4.7 Article

A robust model of brackish water electrodialysis desalination with experimental comparison at different size scales

期刊

DESALINATION
卷 443, 期 -, 页码 27-43

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.desal.2018.04.018

关键词

Electrodialysis; Brackish groundwater; Energetic model; Desalination model

资金

  1. Tata Projects, Ltd.
  2. UNICEF
  3. USAID
  4. Eureka Forbes Ltd.
  5. Tata Center for Technology and Design at MIT
  6. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship [1122374]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper presents a robust analytical model for brackish water desalination using electrodialysis (ED), with prediction of the desalination rate, limiting current density, and total energy use including pumping energy. Several assumptions reduce computation time and accurately model ED system behavior. The predicted desalination rate, limiting current density, and total energy usage agree with measurements across two diverse ED stack designs, differing in total membrane area (0.18 m(2), 37.1 m(2)), membrane manufacturers (GE Water, PCA GmbH), and flow channel spacers. The commercial-scale stack was additionally tested with real groundwater, demonstrating that brackish groundwater may be modeled as an equivalent concentration NaCI solution. Sensitivity to the membrane diffusion coefficient, area available for ion transport, level of discretization along the flow channel length, boundary layer and membrane resistances, and water transport are analyzed to guide empirical characterization when higher accuracy is required. No single existing model for pressure drop in the membrane spacers could accurately predict pumping power in both stacks. One model for each stack was found to reasonably approximate pressure drop, however experimental validation of specific spacer designs is recommended. The fully quantitative, parametric description of electrodialysis behavior presented forms a useful tool to design, evaluate, and optimize ED systems.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据