Synthesis and Performance of Polyamide Forward Osmosis Membrane for Natural Organic Matter (NOM) Removal

Authors: M. N. Abu Seman, L. M. Kei, M. A. Yusoff

Abstract:

Forward Osmosis (FO) polyamide thin-film composite membranes have been prepared by interfacial polymerization using commercial UF polyethersulfoneas membrane support. Different interfacial polymerization times (10s, 30s and 60s) in the organic solution containing trimesoyl chloride (TMC) at constant m-phenylenediamine (MPD) concentration (2% w/v) were studied. The synthesized polyamide membranes then tested for treatment of natural organic matter (NOM) and compared to commercial Cellulose TriAcetate (CTA) membrane. It was found that membrane prepared with higher reaction time (30s and 60s) exhibited better membrane performance (flux and humic acid removal) over commercial CTA membrane.

Keywords: Cellulose Triacetate, Forward Osmosis, Humic Acid, Polyamide.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1100667

References:

[1] P. S. Srivastava, “Characterizing Monsoonal Variation on Water Quality Index of River Mahi in India using Geographical Information System”, Water Quality, Exposure and Health, 2(3-4), 2011, pp. 192-203.
[2] D. E. Kile and C. T. Chiou, Aquatic Humic Substances (Vol. 4). American Chemical Society, 1989.
[3] L. Chekli, S. Phuntsho, H. K. Shon, S. Vigneswaran, J. Kandasamy, and A. Chanan, “A review of draw solutes in forward osmosis process and their use in modern applications,” Desalination and Water Treatment, 43, 2012, pp.167-184.
[4] L. Liu, M. Wang, D. Wang, and C. Gao, “Current Patents of Forward Osmosis Membrane Process,” Chemical Engineering, 2, 2009, pp. 76- 82.
[5] R.L. McGinnis, and M. Elimelech, “Global Challenges in Energy and Water Supply: The Promise of Engineered Osmosis,” Environmental Science and Technology, 42, 2008, pp. 8625–8629.
[6] J. Herron, Patent No. US 7,445,712 B2. United States of America. 2008
[7] R.C. Ong, and T.-S. Chung, “Fabrication and positron annihilation spectroscopy (PAS) characterization of cellulose triacetate membranes for forward osmosis,” Journal of Membrane Science, 394, 2012, pp. 230–240.
[8] R. Wang, L. Shi, C.Y. Tang, S. Chou, C. Qiu, and A.G. Fane, “Characterization of novel forward osmosis hollow fiber membranes,” Journal of Membrane Science 355, 2010, pp. 158-167.
[9] Achilli, A., Cath, T. Y., & Childress, A. E. Selection of inorganic-based draw solutions for forward osmosis applications. Journal of Membrane Science, 364, 2010, pp.233-241
[10] A. Schafer, L. Nghiem, and T. Waite, “Removal of the natural hormone estrone from aqueous solutions using nanofiltration and reverse osmosis,” Environmental Science Technology, 37(1), 2003, pp.182– 188.
[11] Y. Xu, X. Peng, C. Y. Tang, Q. S. Fu and S. Nie, “Effect of draw solution concentration and operating conditions on forward osmosis and pressure retarded osmosis performance in a spiral wound module,” Journal of Membrane Science, 348(1-2), 2010, pp. 298-309.
[12] F.-x. Kong, H.-w. Yang, X.-m. Wang, and Y. F. Xie, “Rejection of nine haloacetic acids and coupled reverse draw solute permeation in forward osmosis,” Desalination, 341, 2014, pp. 1-9.
[13] M. Xie, W.E. Price, L.D. Nghiem, and M. Elimelech, “Effects of feed and draw solution temperature and transmembrane temperature difference on the rejection of trace organic contaminants by forward osmosis,” Journal of Membrane Science, 438, 2013, pp. 57-64.