DESALINATION

ELSEVIER Desalination 106 (1996) 107-l 13

Performance of membrane filtration system used for

water treatment
Taro Oe*, Hiroyuki Koide, Hiroyuki Hirokawa, Katsumi Okukawa
Organo Corporation, 4-9 Kuwagishi I-chome, Toda City, Saituma 335, &pan
Tel. +81 (484) 461881; Fax +81 (484) 461966

Received 20 May 1995; Accepted 12 August 1995

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.

Keywords: Membrane filtration system; Water treatment

1. Introduction developed a new system featuring UF membrane

filtration which needed a smaller area and little if
For a long time we have obtained drinking
any personal attention. This UF membrane is
water by sand filtration systems. However, quali-
made of acetyl cellulose (an internal pressure
ties of raw water are getting worse, so we need
type module) which can be operated with a high
more precise water treatment systems. In Japan it
flux. This UF membrane filtration is preceded by
is difficult to obtain a large land area for a water
a high-rate, long-fiber filtration unit as a pre-fil-
treatment plant, and the number of engineers
tration unit. In this experiment work tests were
available for water treatment supervision is limit-
made to look into the operating performance and
ed. In order to cope with these restraints, we
treated water qualities of the system, and com-
pare these data with those of conventional sys-
terns.
*Corresponding author.

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

average river water in Japan. Fig. 2 shows the Edogawa River.

experimental apparatus. This full automatic sys-
tem consisted of a pre-treatment unit, a UF mem-
brane unit, and an activated carbon post-treat-
ment unit.
2.1 Pre-treatment unit
The pre-treatment unit has bundles of long
fibers which were used as filter medium for re-
ducing any excessive loading of turbidities on the
downstream UF membrane and guarding the UF
module against fouling or clogging. The method
of filtration and backwash is illustrated in Fig. 3.
While filtration was carried out down flow, the
long fibers were compressed so that solids were
trapped and removed effectively. On the other
hand, while a backwash was carried out up flow,
the long fibers were elongated so that the solids
trapped by the fibers were dislodged and
removed by the air scrubbing. The pre-treatment
filtration column had the dimensions of an inter-
nal diameter of 200 mm and a height of 3 m.
Usually it was operated without using any coagu-
lants. However, if the turbidity of the raw water
was more than 50 NTH, a coagulant, poly alurni-
num chloride (PAC) was injected into the raw
water line (in-line coagulation), and the concen-
tration of the coagulant was 3 ppm. The down-
ward filtration flow rate was 27 m/h, which was
more than five times as fast as the flow rate of
the conventional sand filtration. When the filtra-
tion time was 6 h or the head loss had reached to
30 kPa, a backwash was carried out as follows:
1. 3 m3/h of water was fed up flow for 1 min
2. 3 m3/h of water and 20 Nm3ih of air were
bubbled for 4 min
3. 3 m3/h of water was fed up flow again for
1 min.
The recovery of water was about 95%.

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
1)Filtration 2)Backwash
Fig. 3. Method of filtration and backwash.
2.2. UF membrane unit
Table 1 shows the specification of the UF
membrane module used for the experiments. This
module was an internal-pressure hollow-fiber-
type UF membrane module. The membrane is
made of cellulose acetate (CA) and cuts off sub-
stances which have molecular weights greater
than 150,000. The membrane module had a di-
ameter of 3” and its length was 1 m. The mem-
brane area of one module was 5 m*. The hollow
fiber diameter (ID/OD) was 0.80.3 mm. We used
two membrane modules in this experiment. The
flux of the membrane was 8.4 M3/day/module
and the recirculation flow rate was 0.14 m/s at
the exit of the modules. A 60 s backwash was
done every 15 min at a flow rate of 1000 l/h of
permeate water. Chemical cleaning was carried
out when the transmembrane pressure had
reached 200 kPa. For the first 130 d, 5 ppm of
Table 1
Specifications of module
Filtration mode (from inside to outside):
Molecular weight cut off
Permeate flux, m3/m3/d/kPa
Membrane area, m2
Hollow fiber diameter, mm (ID/OD)
109
sodium hypochlorite was injected into the back-
wash line. During the next 40 d, this disinfectant
was injected into the supply line to the membrane
modules. The water recovery was 81%.
2.3. Post-treatment unit
UF is expected to remove turbidities and
bacteria completely. However, it is difficult to
remove dissolved organics and color bodies per-
fectly, so we used activated carbon as the post-
treatment. Two columns were installed in paral-
lel, each column having an internal diameter of
80 mm. The two columns were charged, each to
a bed depth of 900 mm, with activated carbon
made of coal and coconut palm, respectively. The
condition was that the linear velocity was 12 m/h
and the space velocity was 13.3 l/h. A backwash
was done every 72 h for 15 min.
3. Water examination
We analyzed and compared water qualities
obtained by the pre-treatment unit, the UF mem-
brane unit and the pre-treatment unit with water
qualities obtained from the same raw water by
the conventional system which consisted of a
coagulator and a high-rate sand filtration unit.
4. Results and discussion
4. I. Operation
During the experimental period the pre-treat-
ment unit using bundles of long fibers was oper-
ated stably with little increase of head loss. This
result indicated that the pre-treatment unit could
be operated under a higher filtration flow rate
and recovery ratio. Figs. 4 and 5 show the varia-
tion of the turbidity of the raw water and the
water treated by the pre-treatment unit, and the
150,000 change of the transmembrane pressure, respec-
7.3x1o-2 tively. For the first 90 d of filtration, no marked
5 increase of driving transmembrane pressure was
0.8/l .3
observed with the CA membrane. This result is
110 T. Oe et al. / Desalination 106 (1996) iO7-I13

in contrast with the result obtained from the Table 2

membrane made of polyether sulfone (PES:mo- Drainage of chemical cleaning
lecular weight cut-off of 30,000) which was used
for the treatment of the same river water (Fig. 6). Volume of drainage,
This PES membrane was used under milder con- 40 1
ditions, that is a constant flux rate of 0.76 m3/ 2.1
PH
m2/d, and a recovery of 86%. Even under these SS, mgil 83.2
conditions, we had to carry out chemical cleaning VSS, mgil <l
about every 30 d of filtration. This indicates that Turbidity, NTU 1.91
the CA membrane exhibits higher the perfor- Fe, mg/l 12.3
mance than the PES membrane. After 130 d of Mn, mg/l 59.2
Al, mgil 16.2
operation, the driving pressure of CA membrane
SiO,. m&l 18.6
exceeded 200 kPa which was the upper limit for
the membrane module. The driving pressure
returned to the initial value after the chemical the major foulants which adhered to the mem-
cleaning was carried out by circulating 5% citric brane {Table 2). It seems that NaClO as a disin-
acid solution though the membrane module and fectant, which was injected into the backwash
remained unchanged from that time on during the line, oxidized manganese at the membrane sur-
test period. We analyzed the drainage of chemi- face on the permeate side, thereby precipitating
cal cleaning to find that manganese was one of this element on the membrane surface. We
changed the injection position from the backwash
ml
line to the supplying line after the chemical
vu : Rawwater _

w : Longfibers filtrationwater - - - - -
rl !

0 40 00 I20 160
Days of Operation
1
t- 0 B BP vo 160 204

Fig. 4. Turbidi~-raw water vs. long fiber ~ltration Days ofOperation

.
water.
Fig. 6. Change of the transmembrane pressure:PES.

I) Recovery: 77% (before chemical cleaning)

6.5 2Q.5

Pre-tr&mantunR UF membrane wilt

2) Recovery: 94% (after chemical cleaning)

100 c
Prep unit UF membrane unit

Fig. 5. Change of the transmembrane pressure: CA. Fig. 7. Water recovery.

 T. Oe et al. / Desalination 106 (1996) 107-113 111

cleaning to the modules for preventing the pre- Table 3

cipitation of manganese. After the chemical Counts of bacteriophage
cleaning the drainage of backwash was returned
to the raw water tank to increase the water recov Host bacteria E. coli E. coli E. coli
ery of this system (Fig. 7). As a result, the recov- B C W3110 F+
ery ratio was increased from 77% to 94% without Size 63-65 25-35 26-27
bringing about any adverse effects. Raw water, PFU/ml 6301290 7571290 4.551290
Membrane filtration <l/290 <l/290 <l/290
water, PFU/ml
4.2. Wafer quality
Fig. 8 shows a comparison between the mem- shows the number of total bacteria in raw water,
brane filtration water and the sand filtration water long-fiber filtration water, membrane filtration
in the residual turbidity. The former water had water, coagulated and sedimented water, and
better quality, i.e., lower and stabler residual sand filtration water. The sand filtration water
turbidities than latter water. Fig. 9 shows the always contained both coliform bacteria and total
numbers of coliform bacteria in membrane filtra- bacteria, but only one sample of the membrane
tion water and sand filtration water. Fig. 10 filtration water contained 1 CFU/ml of total bac-

; 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

Color COD, NH,-N, Mn, Fe, T-THMFP, DOC,

mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l Wl mg/l
Raw water 11 7.7 0.22 0.054 0.94 0.045 1.4
Pre-treatment water 10 4.7 0.16 0.020 0.28 0.035 1.4
Membrane filtration water 3 3.0 0.14 0.012 0.01 0.030 1.1
Post-treatment water:
From coal 2 2.7 0.06 0.006 0.01 0.018 0.68
From coconut palm 3 2.8 0.06 0.006 0.01 0.020 0.79

Standard of water quality 5 10 0.05 0.3 0.1

Table 5
Comparison of the UF membrane filtration system with conventional systems (1000 m3/d)

Membrane filtration system Sand filtration Sand filtration

Filtration rate, m/d 1.5-2.0 4-5 120-180

Consumables Membrane module Sand Sand
Disinfectant Coagulant
Coagulant
Installation area 100 800 250
Period of construction 100 200 300
Initial cost 100 90 120
Running cost 100 80 90
-

teria. The rejection rate of bacteriophages was
examined (Table 3). Although the size of bacte-
riophage ranged from 25 to 65 nm, they were
perfectly rejected by the UF membrane. Thus, the
membrane filtration was reliable for rejection of
those substances which do not dissolve in water,
but the rejection of color, COD, THNTP and
DOC was not good (Table 4). The activated
carbon was effective for removing these soluble
substances. Particularly, the activated carbon
made of coal exhibited a little better performance
than that of the activated carbon made of coconut
palm. The pre-treatment unit could remove
NH,N and manganese which could not be re-
jected by the membrane filtration perfectly. The
removal ratio of manganese increased with a
lapse of filtration time (Fig. 11). So it seems that
biological metabolism of these substances oc-
curred in the pre-treatment unit.
5. Comparison with conventional system
The UF membrane filtration system was com-
pared with the conventional system of a 1000
m3/d capacity (Table 5). The membrane filtration
system can achieve savings on the installation
area and period of construction. In the case of
conventional filtration systems, the dosage of
coagulates has to be adjusted by the operator
when the turbidity of raw water increases due to
flooding, etc. In contrast, the membrane filtration
system can be operated with little if any personal
operator attention regardless of raw water quali-
ties.
 T. Oe et al. / ~esa~~nati~n 106 (I9961 107-113 113

Tur~~~~ Ordinary Bacteriophage Color Manganese T-TN

Pre-treatment Unit ---

UF Membrane Unit ........*,.,+

.,..l,.,*..*.*...~....
......~.>...,..,,~
.......*.*.*,*t,.., .,,.,
...I..S.“llr%.
**,...*,,,....**......*..........**....‘,.1...*..1.*1‘...~

Post-treatment Unit l
-.**

0 II a l **
Fig. 12, Residual ratio change.

6. con~Iusions 6. The activated carbon was needed to re-

1. The UF membrane ~ltratio~ system used
for drinking water treatment was operated stably
regardless of any variation of raw water quality.
2. The flux of the CA membrane was more
than twice as high as that of the polyether sul-
fone membrane; the frequency of chemical clean-
ing of the former was more than a quarter that of
the latter.
3. The UF membrane filtration system needed
little coagulant.
4. The membrane ~ltration system could re-
move undissolved solids.
5. The bacteriophage was rejected perfectly
by the membrane.
move dissolved organic matter if contained in the
raw water.
7. The high-rate, long-fiber filtration unit
could be operated under high flux and high re-
covery, and removed not only the undissolved
solids but also NH,-N and manganese.
8. The UF membrane ~I~ation system re-
quires smaller installation areas and shorter peri-
ods of construction than conventional systems.
Reference
111 T. Miyanoshita, M. Shiratsuchi, M. Arai and K.
Minami, High performance fiber filtration and its
fluid flow, ASME, Fluids Engineering Division,
1994.