4.8 Article

A comparison of cake properties in traditional and turbulence promoter assisted microfiltration of particulate suspensions

Journal

WATER RESEARCH
Volume 46, Issue 8, Pages 2535-2544

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.02.002

Keywords

Membrane fouling; Flux enhancement; Turbulence promoter; Cake properties

Funding

  1. National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars of China [21125628]
  2. Key Laboratory in Beijing University of Technology

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The use of turbulence promoter can effectively enhance the permeate flux in crossflow microfiltration (CFMF) of particulate suspensions. Flux enhancement which is generally attributed to the reduction in cake thickness, however, has still not been clearly understood. In this study, the effects of turbulence promoter on cake properties (thickness, porosity and particle size) were investigated during CFMF of calcium carbonate suspension. It indicates that turbulence promoter has important effects on cake properties that directly affect the cake resistance. The significant reduction in thickness and slight increase in porosity are positive to reduce the cake resistance. The remarkable decrease in particle size is the negative effect due to the increased specific resistance of a cake. As a whole, the overall cake resistance is still diminished by turbulence promoter and therefore permeate flux is improved. The theoretical calculation of cake resistance shows a good consistence with the experimental result. The cake properties in both cases (using a turbulence promoter or not) almost exhibit the similar trends under various operating conditions. Differently, the use of turbulence promoter can greatly alleviate the effects of transmembrane pressure or feed concentration on growth of cake layer and intensify the effects of inlet velocity on diminishing the particle deposition. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available