Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract
Tests were conducted on a membrane fixation system used as a substitute for conventional sand filtration
systems for the removal of turbidities from dunking water. River water was used as raw water. This memb~ne
system consisted of a pre-treatment filter unit using bundles of long fibers, a UF membrane unit, and a post-
treatment unit with activated carbon. For about 120 d it was operated successfully in an automatic and continuous
mode of operation despite a fluctuation of raw water qualities. This membrane system permitted obtaining better
water qualities with lower coagulant dosage levels as compared to a sand filtration system. For instance, the
turbidity, total bacteria and colifonn bacteria were removed completely. This experimental work was a part of the
project, “The research and development of the membrane filtration system used for water treatment,” sponsored
by the Ministry of Health and Welfare, Japan.
001 l-9164/96/$15.00 Copyright 0 1996 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
HI SO0 l l-9164(96)00098-7
108 T. Oe et al. /Desalination IO6 (1996) 107-113
2. Experiments
Fig. 1 shows the location of the Edogawa
River from which we obtained the raw water.
The Edogawa River is tributary of the Tonegawa
River, which is the biggest in area in Japan. The
raw water is rated as more contaminated than the
-+F I .’
0
-4
Post-treatment Umt
. Backwash Wastewater
‘._‘_‘_._._‘_i
I (Acltited Carbon)
Pm-treatment Unit UF Membrane Unit of Coal
Made of Coconut Palm
tl
P
..,......,,,,.,,..,,.,....
P i
Q
Backwash Pump
Backwash Backwash Pump
NaClO
Fig. 2. Membrane filtration
BIOWBI
Water Tank system.
T. Oe et al. /Desalination 106 (1996) 107-113 109
w : Longfibers filtrationwater - - - - -
rl !
0 40 00 I20 160
Days of Operation
1
t- 0 B BP vo 160 204
100 c
Prep unit UF membrane unit
; 10
; Membrane filtration water A
k _ Sand fi&ation water n
m‘a li!f
OCQJ-
oays of operamn
Days of Operation
Fig. 8. Comparison of the membrane filtration water Fig. 9. Number of coliform bacteria: membrane filtra-
and the sand filtration water in the residual turbidity. tion water vs. sand filtration water.
a 20 -
Raw water 0
D,s _ Long fibers filtration waterA
50 IO0 I.50
oays Of 0perar10n Days of Operation
Fig. 10. Number of total bacteria: membrane filtration Fig. 11. Manganese-raw water vs. long-fiber filtration
water vs. sand filtration water. Raw water 0, Coagu- water.
lated and sedimented water 0, Sand filtration water .,
Long fibers filtration water A, Membrane filtration
water A.
112 T. Oe et al. /Desalination 106 (1996) 107-113
Table 4
Water qualities
Table 5
Comparison of the UF membrane filtration system with conventional systems (1000 m3/d)
teria. The rejection rate of bacteriophages was biological metabolism of these substances oc-
examined (Table 3). Although the size of bacte- curred in the pre-treatment unit.
riophage ranged from 25 to 65 nm, they were
perfectly rejected by the UF membrane. Thus, the
5. Comparison with conventional system
membrane filtration was reliable for rejection of
those substances which do not dissolve in water, The UF membrane filtration system was com-
but the rejection of color, COD, THNTP and pared with the conventional system of a 1000
DOC was not good (Table 4). The activated m3/d capacity (Table 5). The membrane filtration
carbon was effective for removing these soluble system can achieve savings on the installation
substances. Particularly, the activated carbon area and period of construction. In the case of
made of coal exhibited a little better performance conventional filtration systems, the dosage of
than that of the activated carbon made of coconut coagulates has to be adjusted by the operator
palm. The pre-treatment unit could remove when the turbidity of raw water increases due to
NH,N and manganese which could not be re- flooding, etc. In contrast, the membrane filtration
jected by the membrane filtration perfectly. The system can be operated with little if any personal
removal ratio of manganese increased with a operator attention regardless of raw water quali-
lapse of filtration time (Fig. 11). So it seems that ties.
T. Oe et al. / ~esa~~nati~n 106 (I9961 107-113 113
Post-treatment Unit l
-.**
0 II a l **
Fig. 12, Residual ratio change.