alternative to present-day practice. There
are several groups studying the use of natural dyes in modern dyeing industry (Angelini et al.
2003, Kamel et al. 2005). Some of the advantages of the use of this type of compounds are
the absence of toxicity upon humans, the use of sustainable sources and the fit into the natural
pathways of biodegradation of the released dye baths. According to the Colour Index dyes
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 161 [email protected]
can be classified on the basis of colour and application method. Various attractive forces have
the potential of binding dyes to fibres, and often more than one type of chemical bonding can
operate with the same dye-fibre combination. The dominant force depends on the chemical
character of the fibre and the chemical groups in the dye molecule. The types of bonds
established between the dye and the fibre, by increasing relative strength of the bond, can be:
Van der Waals, hydrogen, ionic or covalent (Guaratini and Zanoni 2000). According to the
application categories dyes can be classified as seen in Table 1.
Table 1 Application categories of dyes
Type of dye Characteristics Substrates
Acid
When in solution are negatively
charged; bind to the cationic NH3+
-
groups present in fibres
Nylon, wool, polyamide, silk, modified acryl,
paper, inks and leather
Reactive Form covalent bonds with OH
-, NH
-
or SH- groups
Cotton, wool, silk and nylon
Metal complex
Strong complexes of one metal ion
(usually chromium, copper, cobalt or
nickel) and one or two dye molecules
(acidor reactive)
Silk, wool and polyamide
Direct Large molecules bound by Vander
Waals forces to the fibre
Cellulose fibres, cotton, viscose, paper, leather
and nylon
Basic Cationic compounds that bind to the
acid groups of the fibre Synthetic fibres, paper and inks
Mordant
Require the addition of a chemical
that combines with the dye and the
fibre, like tannic acid, alum,
chromealum, and other salts of
aluminium, chromium, copper, iron,
potassium, and tin
Wool, leather, silk, paper, modified cellulose
fibres and an odized aluminium
Disperse Scarcely soluble dyes that penetrate
the fibre through fibres swelling
Polyester, polyamide, acetate, acrylic and
plastics, Paints, inks, plastics and textiles
Pigment
Insoluble, non-ionic compounds or
insoluble salts that retain their
crystalline or particulate structure
throughout their application
Cellulose fibres, cotton, viscose and wool
Azoic and Ingrain
Insoluble products of a reaction
between a coupling component and a
diazotised aromatic amine that
occurs in the fibre
Cotton, viscose, cellulose acetate and
polyester
Sulphur Complex polymeric aromatics with
heterocyclic S-containing rings Cellulose fibres, cotton and viscose
Solvent Nonionic dyes that dissolve the
substrate to which they bind
Plastics, gasoline, varnish, lacquer, stains,
inks, oils, waxes and fats
Fluorescence
brightners
Mask the yellowish tint of natural
fibres
Soaps and detergents, all fibres, oils, paints
and plastics
Food Non-toxic and not used as textile
dyes Food
Natural Obtained mainly from plants Food, cotton, wool, silk, polyester, polyamide
and polyacrylonitrile
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 162 [email protected]
Discharged wastewater by some industries under uncontrolled and unsuitable conditions
is causing significant environmental problems. The importance of the pollution control and
treatment is undoubtedly the key factor in the human future. Membrane technology has
emerged as a feasible alternative to conventional treatment processes of dye wastewater and
has proven to save operation costs and water consumptions by water recycling. Usually this
technique is applied as a tertiary/final treatment after biological and/or physical-chemical
treatments (Ciardelli et al. 2000, Marcucci et al. 2002). It has also been used to concentrate
and purify dyes in the manufacture of these compounds (Crossley 2002). Table 2 shows the
disadvantages according to different dye class
Table 2 Disadvantages of different dye classes
Dye classes Disadvantages
Azo groups
Their reductive cleavage of azo linkage is
responsible for the formation of toxic amines in
the effluent
Anthraquinone-based
dyes
It is most resistant to degradation due to their
fused aromatic ring structure and thus remains
coloured for a longer time in wastewater.
Basic dyes It has high brilliance and intensity of colours and
is highly visible even in a low concentration
Rose Bengal dye is extensively used in the printing, insecticides and in dying industries.
Aqueous solutions of Eosin B, Eosin Y, Eryhtrosin B, Ehidium Bromide, Giemsa Stain, Janus
Green B, Methylene Blue, and Trypan Blue were successfully decolorized. The reduction
after 24 h is reported to be 53%. Eosin B dyes blue can be degraded to some extent on
activated carbon and its surfactant based desorption. The efficacy of removal was higher for
dyes with low molecular mass, with lower flowrate and smaller particle size of the resin.
Quinoline Yellow (E104) are both sometimes referred to as quinoline yellow which has
created significant confusion when companies are formulating global products. For example,
the following countries accept either color for use in drug products: Argentina, Australia,
Canada, Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong, Israel and Peru. For example, China, Korea,
India and Pakistan accept only quinoline yellow and Mexico and the Phillipines only accept
quinoline yellow. It is important that the specific regulations of the target countries be
evaluated before making a formulation decision. Hence we have taken up work on the
membrane For the ultrafiltration performance dye solution. The resistances effecting the
permeate flux like membrane resistance, concentration polarization resistance were
performed. The main motivation for the present work is colour removal and resistances
effecting the permeate flux during separation of dye aqueous solution using membrane
materials. Flux decline is the major problem in membrane system. Various models have been
developed to predict membrane flux behaviour during separation. All of them can be
classified into three broad categories: (a) osmotic-pressure-controlled models, (b) gel
polarization models, and (c) resistance-in-series models. In a typical membrane filtration
process the flux drops due to osmotic pressure, pore blocking, and gel layer growth may
coexist. The models for the quantification of flux decline due to above constraints are
available in the literature (Sarkar 2013)
2. EXPERIMENTS AND METHODS
Analytical grade reagents of NaOH, Na2CO3, K2Cr2O7, H2SO4, Na2SO4, CH3OH, KBr,
ferrous ammonium sulfate, ethyl acetateare used for all the analysis. Textile dye Quinoline
Yellow, obtained from pollution control division, Central Electrochemical research Institute,
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 163 [email protected]
Karaikudi, Tamilnadu.PES (3500) was received from Udel. Rose Bengal (C20H2Cl4I4Na2O5,
Mr: 1017.65) was procured from M/S Merck and the 0.01 M stock solution was the dye was
prepared in doubly distilled water. Eosin B dye (4´,5´-Dibromo- 2´,7´dinitrofluorescein di
sodium salt, colour index: 45400), chloroform, chlorosulfonic acid, methanol, and
dimethylformamide (AR grade) were obtained from S.D fine Chemicals, India, and were
used without any further purification.
2.1. Preparation of membranes
For the sulfonation of PS, 5g weight was dissolved in 50 ml of chloroform and the solution
was cooled to 0°C in ice bath. The mixture of chloroform (25 ml) and chlorosulfonic acid
(2.5 ml) was added drop-wise to above solution. After 30 min reaction was terminated by
addition of fivefold of methanol in the reaction mixture. Precipitate was collected, washed
thoroughly with methanol and dried at 50°C, which resultant material were SPS. Poly ether
sulfone 40g was dissolved in 1,2 - dichloroethane by heating the solution at a temperature of
85°C ± 5°C, for 2-3 h. The solution was then cooled to 4°C and 5 ml of chlorosulfonic acid
was added drop wise to the solution for about 15 minutes. This reaction mixture was
maintained at 4°C for 2 h. The 20 g of PEEK was dried in a vacuum oven at 100°C and then
dissolved in 500 ml of concentrated (95-98% H2SO4) sulphuric acid at 50-70°C under vigorous
mechanical stirring. The reaction time ranged from 5 to 6 h. The sulfonation reaction was
terminated by decanting the polymer solution into a large excess of ice-cold water under
continuous mechanical agitation and the polymer precipitate was filtered and washed several
times with distilled water until the pH was neutral. The recovered SPEEK was dried at room
temperature for 2 days, finally the polymer was dried in a vacuum oven at 80°C for 24 h, and
stored in a desiccator. The above procedure for preparation of membranes was reported in our
earlier work [Chirsabesan et al 2013a and Chirsabesan et al 2013b]
2.2. Film polarization model
This model was developed based on the film theory and mass balance principle about the
membrane. At steady state the convective flow through the membrane is balanced by solute
flux through the membrane plus diffusive flow from the membrane. Fig shows the
concentration profile near the membrane surface at steady state from the feed side. The
following equation expresses the material balance
��� � � ���� ��� 1
Where C is the concentration at a distance x from the membrane surface,� is the
permeate concentration and D is the diffusion coefficient of the solute.
Figure 1 Concentration profile near the membrane surface during steady state ultrafiltration
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 164 [email protected]
The boundary conditions are X=0 at C=��; X=δ at C=�
Where the boundary layer thickness is δ, � is the bulk solution concentration and ��is
the max value of the boundary layer concentration, which is the concentration at the
membrane surface. Integrating the above equation give
�� ��� ���������� 2
Where, � � δ ⁄ is called the mass transfer coefficient .This model is called film
polarization model.
2.3. Osmotic pressure model
The osmotic pressure model is developed on the assumption that it can explain the flux
decline mechanism that limits the flux. A concentration difference between two solutions,
which are separated by a membrane, will cause an osmotic pressure difference. In order to
create osmotic equilibrium, water is induced to flow from the low concentration region to the
high concentration region. This reduces the convective flux generated by the operating trans
membrane pressure. As any other flows in nature, the permeate flow across the membrane is
governed by the free energy difference across the membrane. In addition, the coupling effect
between water and solute may reduce this energy difference, and the effective trans
membrane pressure may drop.
Originally, Kedem and Katchalsky (1958), using irreversible thermodynamics, derived
the relation:
�� = �(∆� − �∆�) 3
Where �� is the permeate flux, � is the membrane permeability, ∆π is the osmotic
pressure across the membrane [∆π= π (��) – π ( �)] and σ is the reflection coefficient of
solute across the membrane. The osmotic pressure effect on the permeate flux decline is
scaled by the parameter σ. The parameter measures the relative restriction of the membrane to
transmit the solute compared to the solvent, and varies between 0 for a freely permeable to 1
for a completely impermeable solute. � is an inverse function of membrane resistance which
includes both membrane and fouling resistance due to adsorption. Therefore the equation for
permeate flux is given by equation (4.8)
�� = ∆�� ∆!"(#�$#%) 4
Rf is assumed to be independent of pressure and stands to account for the effect of
adsorption.
2.4. Resistances-in-series model
The model has been used to predict the performance of ultrafiltration of different
macromolecule solutions. This model considers all the resistances involved in flux decline
such as membrane resistance, adsorption resistance, pore blockage resistance concentration
polarization resistances in series. Permeate flux can be given by equation (4.9)
��=∆&
"(#�$#'�$#() 5
Where, Rm is membrane resistance, Rcp is concentration polarization resistance, Ra is
adsorption resistance, Rp pore blockage resistance.
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 165 [email protected]
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
3.1. Physical properties of membranes
Table 3 Thickness and porosity of the prepared membranes
Name of Polymer Thickness(mm) Porosity (%)
SPSf 0.25 59.2
SPEEK 0.25 62.5
SPES 0.25 60.0
Nafion® 117 0.25 52.5
The thickness and porosity of the prepared membranes are given in Table 3.1. The above
results have shown that SPEEK membrane is more porous than SPS, SPES and commercial
Nafion® 117 membranes. Hence, permeability and transfer of dye molecules was higher in
SPEEK membranes, when compared with other membranes. However, membrane resistance
differs according to membrane properties. The thickens of membranes plated main role in
solution diffusion. According to Fick’s law, mass transport influence by thickness of
membranes. In this study, the influence of resistance due to concentration polarization, cake
and gel layer on surface of the membranes affect the permeate flux and rejection properties.
3.2. Membrane resistance
It is the resistance offered by the membrane for the transport of particles. It should be
constant for a given feed solution. Membrane resistance can be determined by
)� = ∆&" *+
6
Where ∆� is the transmembrane pressure, )� is membrane resistance, μ is the viscosity
of the water, �� is pure water flux. The above equation shows that flux is a linear function of
pressure for a given feed solution and membrane. Membrane resistance can be determined
and shown in Table 4.
Table 4 Membrane resistance of the prepared membranes
Name of Polymer Membrane Resistance x 1013
(m-1
)
SPS 7.93
SPEEK 4.43
SPES 7.83
Nafion® 117 8.52
3.3. Concentration polarisation during dye separation with effect of pressure and
flux of all membranes
The ion exchange membarnes are responsible for solute aggregation commonly seen in high
pressur membrane process. The exchange groups present in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion
are induced the intermolecular exchanges between dye molecules result in exchanges and
propagate aggregate growth. The presence of a sulfone group has been shown to be necessary
to initiate exchanges of moclecues. Severe flux decline has been observed with dyes
containing amino acid groups. Consistent with this, decreasing the reactivity of the amino
group, for instance by increasing pH, reduced the severity of flux decline. During filtration,
there is an accumulation of retained colloidal particles at the membrane surface giving rise to
a concentration gradient of particles perpendicular to the membrane surface, known as
i. e xi. e x
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 166 [email protected]
concentration polarisation. This concentration gradient is the driving force for diffusion of the
particles back to the bulk, which at steady state, is in balance with the bulk movement of
particles to surface (Chanukya et al 2013). This layer of concentrated particles generates a
resistance to fluid flow, as a physical barrier or increased osmoticpressure which reduces the
effective transmembrane pressure.
Concentration polarisation is a reversible phenomenon that is controlled by the balance
between mass transfer towards and away from the membrane. This gives rise to the typical
flux-pressure correlation seen during ultrafiltrtion of Eosin B Dye dye solution (Figure 2.). At
low transmembrane pressures (TMP), flux and CP are both low, and flux is observed to
increase linearly with pressure (pressure-controlled region). Conversely, at high TMP, CP is
severe, and flux starts to highland with increasing pressure. Here, flux increases are only
possible if mass transfer properties are improved.
Figure 2 Effect of Pressure on permeate flux of dye solution of prepared membranes
3.4. Determination of permeate flux of dye solution through experiment at
different operating conditions and fitting a suitable mathematical model
This is a mathematical model based on resistance in series model considering membrane
resistance and concentration polarization resistance acting in series to the filtrate.
Mathematical model equation for permeate flux is given by
� ∆&",#�$- &�. / 7
In above equation z is given by (Bhattacharjee et al 1998)
0 1�2��2��3�24�2���5�24673�24�2�� 8
89 can be calculated from concentration polarization model given by
� = : ln =(24�2�)(2��2�)> 9
Substituting z in equation 5.4 gives
?* = "#�
∆& � "&�∆& @ =
13 A
2��2�24�2�B �
5�3
2424�2�CD> 10
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 167 [email protected]
Equation 5.7can be written as
?* E?F � EGD � EH 11
The above equation can be solved by least square method to find the constants a1, a2, a3.
Solving non-linear equation 5.8 by least square method the equations can be given by
E?∑FG − EG∑F. D + EH∑F = ∑(F. ?*) 12
E?∑F. D − EG∑DG + EH∑D = ∑ ?* . D 13
E?∑F − EG∑D + �EH = ∑ ?* 14
From Eqn. 5.6 & Eqn. 5.7 a1, a2, a3 can be given as
E? = "(2��2�)&�∆&3(24�2�) 15
EG = "5�246&�∆&3K24�2�L 16
EH = "#�∆& 17
From the above equations ��, : , )� can be calculated.
�� = "(2��2�)MN∆&3(24�2�) 18
: = MO&�∆&3(24�2�)"24P 19
)� = MQ∆&" 20
A mathematical model based on filtration theory coupled with resistance in series model
and gel polarization model has been developed in the present study. This work has been done
by using Eosin B dye solution. Permeation flux studies done through flat sheet dead-end
ultrafiltration set up at 50 psi and 300 rpm speed. In this present study permeate flux from
developed model and experiment was compared. Experimental data measuring flux and
volume of permeate up to that time at definite time interval of 15 min is given below.
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 168 [email protected]
Figure 3 Variation of inverse of flux of dye solution with time for SPS, SPEEK, SPES and Nafion
membranes
The inverse of flux of dye solution at the end of 205 min for all SPS, SPEEK, SPES and
Nafion is plotted in Figure 3. It is evident that the inverse of flux increases with time in
ultrafiltration. This indicates that the number concentration and size distribution become
wider with the initial feed surfactant concentrations leading to more severe pore blocking
(Huang et al 2012). Due to velocity, the permeate flux varies along the length, resulting in a
non-uniform solids concentration at the membrane surface. The ultrafiltration models
discussed to predict an area-averaged flux to determine the concentration at the membrane.
From Figure 3, the time-dependent fouling resistances are related to the flux and particle
deposition rate. For dye solution separation systems where membrane fouling is also
contributed by primary adsorption of dye solutes, the rate of dye molecules deposition may
also be modelled via resistance series model and osmotic pressure model. According to
present work, these models have yet to be applied to dye solution in UF system. In both
models, it was observed that resistance due to pore blocking dominated initially, while cake
resistance becomes more significant in the later stages of filtration.
Figure 4 Variation of volume of dye solution with time for SPS, SPEEK, SPES and Nafion
membranes
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 169 [email protected]
From Figure 4, it is evident that the volume of dye on surface of the membranes increases
with time almost linearly. The gel layer resistance is formed on all surfaces of the
membranes. However, the individual property, membrane resistance, porosity influenced the
formation of specific cake resistance and leading to more resistance to the solvent flux.
Further, the variation of gel layer resistance with all membranes to Eosin B dye at the end of
the experiment for different operating pressures. Figure 4 shows that the volume of dye
solution increases with the feed concentration. We note that the experimental results of the
variation of Rg with feed concentration are less conclusive.
Figure 5 Variation of permeate flux with time at different membranes at operating pressure 414 kPa
and Eosin concentrations of 1000 ppm
Figure 5 shows that flux decline with time and it attained steady state during the filtration.
The effects of dyes permeate flux and times are presented in Figure 5. The curves in Figure 5
clearly show the decline of the permeate flux during the operating time due to concentration
polarization (Salahi et al 2010). At the initial point of time, the flux is higher feed
concentration of eosin. The decrease in flux results in an increase in insolubilized dye. This
causes an increase in the rejection of the dye through the membrane. As a result, the transfer
of dilute water molecules suppressed in the dye concentration in the feed.
Figure 6 Variation of bulk layer concentration of permeate concentration on the eosin dye retention
with time at different membranes
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 170 [email protected]
The effect of the bulk layer concentration of permeate concentration on the eosin
retention is presented in Figure 6. Figure 6 shows that the retention of eosin increases with
concentration. This is quite obvious, as the number concentration, of build-up of the solutes
will be more with increasing concentration polarization, resulting into an increase of the
amount of the dye solubilized in the surface. This leads to an increase in the bulk layer
concentration of permeate concentration of dye (Zhang et al 2010). It is also clear from the
figure that the bulk layer concentration of permeate concentration is at a maximum for the
SPEEK membrane. This is due to porosity and resistance of the membranes.
Figure 7 J Vs ln(cb-cp) of SPS membrane
In ultrafiltration, accumulated solute (dye) particles provide additional resistance to fluid
flow when the permeation process. C to denote the excess number concentration of particles
in the polarization layer. The actual particle concentration is C, + C, where C, is the bulk
(feed) number concentration of particles (Cb). The distribution of permeation of accumulated
particles in permeated liquid (Cp) is influence the retention performances (Koyuncu et al
2013). This observation is shown in Figure 7.
Figure 8 J Vs ln(cb-cp) of SPEEK membrane
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 171 [email protected]
The direction of the permeate velocity is explained from the Figure 8 from the bulk to the
membrane, so that v(x) is always positive. The J value denoted the flow molecules from the
membrane surface. From Figure 8, It is clearly understand that effective applied pressure is
equal to the applied hydraulic pressure minus the osmotic pressure difference between the
bulk suspension and the permeate.
Figure 9 J Vs ln(cb-cp) of SPES membrane
From Figure 9, wall particle concentration of dye solution on SPES membrane surface
more striking, it is independent of the bulk particle concentration. From the R2 value, it is
noted that change in ratio of the wall particle concentration to bulk particle concentration.
Further, the wall particle concentration is assumed to be a constant independent of pressure
for dye molecules/particles (Purkait et al 2004). The particles, a cake layer of retained
particles will form between the concentration polarization layer and the membrane surface.
By 'cake' mean that the retained particles are packed so as to attain minimum porosity.
Figure 10 J Vs ln(cb-cp) of Nafion membrane
Hence, a model for the permeate flux was developed for cases where the additional
resistance of this cake layer is considered. This investigation in the work, and it is particularly
useful for ultrafiltration using dye solution separation and removal. Further, the bulk fluid
moves toward the membrane surface owing to the applied pressure. The magnitude of this
B. Chirsabesan, M. Vijay and S. Shanmugananthan
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 172 [email protected]
transverse flow of dye molecules is determined by the applied pressure, the membrane
resistance and the extent of concentration polarization. The R2 value of Nafion membrane is
0.8993. This value is lower when compared with other membranes. This may be due to
higher value of nafion membrane resistance is when compared with other membranes. The
permeate velocity in ultrafiltration varies along all membranes since the concentration-
polarization layer thickness over the membrane surface increases gradually along with
respective porosity and membrane resistance.
4. CONCLUSIONS
The understanding of dye removal, membrane science, and mathematical modelling can yield
new insights into the mechanisms of flux decline in dye separation using ultrafiltration. Past
three decades, significant advances towards modelling of ultrafiltration have been reported.
The quantification of rejection and membrane properties via thickness, porosity, membrane
resistance and pressure have revealed the importance of concentration polarization, fouling, c
and permeability on ultrafiltration flux. From the both resistance and osmatic model, it is
clearly do influence both bulk layer concentration and gel formation was observed. This is
important when taking into consideration as the operating pressure in ultrafiltration are of a
magnitude higher than cake layer formation. The effect on bulk layer concentration and gel
formation on SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membrane surface varied with individual
membrane properties.
REFERENCES
1. L.G. Angelini, A. Bertoli, S. Rolandelli, L. Pistelli (2003) Agronomic potential of
Reseda luteolaL. as new crop for natural dyes in textile production. Industrial Crops
and Products 17: 199-207.
2. M.M Kamel, R.M. Shishtawy B.M. Yussef H. Mashaly (2005) Ultrasonic assisted
dyeing III. Dyeing of wool with lac as natural dye.Dyes and Pigments 65: 103-110.
3. C.C.I. Guaratini, M.V.B. Zanoni (2000) Corantes Têxteis. Química Nova 23: 71-78.
4. G. Ciardelli, L. Corsi, and C. Marcucci., "Membrane Separation for wastewater
reuse in the textile industry", Conservation and Recycling. 31: 189 – 197.
5. M.G. Marcucci, A. Ciardelli, L. Mateucci, L. Ranieri, M. Russo, Experimental
campaigns on textile wastewater for reuse by means of different membranes
processes, Desalination 149 (2002) 137–143.
6. C. Crossley (2002) How the Dye Industry is Beneficting from Membrane
Technology. Filtration &Separation 39: 36-38.
7. B. Sarkar, (2013). A combined complete pore blocking and cake filtration model
during ultrafiltration of polysaccharide in a batch cell. Journal of Food Engineering,
116: 333-343.
8. B. Chirsabesan and M.Vijay, 2013 A Novel Integrated Electochemical Oxidation
Process for Removal Rose Bengal Dye Aqueous Solution, International Journal of
Chemical Engineering Research. 5:127-137,
9. B.Chirsabesan and M.Vijay 2013 Performance of integrated process using fungal
strain corialus versicalor (mtcc-138) in microbial dyes degradation International
Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology. 4: 27-39
10. B.S Chanukya, S. Patil, N.K. Rastogi, (2013). Influence of concentration
polarization on flux behavior in forward osmosis during desalination using
ammonium bicarbonate. Desalination, 312: 39-44.
Combined resistance and osmotic pressure model models for ultrafiltration using dye solution for
prediction of membrane fouling in SPS, SPES, SPEEK and Nafion membranes
http://www.iaeme.com/IJARET/index.asp 173 [email protected]
11. S. Bhattacharjee, A.S.Kim, M. Elimelech, (1999). Concentration polarization of
interacting solute particles in cross-flow membrane filtration. Journal of Colloid and
interface Science, 212: 81-99.
12. J.H. Huang, L.J. Shi, G.M. Zeng, X. Li, S.B. He, F. Li, Y.L. Xiong, S.H. Guo,
D.M. Zhang, G.X. Xie (2012) Effects of feed concentration and transmembrane
pressure on membrane fouling in Cd2+ removal by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration.
Desalination. 294:67-73.
13. A. Salahi, M. Abbasi, T. Mohammadi, T. (2010) Permeate flux decline during UF of
oily wastewater: Experimental and modeling. Desalination, 25:153-160.
14. S. Zhang, K.Y Wang, T.S. Chung, H. Chen, Y.C. Jean, G. Amy, (2010). Well-
constructed cellulose acetate membranes for forward osmosis: minimized internal
concentration polarization with an ultra-thin selective layer. Journal of Membrane
Science, 360:522-535.
15. I. Koyuncu, D. Topacik, (2003). Effects of operating conditions on the salt rejection
of nanofiltration membranes in reactive dye/salt mixtures. Separation and
Purification Technology, 33: 283-294.
16. M.K. Purkait, S.D. Gupta, S. De, (2004). Resistance in series model for micellar
enhanced ultrafiltration of eosin dye. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 270:
496-506.