Recherche Images Maps Play YouTube Actualités Gmail Drive Plus »
Connexion
Les utilisateurs de lecteurs d'écran peuvent cliquer sur ce lien pour activer le mode d'accessibilité. Celui-ci propose les mêmes fonctionnalités principales, mais il est optimisé pour votre lecteur d'écran.

Brevets

  1. Recherche avancée dans les brevets
Numéro de publicationUS20050224411 A1
Type de publicationDemande
Numéro de demandeUS 11/145,773
Date de publication13 oct. 2005
Date de dépôt6 juin 2005
Date de priorité16 nov. 2001
Autre référence de publicationDE60213184D1, DE60213184T2, EP1312408A2, EP1312408A3, EP1312408B1, US6955762, US20040000520, US20050218073, US20080237125
Numéro de publication11145773, 145773, US 2005/0224411 A1, US 2005/224411 A1, US 20050224411 A1, US 20050224411A1, US 2005224411 A1, US 2005224411A1, US-A1-20050224411, US-A1-2005224411, US2005/0224411A1, US2005/224411A1, US20050224411 A1, US20050224411A1, US2005224411 A1, US2005224411A1
InventeursPaul Gallagher, Tom Rainier, Aaron Balczewski, Daniel Cargnel
Cessionnaire d'origineU.S. Filter Wastewater Group, Inc.
Exporter la citationBiBTeX, EndNote, RefMan
Liens externes: USPTO, Cession USPTO, Espacenet
Method of cleaning membranes
US 20050224411 A1
Résumé
The present invention relates a method for cleaning polymeric microfiltration membranes and membrane units, and to compositions useful in such methods. The compositions include at least one soluble sulfite reducing agent and a compatible solvent.
Images(8)
Previous page
Next page
Revendications(19)
1. A method of cleaning a membrane contaminated with a contaminant, the method comprising the step of:
contacting the contaminant with a composition comprising a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane and wherein the contaminant comprises a metal oxide or a metal hydroxide.
2. (canceled)
3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the contaminant comprises ferric floc.
4-17. (canceled)
18. A composition for cleaning a membrane contaminated with a contaminant, the composition comprising a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane and wherein the sulfite reducing agent is selected from the group consisting of sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, sodium sulfite, potassium metabisulfite, potassium hydrosulfite, potassium sulfite, and mixtures thereof.
19-21. (canceled)
22. The composition according to claim 18, wherein the sulfite reducing agent comprises sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite.
23. The composition according to claim 18, further comprising an enhancing agent.
24-26. (canceled)
27. The composition according to claim 18, wherein the sulfite reducing agent comprises from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium metabisulfite.
28. The composition according to claim 18, wherein the sulfite reducing agent comprises from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite, and wherein the sulfite reducing agent is capable of dilution to a working concentration of about 0.5. wt. % to about 2 wt. % soluble sulfite reducing agent present in solubilized form.
29. The composition according to claim 18, wherein the sulfite reducing agent comprises from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite.
30. The composition according to claim 18, comprising from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium metabisulfite and from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite, wherein the sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite are capable of dilution to a working concentration of about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sulfite reducing agent in solubilized form.
31. The composition according to claim 18, comprising from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite.
32. A method for cleaning a membrane, the method comprising the step of:
cleaning the membrane using a composition comprising a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
33. A membrane, wherein the membrane is capable of cleaning by a composition comprising a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
34. A membrane, wherein the membrane is contaminated with a contaminant comprising a metal oxide or a metal hydroxide, and wherein the membrane is capable of cleaning by a composition comprising a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
35. The membrane of claim 32, wherein the membrane comprises a hollow fiber or a flat sheet.
36. The membrane according to claim 35, wherein the membrane comprises a polyvinylidene fluoride polymer.
Description
    RELATED APPLICATION
  • [0001]
    This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/333,828, filed Nov. 16, 2001.
  • FIELD OF THE INVENTION
  • [0002]
    The present invention relates a method for cleaning polymeric microfiltration membranes and membrane units, and to compositions useful in such methods.
  • BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
  • [0003]
    Synthetic membranes are used for a variety of applications including desalination, gas separation, filtration, and dialysis. The properties of the membranes vary depending on the morphology of the membrane, i.e. properties such as symmetry, pore shape, and pore size, and the polymeric material used to form the membrane.
  • [0004]
    Different membranes can be used for specific separation processes, including microfiltration (MF), ultrafiltration (UF), and reverse osmosis. MF and UF processes are carried out under differential pressure and are distinguished by the size of the particle or molecule that the membrane is capable of retaining or passing. MF can remove very fine colloidal particles in the micrometer and sub micrometer range. As a general rule, it can filter particles down to 0.1 μm, whereas ultrafiltration can retain particles as small as 0.01 μm and smaller. Reverse osmosis operates on an even smaller scale.
  • [0005]
    As the size of the particles to be separated decreases, the pore size of the membrane decreases and the pressure required to carry out the separation accordingly increases.
  • [0006]
    A large surface area is generally needed when a large filtrate flow is required. One known technique to make a filtration apparatus more compact is to form a membrane in the shape of a hollow porous fiber. Modules of such fibers can be made with an extremely large surface area per unit volume. Microporous synthetic membranes are particularly suitable for use in hollow fibers and are typically produced by phase inversion techniques.
  • [0007]
    Microporous phase inversion membranes are particularly well suited to the application of removal of colloidal suspensions, viruses, and bacteria. Of all types of membranes, the hollow fiber membrane contains the largest membrane area per unit volume.
  • [0008]
    UF and MF membranes are used in separating particles and colloidal matter from liquids. In a typical scenario, water containing solutes and precipitates is passed through a bank of semipermeable tubular membranes housed in a module, often at elevated pressures. The filtered water is drawn off and collected, leaving a residue of solid material in the membrane pores or on the unfiltered side of the membrane.
  • [0009]
    It is preferred that the pores of the membrane be kept relatively free of contaminants. As the amount of pore blockage increases, the filtration efficiency of the module decreases and the amount of pressure required to maintain a viable throughput of liquid increases. As pressure increases, the likelihood of membrane rupture becomes more significant.
  • [0010]
    Under some circumstances, it may be desirable to treat water containing impurities with a flocculating agent prior to filtration. The purpose of flocculating agents is to cause dispersed colloids to coagulate and form ‘flocs’. Flocs have the advantage of entrapping smaller colloidal particles, thereby making filtration more efficient. They may also aid in the removal of dissolved particles. Under the influence of a flocculating agent, dissolved and suspended particles coagulate and precipitate from the water, thereby removing color, and turbidity.
  • [0011]
    Thus, in practice, the filtrate containing the flocculating agents, colloids, bacteria and other particulate matter is passed through the filtration unit under pressure, expelling filtered water and leaving the floc trapped within the unit, and more particularly on the waste side of the membrane and in the pores of the membrane. Flocs are particularly problematical in causing membrane blockage, and membrane performance gradually diminishes with use until it becomes necessary to clean the membranes.
  • [0012]
    One of the most commonly employed flocculating agents in the water purification field is ferric chloride, and the resultant floc is known as Fe floc. Build-up of Fe floc leads to iron fouling and eventually results in membrane performance degradation that diminishes the lifetime of these high cost membrane units. Two of the most widely used membrane compositions, polypropylene (PP) and polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), foul irreversibly with Fe floc and can become useless.
  • [0013]
    Residual material accumulating in and on the membrane is often removed by ‘backwashing’, that is, running the current of water counter to its normal direction of flow to dislodge the contaminants from the membrane. Gas backwashing of the membrane is also possible.
  • [0014]
    Backwashing generally involves increasing the pressure on both sides of the hollow fibers within a module a relatively high value before suddenly releasing that pressure on the unfiltered side of the membrane walls to cause a sudden pressure differential across the walls, which causes a backwash action. However, it is difficult to achieve complete removal of particulate matter, especially when flocculants have been used.
  • [0015]
    In addition to backwashing, the membranes may be de-fouled by more conventional cleaning regimes such as solution treatment with one or more of (and usually in a sequential manner) citric acid, oxidizing agents, in particular chlorine, and chelating agents such as EDTA.
  • [0016]
    Citric acid is usually regarded as a satisfactory cleaning agent, however, even it does not provide ideal levels of cleaning, and the membrane performance diminishes even following regular use/cleaning cycles. Moreover, the cleaning process usually involves a number of steps, and one or more of the steps may need to be conducted for long periods of time. Temperature control is also usually required.
  • [0017]
    Inorganic acids and bases are the mainstay of conventional cleaning agents. As well as suffering from the drawbacks mentioned above, these agents present their own problems because they may chemically attack the membranes and/or module components. Combinations of an aqueous inorganic acid, generally nitric acid, and a reducing agent, e.g., ascorbic acid, have also been used. However, none of the above regimes sufficiently de-foul membranes, particularly PVDF membranes, of the floc. Hence, there exists the need to improve the cleaning regime while at the same time avoiding the use of potentially severe cleaning agents.
  • SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
  • [0018]
    It is desirable to overcome or ameliorate at least one of the disadvantages of the prior art methods of de-fouling membranes, to provide a useful alternative to conventional methods of de-fouling membranes, or to provide suitable compositions for use in cleaning or de-fouling membranes.
  • [0019]
    In a preferred embodiment, there is provided a method of cleaning a membrane contaminated with a contaminant including the step of contacting the contaminant with a composition including at least one soluble sulfite reducing agent and a compatible solvent. The term sulfite as used herein is used in its broadest general sense and includes, without limitation, sulfite, bisulfite, metabisulfite, hydrosulfite, and the like.
  • [0020]
    Preferably the membrane is of a hollow fiber configuration, although alternatively it may be a flat sheet membrane or other membrane configuration. In highly preferred embodiments, the membrane is formed from PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) polymer, although the methods of the preferred embodiments are applicable to polysulfone, polyethylene, polypropylene, polyacrylonitrile (PAN), fluorinated membranes, cellulose acetate membranes and the like and mixtures of the above, as well as all commonly used membrane polymers.
  • [0021]
    Preferably, the soluble sulfite reducing agent is sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, sodium sulfite or mixtures thereof. Most preferably, a mixture of sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite is used. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that, for instance, besides sodium, other soluble salts such as potassium or other alkali metals or alkaline earth metals may be used. The solvent is preferably water. However any suitable solvent that is compatible with the materials comprising the membrane and is a suitable solvent for the sulfite may also be employed.
  • [0022]
    It is also preferred that the sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite are present in an amount of 20 wt. % to 65 wt. % each, when used alone or in combination. This combination may be used neat or further diluted when in use, for example, to around 0.5 wt. %. Dilutions of about 2 wt. % are particularly preferred. However, any suitable dilution may be employed.
  • [0023]
    Preferably, and without wishing to be bound by any particular theory, the contaminant is believed to be removed by solubilization resulting from a reduction to a lower valence state of at least a part of the contaminant.
  • [0024]
    Preferably, the method reduces the cleaning time relative to known cleaning methods and is carried out at low or ambient temperatures.
  • [0025]
    Accordingly, in a first embodiment, a method of cleaning a membrane contaminated with a contaminant is provided, the method including the step of contacting the contaminant with a composition including a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
  • [0026]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the contaminant includes a metal oxide or a metal hydroxide.
  • [0027]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the contaminant includes ferric floc.
  • [0028]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the contaminant includes an organic compound.
  • [0029]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the solvent includes water.
  • [0030]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, sodium sulfite, potassium metabisulfite, potassium hydrosulfite, potassium sulfite, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0031]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, method further includes the step of reducing a valence state of an atom of the contaminant to a lower valence state, whereby the contaminant is solublized and removed from the membrane.
  • [0032]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the composition further includes an enhancing agent.
  • [0033]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the enhancing agent includes inorganic acids, organic acids, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0034]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the enhancing agent includes citric acid.
  • [0035]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the solvent includes water and the sulfite reducing agent includes sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0036]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 0.1 wt. % to about 5 wt. % of a component including sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0037]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % of a component including sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0038]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the composition includes from about 0.5 wt. % to about 1.5 wt. % sodium metabisulfite and from about 0.5 wt. % to about 1.5 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite.
  • [0039]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the membrane includes a hollow fiber microfiltration membrane or a hollow fiber ultrafiltration membrane.
  • [0040]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the membrane includes a flat microfiltration membrane or a flat ultrafiltration membrane.
  • [0041]
    In an aspect of the first embodiment, the membrane includes a polyvinylidene fluoride polymer.
  • [0042]
    In a second embodiment, a composition for cleaning a membrane contaminated with a contaminant is provided, the composition including a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
  • [0043]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the contaminant includes a metal oxide or a metal hydroxide.
  • [0044]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the contaminant is ferric floc.
  • [0045]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes sodium metabisulfite, sodium hydrosulfite, sodium sulfite, potassium metabisulfite, potassium hydrosulfite, potassium sulfite, or mixtures thereof.
  • [0046]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite.
  • [0047]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the composition further includes an enhancing agent.
  • [0048]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the enhancing agent includes an inorganic acid or an organic acid.
  • [0049]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the organic acid includes citric acid.
  • [0050]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 20 wt. % to about 60 wt. % sodium metabisulfite, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is capable of dilution to a working concentration of about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % of sulfite reducing agent in a solubilized form.
  • [0051]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium metabisulfite.
  • [0052]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite, and wherein the sulfite reducing agent is capable of dilution to a working concentration of about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % soluble sulfite reducing agent present in solubilized form.
  • [0053]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the sulfite reducing agent includes from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite.
  • [0054]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the composition includes from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium metabisulfite and from about 20 wt. % to about 65 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite, wherein the sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite are capable of dilution to a working concentration of about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sulfite reducing agent in solubilized form.
  • [0055]
    In an aspect of the second embodiment, the composition includes from about 0.5 wt. % to about 2 wt. % sodium metabisulfite and sodium hydrosulfite.
  • [0056]
    In a third embodiment, a method for cleaning a membrane is provided, the method including the step of cleaning the membrane using a composition including a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
  • [0057]
    In a fourth embodiment, a membrane is provided wherein the membrane is capable of cleaning by a composition including a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
  • [0058]
    In a fifth embodiment, a membrane is provided, wherein the membrane is contaminated with a contaminant including a metal oxide or a metal hydroxide, and wherein the membrane is capable of cleaning by a composition including a sulfite reducing agent and a solvent, wherein the sulfite reducing agent is soluble in the solvent, and wherein the solvent is compatible with the membrane.
  • [0059]
    In an aspect of the fifth embodiment, the membrane includes a hollow fiber or a flat sheet.
  • [0060]
    In an aspect of the fifth embodiment, the membrane includes a polyvinylidene fluoride polymer.
  • DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
  • [0061]
    The following description and examples illustrate a preferred embodiment of the present invention in detail. Those of skill in the art will recognize that there are numerous variations and modifications of this invention that are encompassed by its scope. Accordingly, the description of a preferred embodiment should not be deemed to limit the scope of the present invention.
  • [0062]
    Ferric chloride is the preferred flocculating agent in water clean-up procedures. However, standard cleaning regimes have not been highly effective in cleaning PVDF membranes of the resultant Fe floc, leading to significant commercial costs associated with ultimate irreversible membrane fouling by metal oxides and/or hydroxides.
  • [0063]
    Surprisingly, the present inventors have found that the methods of the preferred embodiments are particularly suited for PVDF membranes. When metabisulfite was used as a cleaning agent on PVDF membranes, there was successful removal of metal oxides and metal hydroxides.
  • [0064]
    More surprisingly, when sodium hydrosulfite and sodium metabisulfite were used in combination as cleaning agents for PVDF membranes, significant antifouling properties were observed.
  • [0065]
    One commercial blend of sodium hydrosulfite (20-65 wt. %) and sodium metabisulfite (20-65 wt. %) was found to be particularly useful. This mixture, marketed as SUPER IRON OUT®, has been commercially available since the 1950's, although it has not been used for cleaning membranes. SUPER IRON OUT® has been marketed to household consumers as an all-purpose rust and stain remover, water softener, a cleaning agent for toilets, sinks tubs, dishwashers, white clothing, and fabrics as well as exterior surfaces, i.e. as a general household reductant.
  • [0066]
    This material may be used neat, although it is possible to use it diluted in an amount such that the dilution is as low as 0.5 wt. %, although dilutions of around 2 wt. % have been found advantageous.
  • [0067]
    Alternatively, standardized solutions may be prepared from the starting materials. While the exact concentration will be selected depending on the time limits set for the membrane cleaning and on cost considerations, it has been found particularly useful to use solutions of around 2 wt. %/volume total sulfite content based on the starting materials, i.e. 2 g sodium metabisulfite per 100 ml of water, or 1 g sodium bisulfite and 1 g of sodium hydrosulfite per 100 ml of water, and the like.
  • [0068]
    The commercial importance of this new application is that it allows ferric floc applications to be run at 20 to 30% higher water flux than has previously been thought possible. Using such high fluxes is normally to be avoided because of the extreme fouling that takes place under such conditions, and the resultant difficulty in cleaning badly fouled membranes, wherein the floc is forced hard into the pores and cannot be readily physically removed by backwashing, or by chemical cleaners.
  • [0069]
    With the advent of the cleaning method of the preferred embodiments, the ferric floc applications can be run at the higher flux and the fouled membranes can be quickly and efficiently cleaned. The ability to use such high fluxes can translate into a significant commercial advantage.
  • [0070]
    As more liquid is filtered, the amount of residue removed from that liquid increases in the pores and on the outside and needs to be cleaned.
  • [0071]
    The methods of the preferred embodiments can be used in conjunction with backwashing methodology, or as a stand-alone cleaning method suitable for carrying out “cleaning-in-place” (CIP). CIP involves cleaning the membrane module without removal from its normal in situ place of operation.
  • [0072]
    In general terms, one form of CIP cleaning involves isolating the module to be cleaned by means of taps and pipes and the like from fluid communication with the remainder of the system. The water or liquid normally filtered is then replaced with a cleaning fluid. The cleaning fluid is then allowed to run through the membrane module to carry out the cleaning. The cleaning fluid may be recycled through the module, or allowed to pass through the module just once before being run off to waste, depending upon the particular requirements of the system and the amount of contaminants being removed.
  • [0073]
    The CIP procedure can take place at ambient temperatures or at controlled temperatures outside the normal range of filtration temperatures, e.g. at higher temperatures to increase dissolution of solids, or at lower temperatures to allow for a greater concentration of dissolved gaseous agents e.g., especially chlorine gas, in the fluid. The CIP can be carried out for varying lengths of time and at pressures outside the normal range of those used for filtration.
  • [0074]
    Once the cleaning is completed, the filtration agent is flushed to remove traces of the cleaning agent before being returned to service by being reconnected to the normal fluid flow.
  • [0075]
    CIP can be carried out manually or by means of fully automated systems which activate in response to pressure differentials or after predetermined module operating times.
  • [0076]
    A preferred embodiment is described below, by way of example only.
  • [0077]
    The examples given below relate to modules prepared from banks of hollow fiber PVDF membranes. The membrane modules are as described in U.S. Pat. No. 6,159,373, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference. The module includes a shell within which is positioned a bundle containing from about 2800 to about 30,000 hollow fibers with a diameter of 500 μm to 650 μm and a lumen diameter of 250 μm to 310 μm, with a pore size of 0.2 μm, but these sizes may be varied as required. Moreover, membrane and module configurations different from the one described above may also be employed with the methods of preferred embodiments, as will be appreciated by one skilled in the art.
  • [0078]
    At each end of the fiber bundle, a potting compound holds the ends of the fibers in place without blocking the lumens and closes off each end of the module. The liquid feed is pumped into the module, between the shell and the outside of the hollow fibers. Some of the feed liquid passes into the lumen of the fibers, being filtered as it does so. The clean liquid then concentrates in the inside of the lumen, and flows, or is drawn off and taken outside the module, as a clarified liquid.
  • [0079]
    In the CIP method exemplified, the cleaning agent is introduced in place of the untreated liquid stream. However, those skilled in the art will realize that the flow can be introduced counter to that normally used.
  • EXAMPLES CIP Comparative Method 1 Raw Water Filtration Module
  • [0080]
    Membranes in a raw water filtration module were cleaned using a 2 wt. % solution of citric acid in water at 35° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes. Three repeats of a 300 second aeration followed by a 300 second soak were conducted. Then, a solution of 300 ppm Cl in water at 20° C. was recirculated for 60 minutes, followed by a 30 minute soak. The total duration of the CIP was 3 hours. Table 1 provides measurements of transmembrane pressure (TMP), resistance (R), and flow (in gallons per minute per module) both before and after the CIP.
    TABLE 1
    BEFORE CIP AFTER CIP
    TMP Flow TMP Flow
    (psi) R (gpm/mod) (psi) R (gpm/mod)
    8.1 4.27 4.4 3.5 2.21 4.9
  • CIP Comparative Method 2 Clarified Water Filtration Module
  • [0081]
    Membranes in a clarified water filtration module (containing flocculant) were cleaned 400 ppm solution of Cl in water at 20° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes, followed by a 30 minute soak. Then the membranes were washed with a 2.7 wt. % citric acid solution in water at 35° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes. Three repeats of a 300 second aeration followed by a 300 second soak were conducted. Then, an overnight soak was conducted. The total duration of the CIP was 13 hours. Table 2 provides measurements of transmembrane pressure, resistance, and flow both before and after the CIP.
    TABLE 2
    BEFORE CIP AFTER CIP
    TMP Flow TMP Flow
    (psi) R (gpm/mod) (psi) R (gpm/mod)
    11 7.48 4.9 5.9 3.56 4.9
  • CIP Comparative Method 3 Clarified Water Filtration Module
  • [0082]
    Membranes in a clarified water filtration module (containing flocculant) were cleaned using a 1000 ppm solution of Cl in water at 20° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes, followed by a 30 minute soak. Then the membranes were washed with a 4 wt. % citric acid solution in water at 35° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes. Three repeats of a 300 second aeration followed by a 300 second soak were conducted. Then, an overnight soak in a 1000 ppm Cl solution in water was conducted. The total duration of the CIP was 13 hours. Table 3 provides measurements of transmembrane pressure, resistance, and flow both before and after the CIP.
    TABLE 3
    BEFORE CIP AFTER CIP
    TMP Flow TMP Flow
    (psi) R (gpm/mod) (psi) R (gpm/mod)
    10.9 10.61 3.6 5.4 3.34 3.6
  • CIP Comparative Method 4 Raw Water Filtration Module
  • [0083]
    Membranes in a raw water filtration module were cleaned using a solution of 300 ppm Cl in water at 20° C., followed by an overnight soak. Then, the membranes were cleaned with a 2 wt. % citric acid solution in water at 40° C. for two hours. The total duration of the CIP was 13 hours. Table 4 provides measurements of transmembrane pressure (TMP), resistance (R), and flow (in gallons per minute per module) both before and after the CIP.
    TABLE 4
    BEFORE CIP AFTER CIP
    TMP Flow TMP Flow
    (psi) R (gpm/mod) (psi) R (gpm/mod)
    5.58 4.08 3.85 3.5 2.63 3.75
  • CIP Method 1 Clarified Water Filtration Module
  • [0084]
    Membranes in a clarified water filtration module (containing flocculant) were cleaned using a 2 wt. % solution of SUPER IRON OUT® in water at 20° C. for 30 minutes. Then the membranes were washed with a solution of 1000 ppm Cl in water at 20° C., which was recirculated for 60 minutes, followed by a 30 minute soak. The total duration of the CIP was 2 hours. Table 5 provides measurements of transmembrane pressure, resistance, and flow both before and after the CIP. The data demonstrate a substantial reduction in transmembrane pressure and resistance, and an increase in flow following the cleaning method.
    TABLE 5
    BEFORE CIP AFTER CIP
    TMP Flow TMP Flow
    (psi) R (gpm/mod) (psi) R (gpm/mod)
    10.6 7.19 4.8 5 2.8 5.7
  • [0085]
    It can be seen from all the above examples that cleaning the membranes, by both conventional methods and by the methods of the preferred embodiments, results in a reduction in transmembrane pressure, a decrease in resistance, and an increase in flow, all indicators that the membrane has been cleaned.
  • [0086]
    The results with SUPER IRON OUT® are significantly better than the comparative conventional methods. It enables the highest restoration of flow and the most significant decrease in resistance on cleaning.
  • [0087]
    It has also achieved these results at ambient temperatures, and with fewer steps, meaning that the amount of external apparatus required to carry out the CIP of the module is considerably reduced.
  • [0088]
    Possibly most significantly, however, it achieved this high level of cleaning in 2 hours for clarified (flocculant-containing) water. To achieve close to this result using the standard methods required overnight CIP times, typically around 13 hours. This dramatic reduction in CIP time translates into a reduction in downtime of modules, as well as allowing higher liquid throughput by permitting effective clean up after running at high flux rates.
  • [0089]
    Sulfite agents such as sodium metabisulfite and SUPER IRON OUT® can also be used in conjunction with other conventional methods, for example, in conjunction with sulfuric acid for cleaning membranes (including polypropylene membranes). In low concentrations, it is believed sodium metabisulfite may act as a sacrificial agent, protecting the membrane from degradation by other cleaning agents.
  • [0090]
    Further investigations were carried out to better standardize the active amount of sulfite agent present (rather than relying on the broader ranges which may be found in proprietary formulations and to investigate the optimal cleaning compositions, as established by the differing criteria to determine membrane de-fouling.
  • [0091]
    Two sets of experiments were carried out to determine the efficiency of sulfite cleaning compositions of precisely defined composition relative to citric acid and chlorine, and measured with reference to different criteria. In both sets of experiments, the membranes were fouled with a mixture of 100 ppm humic acid and 100 ppm FeCl3.6H2O, by filtering this mixture through the membranes.
  • [0092]
    In the transmembrane pressure recovery and refouling experiments, the same equipment was used to filter the cleaning solution through the membranes. The TMP change versus time was recorded while filtering this humic acid/iron solution through the membrane before and after the clean. The results are shown in Table 6.
    TABLE 6
    Fouling
    Final TMP Initial TMP TMP rate
    before clean after clean recovery post-clean
    Clean (kPa) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa/min)
    2 wt. % Citric acid 38 18 20 0.07
    200 ppm NaOCl 46 21 25 0.6
    2 wt. % SHS 60 21 39 0.15
    2 wt. % SMBS 36 20 16 0.08
    1.5 wt. % SMBS + 31 17 14 0.1
    0.5 wt. % SHS
    0.5 wt. % SMBS + 39 20 19 0.1
    1.5 wt. % SHS
    1 wt. % SMBS + 36 20 16 0.3
    1 wt. % SHS

    SMBS = sodium metabisulfite

    SHS = sodium hydrosulfite
  • [0093]
    The results in the experiment show that the TMP recoveries were similar for all the cleaning methodologies used except for 2 wt. % sodium hydrosulfite which gave a significantly higher recovery than the other cleaning agents.
  • [0094]
    The best post-clean fouling rates were also investigated. The poorest post-clean fouling rate was found using the conventional chlorine clean. The best post clean fouling was found using 2 wt. % citric acid and 2 wt. % SMBS, with the 1.5 wt. % SMBS/0.5 wt. % SHS and 0.5 wt. % SMBS/1.5 wt. % SHS mixtures also performing very well.
  • [0095]
    In the second set of experiments, the dirty membranes were placed in jars of the cleaning solution and allowed to soak. The permeability of the fibers was measured before and after the clean. The results are shown in Table 7.
    TABLE 7
    Permeability Permeability Permeability %
    before clean after clean recovery Permeability
    Clean (L/m2 · hour) (L/m2 · hour) (L/m2 · hour) recovery
    2 wt. % Citric 589 795 206 135
    acid
    200 ppm 277 576 299 207
    NaOCl
    2 wt. % SHS 383 795 412 208
    2 wt. % SMBS 454 714 260 157
    1.5 wt. % 350 774 424 221
    SMBS +
    0.5 wt. % SHS
    0.5 wt. % 591 835 244 141
    SMBS +
    1.5 wt. % SHS
    1 wt. % 378 824 446 236
    SMBS +
    1 wt. % SHS

    SMBS = sodium metabisulfite

    SHS = sodium hydrosulfite
  • [0096]
    The citric acid gave the lowest permeability recovery. Three cleans, 1.5% SMBS+0.5 wt. % SHS, 1 wt. % SMBS+1 wt. % SHS, and 2 wt. % SHS gave the best permeability recoveries. The permeability recoveries for the sulfite cleaning agents show that for two specific combinations, 1.5 wt. % SMBS/0.5 wt. % SHS and 1 wt. % SMBS/1 wt. % SHS, the permeability recovery (of 221% and 236%, respectively) was greater than the permeability recovery for either the SMBS or SHS alone, indicating a synergistic relationship between the two. On the basis of the individual mixture components, a 1 wt. %: 1 wt. % SMBS/SHS mixture would be expected to restore about 183% (based on 208%/2+157%/2) of the permeability, yet the actual value was 236%.
  • [0097]
    The other cleaning combinations are likewise not simply additive, indicating that in combination, the two sulfite cleaning agents may act co-operatively.
  • [0098]
    Thus, it can be seen that the sulfite cleaning method of the preferred embodiments provided in all cases a good TMP recovery, good permeability recovery and a low rate of post clean fouling. The all round performance was not matched by conventional cleaning methodologies. Further, sulfite cleaning required less time to achieve CIP (cleaning in place) de-fouling of membranes than conventional (chlorine) membrane cleans.
  • [0099]
    The above description discloses several methods and materials of the present invention. This invention is susceptible to modifications in the methods and materials, as well as alterations in the fabrication methods and equipment. Such modifications will become apparent to those skilled in the art from a consideration of this disclosure or practice of the invention disclosed herein. Consequently, it is not intended that this invention be limited to the specific embodiments disclosed herein, but that it cover all modifications and alternatives coming within the true scope and spirit of the invention as embodied in the attached claims. All patents, applications, and other references cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety.
Citations de brevets
Brevet cité Date de dépôt Date de publication Déposant Titre
US2105700 *13 juil. 193618 janv. 1938Ramage William DProcess for purification of beverages
US2926086 *30 juil. 195723 févr. 1960Universal Oil Prod CoStabilization of non-distilled alcoholic beverages and the resulting product
US3183191 *19 avr. 196011 mai 1965Hach Chemical CoStain and rust removing composition
US3228876 *19 sept. 196011 janv. 1966Dow Chemical CoPermeability separatory apparatus, permeability separatory membrane element, method of making the same and process utilizing the same
US3708071 *5 août 19702 janv. 1973Abcor IncHollow fiber membrane device and method of fabricating same
US3955998 *18 juil. 197411 mai 1976Phillips Petroleum CompanyAqueous gels for plugging fractures in subterranean formation and production of said aqueous gels
US4082683 *10 sept. 19764 avr. 1978Lever Brothers CompanyCleaning of hard surfaces
US4188817 *4 oct. 197819 févr. 1980Standard Oil Company (Indiana)Method for detecting membrane leakage
US4192750 *3 juil. 197811 mars 1980Massey-Ferguson Inc.Stackable filter head unit
US4193780 *20 mars 197818 mars 1980Industrial Air, Inc.Air filter construction
US4248648 *18 juil. 19793 févr. 1981Baxter Travenol Laboratories, Inc.Method of repairing leaks in a hollow capillary fiber diffusion device
US4384474 *20 mai 198124 mai 1983Amf IncorporatedMethod and apparatus for testing and using membrane filters in an on site of use housing
US4385150 *8 oct. 198124 mai 1983Asahi Glass Company, Ltd.Organic solution of fluorinated copolymer having carboxylic acid groups
US4451369 *17 déc. 198129 mai 1984Toyo Boseki Kabushiki KaishaFluid separation apparatus
US4496470 *12 janv. 198229 janv. 1985The B. F. Goodrich CompanyCleaning composition
US4511471 *2 juin 198316 avr. 1985Drm, Dr. Muller AgFilter apparatus for continuously thickening suspensions
US4636296 *23 janv. 198513 janv. 1987Gerhard KunzProcess and apparatus for treatment of fluids, particularly desalinization of aqueous solutions
US4642182 *7 mars 198510 févr. 1987Mordeki DroriMultiple-disc type filter with extensible support
US4647377 *18 déc. 19843 mars 1987Kabushiki Kaisha Ito TekkoushoFilter apparatus
US4650586 *19 févr. 198517 mars 1987Kinetico, Inc.Fluid treatment system
US4656865 *9 sept. 198514 avr. 1987The Dow Chemical CompanySystem for analyzing permeation of a gas or vapor through a film or membrane
US4660411 *31 mai 198528 avr. 1987Reid Philip LApparatus for measuring transmission of volatile substances through films
US4670145 *8 juil. 19862 juin 1987E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And CompanyMultiple bundle fluid separation apparatus
US4673507 *23 mai 198516 juin 1987Eco-Tec LimitedFluid treatment process and apparatus
US4718270 *17 mai 198412 janv. 1988Coulter Electronics, Ltd.Porosimeter and methods of assessing porosity
US4744240 *26 mai 198717 mai 1988Akzo NvMethod for determining the bubble point or the largest pore of membranes or of filter materials
US4749487 *10 avr. 19857 juin 1988Syrinx Research Pty. Ltd.High flux membrane
US4797211 *24 déc. 198610 janv. 1989Kernforschungszentrum Karlsruhe GmbhCross flow microfilter
US4810384 *29 juin 19877 mars 1989Rhone-Poulenc RecherchesHydrophilic PVDF semipermeable membrane
US4812235 *26 sept. 198314 mars 1989Hr Textron, Inc.Filter element assembly replaceable mesh pack
US4816160 *27 mars 198628 mars 1989Memtec LimitedCooling hollow fibre cross-flow separators
US4834998 *22 déc. 198630 mai 1989Heublein, Inc.Ultrafiltration of red wines
US4921610 *4 sept. 19871 mai 1990Memtec LimitedCleaning of hollow fibre filters
US4931186 *3 mars 19865 juin 1990Memtec LimitedConcentration of solids in a suspension
US4935143 *13 juil. 198719 juin 1990Memtec LimitedCleaning of filters
US4988444 *12 mai 198929 janv. 1991E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And CompanyPrevention of biofouling of reverse osmosis membranes
US4999038 *7 févr. 198912 mars 1991Lundberg Bo E HFilter unit
US5005430 *11 janv. 19909 avr. 1991Electric Power Research Institute, Inc.Automated membrane filter sampler
US5024762 *5 janv. 199018 juin 1991Memtec LimitedConcentration of solids in a suspension
US5079272 *30 nov. 19897 janv. 1992Millipore CorporationPorous membrane formed from interpenetrating polymer network having hydrophilic surface
US5094750 *19 oct. 198910 mars 1992Memtec LimitedHollow fibre filter cartridge and header
US5094867 *9 janv. 199110 mars 1992Basf AktiengesellschaftRemoval of heavy metal ions from wine and wine-like beverages
US5104535 *17 août 199014 avr. 1992Zenon Environmental, Inc.Frameless array of hollow fiber membranes and module containing a stack of arrays
US5104546 *3 juil. 199014 avr. 1992Aluminum Company Of AmericaPyrogens separations by ceramic ultrafiltration
US5182019 *3 mars 199226 janv. 1993Zenon Environmental Inc.Cartridge of hybrid frameless arrays of hollow fiber membranes and module containing an assembly of cartridges
US5192456 *4 mars 19929 mars 1993Kubota CorporationApparatus for treating activated sludge and method of cleaning it
US5192478 *15 janv. 19929 mars 1993The Dow Chemical CompanyMethod of forming tubesheet for hollow fibers
US5194149 *28 sept. 199016 mars 1993Memtec LimitedFilter cartridge manifold
US5198116 *10 févr. 199230 mars 1993D.W. Walker & AssociatesMethod and apparatus for measuring the fouling potential of membrane system feeds
US5209852 *19 août 199111 mai 1993Japan Organo Co. Ltd.Process for scrubbing porous hollow fiber membranes in hollow fiber membrane module
US5211823 *19 juin 199118 mai 1993Millipore CorporationProcess for purifying resins utilizing bipolar interface
US5221478 *9 sept. 199222 juin 1993The Dow Chemical CompanyChromatographic separation using ion-exchange resins
US5297420 *19 mai 199329 mars 1994Mobil Oil CorporationApparatus and method for measuring relative permeability and capillary pressure of porous rock
US5320760 *7 déc. 199214 juin 1994E. I. Du Pont De Nemours And CompanyMethod of determining filter pluggage by measuring pressures
US5389260 *2 avr. 199314 févr. 1995Clack CorporationBrine seal for tubular filter
US5393433 *25 oct. 199328 févr. 1995Aquasource, Societe En Nom CollectifMethod using separation membranes to treat a fluid containing matter in suspension and in solution
US5401401 *13 janv. 199328 mars 1995Aquaria Inc.Hang on tank canister filter
US5403479 *20 déc. 19934 avr. 1995Zenon Environmental Inc.In situ cleaning system for fouled membranes
US5405528 *19 avr. 199111 avr. 1995Memtec LimitedModular microporous filter assemblies
US5417101 *9 juin 199223 mai 1995Pall CorporationMethod and apparatus for testing the integrity of filter elements
US5419816 *27 oct. 199330 mai 1995Halox Technologies CorporationElectrolytic process and apparatus for the controlled oxidation of inorganic and organic species in aqueous solutions
US5480553 *12 févr. 19932 janv. 1996Mitsubishi Rayon Co., Ltd.Hollow fiber membrane module
US5607593 *30 nov. 19944 mars 1997Otv Omnium De Trajtements Et De Valorisation S.A.Installation for making water potable with submerged filtering membranes
US5639373 *11 août 199517 juin 1997Zenon Environmental Inc.Vertical skein of hollow fiber membranes and method of maintaining clean fiber surfaces while filtering a substrate to withdraw a permeate
US5888401 *16 sept. 199630 mars 1999Union Camp CorporationMethod and apparatus for reducing membrane fouling
US5906742 *14 oct. 199725 mai 1999Usf Filtration And Separations Group Inc.Microfiltration membranes having high pore density and mixed isotropic and anisotropic structure
US5910250 *16 juin 19978 juin 1999Zenon Environmental Inc.Baffle for conversion of fine bubbles to coarse while filtering with a vertical skein of hollow fibers
US5914039 *1 juil. 199722 juin 1999Zenon Environmental Inc.Filtration membrane with calcined α-alumina particles therein
US5918264 *27 oct. 199329 juin 1999Usf Filtration And Separations Group Inc.Fiber monitoring system
US6024872 *14 mai 199915 févr. 2000Zenon Evironmental Inc.Method of making a dope comprising hydrophilized PVDF and α-alumina, and a membrane made therefrom
US6039872 *10 avr. 199821 mars 2000Pall CorporationHydrophilic membrane
US6042677 *26 févr. 199928 mars 2000Zenon Environmental, Inc.Potted header for hollow fiber membranes and method for making it
US6045698 *19 nov. 19964 avr. 2000Omnium De Traitements Et De Valorization (Otv)Method for cleaning a filtration installation of the type with immersed membranes
US6048454 *18 mars 199711 avr. 2000Jenkins; DanOil filter pack and assembly
US6077435 *15 mars 199620 juin 2000Usf Filtration And Separations Group Inc.Filtration monitoring and control system
US6193890 *30 août 199927 févr. 2001Zenon Environmental Inc.System for maintaining a clean skein of hollow fibers while filtering suspended solids
US6202475 *31 août 199920 mars 2001Usf Filtration And Separations Group, Inc.Predicting logarithmic reduction values
US6214231 *27 août 199910 avr. 2001Zenon Environmental Inc.System for operation of multiple membrane filtration assemblies
US6221247 *3 juin 199924 avr. 2001Cms Technology Holdings, Inc.Dioxole coated membrane module for ultrafiltration or microfiltration of aqueous suspensions
US6354444 *17 juin 199912 mars 2002Zenon Environmental Inc.Hollow fiber membrane and braided tubular support therefor
US6375848 *22 nov. 199923 avr. 2002Zenon Environmental Inc.Water filtration using immersed membranes
US6387189 *3 janv. 199814 mai 2002Bayer AktiengesellschaftSurface-cleaning method
US6524481 *23 mars 200125 févr. 2003U.S. Filter Wastewater Group, Inc.Apparatus and method for cleaning membrane filtration modules
US6550747 *23 mars 200122 avr. 2003Zenon Environmental Inc.Cyclic aeration system for submerged membrane modules
US6555005 *18 juin 199929 avr. 2003Usf Filtration & Separations Group Inc.Scouring method
US6685832 *13 juin 20023 févr. 2004Zenon Environmental Inc.Method of potting hollow fiber membranes
US6893568 *5 mai 200017 mai 2005Zenon Environmental Inc.Immersed membrane filtration system and overflow process
US20030057155 *4 nov. 200227 mars 2003Hidayat HusainUltrafiltration and microfiltration module and system
US20030075504 *21 nov. 200224 avr. 2003Fufang ZhaApparatus and method for cleaning membrane filtration modules
US20030089659 *9 oct. 200215 mai 2003Fufang ZhaHollow fibre restraining system
US20040000520 *15 nov. 20021 janv. 2004Gallagher Paul MartinMethod of cleaning membranes
US20040035782 *12 mai 200326 févr. 2004Heinz-Joachim MullerModified membranes
US20040084369 *30 sept. 20036 mai 2004U.S. Filter Wastewater Group, Inc.Scouring method
US20050029185 *30 juil. 200410 févr. 2005Heinz-Joachim MullerModified membranes
US20050029186 *29 juil. 200410 févr. 2005Heinz-Joachim MullerModified membranes
US20050032982 *29 juil. 200410 févr. 2005Heinz-Joachim MullerModified membranes
US20050087898 *30 sept. 200328 avr. 2005U. S. Filter Wastewater Group, Inc.Potting method
US20050098494 *9 août 200412 mai 2005Daniel MulletteHalar membranes
USRE37549 *15 juin 199919 févr. 2002Zenon Environmental Inc.Vertical skein of hollow fiber membranes and method of maintaining clean fiber surfaces while filtering a substrate to withdraw a permeate
Classifications
Classification aux États-Unis210/636, 210/639, 210/757
Classification internationaleB01D61/16, C02F1/44, B01D65/06, B01D71/34
Classification coopérativeB01D61/147, B01D61/145, B01D2311/04, B01D71/34, B01D2321/04, B01D65/02, B01D61/16, C02F1/444, B01D2321/168
Classification européenneB01D65/02, B01D61/16, B01D71/34
Événements juridiques
DateCodeÉvénementDescription
15 mars 2007ASAssignment
Owner name: SIEMENS WATER TECHNOLOGIES CORP., PENNSYLVANIA
Free format text: MERGER;ASSIGNOR:U.S. FILTER WASTEWATER GROUP, INC.;REEL/FRAME:019017/0284
Effective date: 20060804