Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Selecting
Membrane Filtration
Systems
Wu Chen
Frank Parma
Anant Patkar
Adrienne Elkin and
Subrata Sen,
The Dow Chemical Co.
22
www.cepmagazine.org
December 2004
CEP
Membrane classifications
Traditional filtration media such as filter cloth, wire
mesh or sintered metal have been used to remove particles measuring down to 1 mm. But, due to the lack of
technology in manufacturing these media, they have
not been successful in filtering out finer particles. Advances in polymer technology have brought to market
many membranes with pore sizes down to a few
angstroms (1010 m), opening the doors to what is now
called membrane filtration.
Depending on the sizes of particles to be separated,
membrane filtration can be classified as microfiltration
(MF), ultrafiltration (UF) or reverse osmosis (RO). There
are no clear-cut boundaries among these categories. Normally, MF refers to filtration of particles measuring approximately 0.051 m. UF membranes reject particles
measuring down to 30 nm (109 m). RO membranes are
used to remove even smaller particles, such as sodium
ions, from the feed stream. Nanofiltration (NF), a relatively new term, has been employed for applications that
fall within the boundaries of UF and RO.
MF membranes are rated by pore size, which is
measured in microns. These ratings, however, are not
always absolute. Membranes that have the same rating
Typical
Pore Size
0.051 m
11,000 kD
0.011 kD
9899%
salt retention
Typical P, psi
550
7100
50150
1201,200
may not exhibit identical rejection behaviors, due to differences in membrane material, membrane microstructure,
particle characteristics and membrane testing methods.
UF and NF membranes are rated using a term called
molecular weight cut-off (MWCO). The unit of measure
for MWCO is the Dalton (D). If a membrane does not
allow molecules with molecular weight of 100 g/mole or
more to pass, then this membrane is considered to have a
MWCO of 100 D. The MWCO is frequently expressed in
kD, where 1 kD = 1,000 Dalton. UF membranes are available in the range of 11,000 kD MWCOs. As in the case
of MF, and for similar reasons, UF and NF membranes
with identical ratings may not behave the same way. Manufacturers of UF and NF membranes use polymers with a
defined molecular weight distribution, such as polyethylene glycol or dextrin, to evaluate membrane-rejection
characteristics. It is important to remember that the hydrodynamic radii of these extended polymers may be different
from those of the molecules one intends to separate. For
example, proteins are usually globular and compact.
Therefore, for complete rejection of a protein, one should
use a membrane rated at one-fifth the molecular weight of
that protein (e.g., a 10-kD membrane should reject a 50kD protein completely).
For RO membranes, the rating is commonly listed as
percent (%) salt retention. Similar to UF and NF, the percent removal depends on the type of salt and operating
conditions. As the pore size decreases, the required driving
force (P) for filtration increases. A summary of membrane pore sizes and pressure drops for MF, UF, NF and
RO is presented in Table 1.
Equipment options
In membrane filtration, the permeate (or filtrate) flows
through the membrane (in crossflow filtration, this flow is
perpendicular to the membrane surface), while the slurry
(or retentate) remains on the other side of the membrane.
The filtration rate per unit membrane area is called permeate flux, commonly expressed in L/m2h.
Due to the membranes small pore sizes and high medium resistance, the liquid flux is normally smaller than that
seen in conventional filtration processes. A larger filtration
area is therefore necessary to achieve the required filtration
Figure 1. Shown are the two filtration modes: dead-end (left) and
crossflow (right).
CEP
December 2004
www.cepmagazine.org
23
Solid/Liquid Separations
d
c
spiral wound, courtesy of Dow Chemical Co.; b) hollow fiber, courtesy of PCI Membrane Systems, Inc.;
c) flat sheet, courtesy of Alfa Laval; d) tubular
ceramic, courtesy of Pall Corp.
capacity. One of the key issues in designing membrane filters is maximizing the filtration area, while avoiding the
fabrication of very large equipment.
A membrane filtration system is composed of filter vessels in which a number of membrane modules are housed.
Four popular membrane module configurations are the spiral-type filter (Figure 2a), in which the membrane is spiralwound and housed in a cylindrical casing. The retentate
flows in a direction that is parallel to the axis of the cylinder and the permeate flows spirally into the membrane
modules central collection chamber. Today, spiral-type filters are the most common and economic type of membrane
configuration, since they offer the highest membrane area
per footprint (space consumed in plant). However, these
membranes are usually not suitable for systems with a high
concentration of suspended solids.
Another module configuration that is frequently used in
todays industrial environment is the hollow fiber type (Figure 2b). In this configuration, a bundle of hollow fibers
(with each fiber measuring 0.12 mm in internal diameter)
is contained within a shell. The retentate flows inside the
hollow fiber, while the permeate is collected on the shell
side. Hollow fiber membranes, like the spiral-wound membranes, are considered to be an economic option. However,
they are not recommended when solid particles are present.
Flat-sheet membrane systems, such as those shown in
Figure 2c, comprise flat sheets of membranes that are attached to plastic plates, which provide mechanical support.
Many plates can be stacked together to achieve a system
with a large filtration area.
24
www.cepmagazine.org
December 2004
CEP
CEP
25