DESALINATION

ELSEVIER Desalination 160 (2004) 29-42

www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

Mathematical modeling of reverse osmosis systems

Abstract

-J-he present investigation pertains to modeling of seawater desalination system. A simulation model was developed and veriJied for a small-scale reverse osmosis system. The proposed model combines material balances on the feed tank, membrane moclule and product tank with membrane mass transfermodels. Finally a comprehensive simulation model has been developed incorporating the effect ofmass transfer inhibition The model is non-linear differential equation representing the feed concentration as a function of operating time and space. The solution of the simultaneous differential equations was obtained using the fourth order Runge-Kutta method, due to self starting and stability. The model was veritied using the experimental data from the literature [17,24]. Parameter sensitivity was carried out to select the proper step size. The simulation was run for over 1000 h enabling a prediction of operational perfomrance at high overall system recoveries. K~~vow!s: Mathematical modeling; Reverse osmosis: Mass transfer; Inhibition: Concentration polarization

1. Introduction Membrane separation systems are gaining popularity in the food and bioprocessing industries due to its less energy requirement-, negligible denaturation of food product, retention of aroma and flavours. This technique has also got numerous applications in processing industries such as chemical, nuclear. biotechnology, petroleum and petrochemical industries. Reverse osmosis is the *Corresponding author. 001 l-91
WOG/SSee front matter PII: SO0 I l-9 164(03)006 16-7

most popular technology for seawater desalination. During the last two decades hundreds of reverse osmosis seawater desalination plants have been built worldwide. Each year the plant sizes and cost-effectiveness have increased. Recently the reverse osmosis has achieved growing acceptance as an economical and viable alternative to multistage flash distillation (MSF) process for desalting seawater [.1.2,5]. A number of investigators have carried out the work on different aspects ofreverse osmosis seawater desalination. Few models for

0 2004 Hsevier Science J3.V. All rights reserved

solventandsolutefluxes throughmembranes have beendeveloped analyzed and neglectingthe effect ofmasstransferinhibition. Concentration polarization and fouling of the membrane are the two serious problems that would prevent the use of RO into many of the processes.Both of these phenomenaarc flux inhibiting boundary layer effects and that -foulingis almost always a result of*concentration polarization. Concentration polarization may be defined asthe presence higher ofa concentrationof rejected species.at the surface of a membranethan in the bulk solution, due to theconvectivetransportofboth soluteandsolvent [ 10,331. is generallyconsidered totally reversIt a ible effect that c.anbe describedin a first approximation. by a variety of analytical models. The fouling in the membraneis thecondition,in which membraneundergoes pluggingor coatingby some elementin the streambeingtreated,in sucha way that its output or its flus is reduced.A model for colloidal membranefouling hasbeenreportedby GreenandBelfort [9], which allows thetheoretical prediction of membraneflux declination.A lot of work has been done on the membrane foulants by thevariousinvestigators a detailedanalysis and is availablein the literature[ 15.161. measureThe ment and control in reverseosmosisdesalination havebeenstudiedby Mindler and Epstein [22]. The reductionof concentrationpolarizationis importantfor theimprovementof theperformance of osmotic type membrane, which will lead to reductionin thefouling ofthe membrane.Several measures reducethe concentration to polarization to controlthe fouling havebeenadoptedand proposed.The techniquesusedto reducethe concentration polarization are increasing flow rate, assembling intensifierfor turbulentflow, impulse an methods, agitating methods, periodic depressurizationof membranetube, flow reversal,precoatingof membranesurfaces. enzymeimmobilization, modification of membrane polymeric structure,mechanicaland ultrasonic vibration o! membraneshave been tried also but with little success13.71.The turbulence promoter acts to

reduceconcentrationpolarization and therefore fouling, by increasingthe friction factor andbulk velocity.A model hasbeendevelopedby Chiolle et al. [6] for the reverseosmosis with the turbulencepromotingnetsfor theparallelwall channels module. The model developed by Drioli and Bellucci [8] showsthe effect of the interactionof theconcentration polarization solute-membrane and interactionon thepressure drivenmembranewhen working with multicomponent solution. The modification ofthe membranepolymeric structure plays animportantrole in thereductionof concentration polarizationthroughthe tluidized bedwas developedby van der Waal [:20].Bhattacharyya et al. [25] developeda Galerkin finite elements program to compute the concentration profile throughouta reverseosmosismembranemodule to predict the performanceof the module. The finite elementmethodallowed rapidevaluationof variousmembranemoduleconfigurations, suchas taperedcell geometry and channelscontaining spaces.Basedon the available work.,a comprehensivesimulation model hasbeendeveloped for seawaterdesalinationsystem.

2. Models for solvent in reverse osmosis

and solute transport

Variousmodelsandmechanismfor the solvent and solute transport through reverse osmosis membranehavebeendevelopedandproposed by a number of investigators [12,19]. The flow of solventthroughthe membraneis definedin terms of flux: J,,,= <Qj~s,> Clv,:, (1)

The solvent flus of the permeatedependson the hydraulic pressureapplied acrossthe membrane,minusthedifferencein theosmoticpressure of the solutions of the feed and permeateside of the membrane[2].
J, =A@-An) (2)

?I

While the solute tlux depends on the concent-ration gradient J, = B,AC AC=C, -C, (3) (4)

Cv Qr

RETENIA~
ROMJZMBUNE

Semi-Batch

Continuau

The membrane rejection is defined as the difference between the feed concentration and permeate concentration R=(q -c& =[l-(c,/ci)j (5)
FEED TANK

From the solvenr and soIute flux Eqs. (2) and (3) it can be shown that the rejection is the function of pressure and concentrations. Since the solvent flux is dependent on pressure, an increase in pressure will increase solvent flux at constant solute flux. Consequently the percentage of the re.jection will increase. Thus combining tlux models and relating it with rejection, it can be shown that the permeate concentration is equal to material balance around the membrane

c,.

v,

Fig. 1. hIodes of reverse osnlosis system operation characteristics remain the same and the retentate or concentrate is collected separately, as is the permeate. if an initial feed volume is used, feed is run to exhaustion. fn the absence of mass transfcl inhibition, rqjection. flux and stream concentrations ideally remain the same with time. The single pass recovery for this type of operation relates permeate production to feed rate Recovery (2) = QP / Qf (9

C, = C,,(Js/ Jw )
so that the re.jection R is given by R=l.Q-(J,C,,lJ,,C,j

(6)
(7)

Substituting the expressions for the fluxes in the expression of rejection we have:

From this expression5 it appears that if pressure drop is increased to a large value then rejection approaches towards unity. However this camiot be achieved due to the limitation of membrane. Nevertheless one can reach almost up to the desired level. The model presented above is [he model for ideal mass transfer which does not give the exact picture of the reverse osmosis system. The simple process case of continuous mode of operation if once through as shown in Fig. 1 is run most easily. Llnderthis type of operation, feed

In a semi-batch, unsteady state mode ofoperation, as was the basis for simulation [ 181. retentate is recycled to the feed tank and permeate is collected separately. This process is essentially a closed loop concentrating system. As the operation time increases, the volume of permeate collected increases. The permeate produced at any instant of time is called the instantaneous permeate. The permeate or product collected in the product tank over a span of time is called the average product. Since the permeate is remov-ed continuously from the feed, the volume ofthe feed decreases, the feed becomes more and more concentrated with time. The feed in this type of process can also be referred to as the concentrate.

As feed volume diminishes and concentration increases,the system will operateas if it were running in sequential increments of increasing concentration.in a semi-batch,steady statemode. This type of processallows the systemto run at varyinglevelsof recovery large-scale and simulation can be operated. Recovery is defined in terms of an overall systemrecovery as the total quality of product generated to a given time divided by up the initial feed volume:
Recovery (X) = VP / VfO (10)

The changein thevolume ofthe permeate with time is the production rateof the membrane.
dV,/dt=Q, By substitution of this in Eq. (12) we get ldt) V, )/ VP (14)

(131

QpCp Q&m =
or dC,

+ (dc,

1dt = Qp (CP - C,

The material balance around the membrane moduleis

At somepoint in the operationthe systemmust be stoppedas the feed becomesso concentrated that the flux drops significantly, due to a large increasein the osmotic pressureof the feed. If
the permeate flows in a semi-batch, unsteady-state system is returnedto the feed tank, the mode of

In this balance an assumption is made that in

operation is termed semi-batch, steady state. Although the flow pattern is not an operational mode, it is usedto study the characteristics ofthe system.Sinceboth permeate and retentate stream are recycled to the feed tank, the feed volume and concentrationdo not changewith time. The system material balances,togetherwith thesemasstransfermodels,wereusedto simulate system operation. Correlation of flux, solute concentrationsand re.jectionwith operating time and overall system recovery arefunctions of the model. This model also predicts operational performance c.haracteristics of the system at various times andrecoveries.The effectsof pressure,feed concentration,volume and membrane characteristicson separationefficiency can also be described. The material balances can be formulated for the system: A materialbalance madeon theproducttankyields

this systemtheconcentration within themembrane doesnot changegreatlywith spatialdistribution. A meanpermeate concentration themembrane from module was used. Similarly the balance around the feed tank becomes

Q/G. -Q&J, = d(VC,)/dt

(16)

In the model it was assumed the feedtank that was well mixed. Thus the concentrationo-f the feedto the membraneequalsthe concentrationin the feedtank. Therefore,at any instantin time, t, c =c 1 Thdfcombination of Eqs. (15) and (16) with
substitution of CTtf C, gives as - QpCp = (dV/, / dt)C, + (dC, / dt ) V$ be taken as the productionrate, so -dV,/dt=Q, (18)

(17)

The changein the feed volutne with time can

QpCp= d(V&m )I dt
QPCP = (dVp /dt)C,, +(dC,, ldt)V,

(11)
(12)

lntegratingwith boundarycondition at t = 0, I/r, = y/v Jji = Vfo - Qpt (19)

BoundaT conditions: at t = 0, V, = 0, Cpl = C P

Substitutingthis value into Eq. ( 17)we get

- QpCp -QpCr + (v,, - Qg) (dc, ldt) =

Rearrangement dc., ldt = of Eq. (30) gives - C, )b(v,o -

c-w

Qp (c,

Q,t )

(21)

To get the solution of Eq. (21) we need the relationship between Q!, and C,> with the expression for c, in terms of CL, To achieve this we have to get the relationship between osmotic pressure and feed concentration, which is done through the v$ant Hoffexpression x:=(+dV)RT
(32)

Approximating the equation through ,4%AIlB, >z=-As,Y/B, and CT! >> CT!,for high rejection,

Eq. (22) shows that the osmotic pressure of solution increses with the increasing concentration and temperature directly. The osmotic pressure coefficient must be determined for different solutions. It has been determined by various researchers to be less than unity and slightly increases with increasing solution concentration 1171. if the solute is not known or it is complex, wc have to use mass concentration instead of molar concentration. For convenience: this model assumed a constant temperature and incorporated the other constant Y which simplifies osmotic pressure to solute concentration coefticient. n=YC AZ = YAC (23)

w2

(37)

By substitution of the expression for C,, in Eq. (24) we get the expression for flux in terms of ;

J, = 4, [@ - yCf + {(YC, )/(a3-a&,, )}] (281

substitution of Eq. (38) into Eq. ( 1)

The value of Y was assumed t-o be constant over the operating range of the solute concentration. Incorporation ofEq. (23) into the expression for the solute flux Eq. (2) yields:

Putting the expression for C,;]and Opq Eqs. (27) and (28). into the expression for the concentration change with time into Eq. (2 1), we get:

J,,. = A,, lap - \fl(c/ - C, )]

(24)

J, =B,b, -cpl J.s= Jwkp /Cwp )

Combining the above equations. we get:

(3) (6)
where the model constants are a, = bW~C,,

J&

= J,.C,

Eq. (30) is the non-lineardifferential equation, which canbe solvednumerically. The solution of this equation gives the relationship betweenthe operatingtime andconcentration feed.Concenof tration of feedis a functionofoperatingtime. Once the C, is calculatedat any time, permeateconcentration, rejectionandflux can be determined.The overall recovery can be obtained by using feed and permeate concentrations. In the mode of operationused. the system is essentially closed: that is the mass of the solute in the initial feed must equalthe total ofthe variousprocessstreams andtanksat any instantof time. The overall mass balanceis

For the determination of model constantthe six modelconstants two initial conditionswere and usedin the simulation program. The initial conditions arefeedconcentration andfeedvolume cfi I$. Membranesurfacearea5(, operatingpresand sure gradient AP are two model constantsthat representdesign variables, the solvent (water) concentrationis C For distilled witer n, = 0, so .{,> AIVAI. The = slope of the plot betweenJ,,, vs. AP determines A,,,.The solute permeability constantwas determined by operatingthe systemat severaldifferent concentrationof the feed at constant pressure. Since .J,= B\ACY */,,,Cl,/CWj,Us (C, - C:,), a and = plot of JwCplC,, vs. (CIc- CJ yields B,y. The osmotic pressurecoefficient can also be determinedexperimentallyon thereverse osmosis system. SinceA,,,was previously found for pure water,the relationship bNJ,uv)l =M,-c,)] canbe plottedto determineyf. 3. Model for reverse osmosis system with concentration polarization

The overall recovery is expressedin terms of C,&,CTiand t;jO,.: VPlVfO = (c,. -c,J/(c, -qm) (33)

The equation for total dissolved solid (TDS) concentrationin the producttank canbe obtained by substitutingEq. (27) into Eq. (14)

dC,Jdf= -qm.)llvp bD(c,

or
dC,, ldt = [a, - a,C, + {a,Cf /(a3 - a,C,)}]

E(cdh -~&C,1~
k/5 k, - c,o )@f - C, II

(34)

Eqs. (30) and (34) can be solved simultaneouslywith thehelp of fourth orderRunge-Kutta technique.

The model developedin this study depictsthe ideal masstransfer.doesnot include the concentration polarizationandfouling of the membrane, which causes significant declinein the solvent the flux. To avoid the concentration polarization, creatingturbulencein the feed velocity is one of the remedies.There is certain feed velocity, say critical velocity, abovewhich flux declination is slower than at lower velocities. The model developed Slateret al. [ 171 by considered feed the concentration changes with time globally. To accomplishthe concentrationpolarization andincorporatethefeedvelocity in the model we consideredthe feed concentrationchangeswith time locally. Sothatthetime andspace dependence of feed conc.entration be consideredin this will model. Cr = C/. (time, space)

Differentiating C::, partially and space coordinalc

with respect to time

dC, = (aC, / at)dt + (aC, / ay)dy . or

dcpidt=acpiat+(ac,iay)ub

(35)

Using Eq. (2 i) for material balance around the feed tank with the concentration as a function of time and space, we get dc, ldt = [e, k, Substitution - C, )dv,o - Q,t))l (36) Fig. 9. Solute transfer on the boundary layer of the Inembrane. of the solvent. This urlfavourable phenomenon is called concentration polarization [ 10,241. The differential equation for mass conservation in the process of reverse osmosis is as follows:

of Eq. (35) into Eq. (36) gives

(ac,

iat)+ (ac,

/a&7, =

Qp - C, )b(v,o- Q,t )I Or {(c,

ac, / at = bp icy - C, )bbp - Qpd 4 bc, / 4 ( 7) 3

J, = F,,,C,,, - D (dC,,ldy) The solute tween the total the membrane diffusing back solution.

(38)

Eq. (37) shows the time as well as spatial dependence of the feed concentration. To solve this equation we have to get the expression for the spatial dependence of feed concentration. For a membrane under steady state condition. when the solution flows through the system parallel to the membrane surface at a given rate, both the solute and the solvent are forced to pass through the membrane owing to the action ofthe pressure difference, as depicted in Fig. 2. The solvent can pass through the membrane completely but most of the solute accumulates at the surface due to the rejection caused by the membrane. Thus a concentration gradient is built between the membrane surface and bulk solution, which makes the solute diffuse back towards the bulk solution. The higher the solute concentration at the rncmbrane surface the lower will be solute permeation rate

flus is equal to the difference beamount of solute Rowing towards surface and the portion of solute from the membrane s&ace to bulk

dC,ldy-[(Fw/D)c,]

=-(J,y lD)

This is a firsi order ordinq di Rerential equation which can be solved through the particular integral and complementary function. C, = P wbl exd@,, / D)vl + C, (39)

where CLand p are integration constants. Boundary conditions at J = 0 c,, = c, and at y = 6 Cl, = C:, C, - C, = Pexp[a] (40)

C,,, C, =Pexpblexp[(ic,,, / D>Sl

(41)

Dividing Eq. (4 I) by (40) in order to get concentrationpolarizationratio

Brian [ 16,231 approximatedthe average value of concentrationpolarizationin thetubular membranewith the following equation: C, lC, = l.333exp[(y/0.75)(y/6)lCP

(Cw )/(C, )=expk ~~>~I -C, -C,

C, lC, = exp[(F, /II)&]. or C, lC, = exp[F, lk]
k=D/6,

(42)

CQ (C, )exddd>l+C, = -C, JC,QY =((c,- C,I/~bxdh @I

(48)

using the approximation limit (JI,<< C, < c,*,so that we can neglect C,> from Eq. (42).

Partialdifferentiation o,fEq. (48) with respect to spacecoordinategives:

(4%

(43) (44)

C, = C, exp[F, /k]

Substitutionof Eq. (49) into Eq. (37) will give the expression feedconcentration for changes with time in thepresence concentration of polarization andbulk velocity. Xv /at = e-{U,(C, -C,)lG)yexp[y(ylG)] (50)

Substitutingthesevaluesinto Eq. (39) we get:

C, =(C,- C,)expk /kxy/ @I C, +

(45)

I0 calculate wall concentration we have to calculatethe masstransfercoefficientandF,. The valueofF>,,can bedeterminedexperimentallyfor a given membrane and operating condition. To estimatethe value of k severalinvestigatorshave proposed schemeto determinethe masstransfer a coefficient. Majority of them doesnot includethe major parameterparticularly the action of F,v in radial tlow rate,i.e. solvent flux. The calculation ofk throughthe expression developed earlier[ 14161 givesthe following:
j, =(k/Ub)Sc23

with 8 = QP(C, -C,)@/,, - Q,t). Concentrationpolarization can be minimized by the turbulent promotion, with the increased friction factor andbulk velocity. In orderto simulatethis masstransferprocess and to determine the mass transfer coefficient when boththe longitudinal and radial flows exist simultaneously 14,201, Xuesong Wang[24]developed a new type of diffusion current method for the determination of k. lie deduced the empirical formulae of the masstransfercoefficient for one andtwo dimensionsasfollows: For laminar flow onedimension Sh = 1.66Re0,36 (d, / L)o.42 SC.~~ two dimensions Sh =4.72Re.36 SC.~~(~, !L)o.42X.25
(51)

for the casesof turbulent flow in roundtubes j,=f/2

k = (~T&)/(~SC~~) (45) gives us
(46)

(52)

The substitution0fEq. (46) into Eqs. (43) and

C,/C,=wM
withy= (2FwSc2 /fog).

(47)

Concentrationpolarization ratio for laminar flow with two dimensions can be obtained by substitutionof Eq. (52) into Eq. (43) C,, / C, = exp[h] A = [((,,l?V.75)/(Reo.36 SCOJ~)~LIA,)~.~Z]

Substitution c, = k

of the value of k in Eq. (45) gives

- c, )expMY /

(53)

Differentiating Eq. (53) with respect to space coordinate, we will get: JC, / dy = {(C, - C, )/ G}exp[h(y / S)] (54)

From the experiment carried out by Xuesong Wang 1241 a dimensionless empirical equation for the mass transfer coefficient for a tube type fluidized bed under laminar flow conditions was obtained as follows: Sh, = 2.58Rey C, lC, = exp[z] T = [(0.388V$98)/(Re~36 SC~~)~L/~, )oos] SC.*~(~, /L).08Xo/025 ((2, (63)

Substituting Eq. (54) into Eq. (37). we will get:

acJat=e-{u,(c~

-c,)/6}~exp[h(y/6)](55)

This represents the system equation when the concentration ofthe feed is taken as the function of time and space with the value ofmass transfer coefficient k. Similarly the system equation can be obtained for turbulent flow: Turbulent flow: one dimension Sh = 0.073 Re0.74 SC.~~ / L)o.32 (d, two dimensions Sh = 0.147Re0.74 SC.~~(LI,/L)o.32Xo l9 The concentration ofturbulent flow is (57)
(56)

The expression for the space dependence of feed concentration can be obtained by subslitution of Eq. (63) in Eq. (45). Cp = (C, - Cp )exp[& Differentiating coordinate gives: aC, /+={(C, / S)] + C, W

Eq. (64) with respect to space

-C,)/6bexp[r(~~/S)]

(65)

By substitution of Eq. (65) into the master Eq. (37) for the system we get: ilC, /at = e-(u,(C, -C,)/Gbexp[z(yl6)] (66)

polarization ratio in the case (58)

C,/C,=ewhl

writh q = [((6.8~.s1)/(Reo.74 ,sc.~ )XL/~~ ,,.Q] . The equation for feed concentration is (59)

Cw (ChC,)expMy C, = /@I+
Ditferentiating dc, / dy = k, - C, )/ Sh ddy / @I

Eq. (59) with space coordinate:

(60)

Eq. (66) represents the master system equation which includes the spatial as well as time dependence of feed concentration with inclusion of feed velocity and concentration polarization by a remedial factor to reduce concentration polarization, with the help of l-luidized bed. Once the above equation is solved then the value of solvent flux with compaction correction factor. recovery, rejection and concentration of permeate can be calculated by substituting the value of Cc,,in the corresponding equations, discussed earlier. 4. Models verification

Substitution ofEq. (60) into the master Eq. (37) gives:

ac, 1 at = 0 - (uh (c, - c, )/ S)ll exp[q(y / S)] (6 I )

Experimental data for aqueous salt (NaCl) solution form the literature [17&l were used to

38

K Jand

Ed al. , Iksniincrfion

I60 (2004)
17

29.---/2

verify the model. The constants and initial conditions for the simulation are given as:
c;? = 2.00
kghd VfO

= 1.50 13, Cl? - 1.0~ lti k&l?;

IS

s, = 0. I8 1 111:.
AZ' = 4.02x 10" kg/m h, A,,, = 4.2~ 10 I7 h/m, Bc= l.l2rlO-.lm/h, Y = 1.02x IO m2/h2, Re = 30 -1 OjT~71f/Z.,0.0 15, = 0.62 mm < d I: 0.9 mm, 450 < SC < 2650, 0.55 <E -C0.9&0.0623 <X,< 1.455
13

5. Results

and discussion
7

Fig. 3 shows the variation of permeate flux with time. Initially as operating time increases, the permeate tlux decreases slowly. After the attainment of around 400 h, the flux decreases sharply. The simulation results suggest that the permeate flux decreases slowly at first, but as time advances, the concentration gradient increases and the flux falls more sharply. Fig. 4 shows the simulation results of solute concentration in feed with time. As predicted by the model, the feed concentration increases linearly with time at a slow rate during the early hours (i.e. up to 400 h) of operation. Beyond this, the feed concentration increases exponentially with time. During the initial period of operation of the reverse osmosis system, an initial feed volume was used. Retentate concentration is always incrementally greater than the feed concentration; and the retentate is recycled to the feed tank as shown in Fig. 1. The feed volume decreases continuously with time because of permeate production, hence feed concentration increases with time. If I/;, was larger? the curve would remain linear for a longer time as described earlier. Both plots of permeate and average product concentrations, as predicted by the model, is sho\vn in Fig. 5. The permeate concentration increases gradually with time (around up to 400 h of operation) and beyond this time the permeate concentration increases rapidly with time. At the end of simulation, the permeate concentration reaches to a value of I.027 kg/m: after 1000 h. The average

^, 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 loo0

Time, t (hr)

Fig. 3. Simulation results of permeate flux vs. time.

loo

FJO

300

400

54Jo

600

7cn

I)00

900

loo0

Tim* t (b0

Fig. 4. Simulation results of feed concentration vs. time.

1.2

..-

a b.6 8 c E : .j ; P
$0.2 I e 0 0 loo 200 300 400 500 ml Time, t (br) 700 800 %M ml0
2 ^ .

100

ii

300

400

SO0

600

700

SW

900

1000

Fig. 5. Simdation resdts of permeate concentration average permeate concentration vs. time.

and

Timt, t (ar)

Fig. 6. Simulation results of permeate flnx vs. time with concentration polarization.

permeate concentration also increases more gradually, reaching 0.178 kg/m due to the effects of dilution in the product tank. 6. Simulation results of reverse osmosis system with concentration polarization Fig. 6 shows the variation ofpermeate flux vs. time with concentration polarization. The permeate flux gradually increases up to 450 h reaching 16.00 kg/m2h. After this period, the flux decreases rapidly up to 650 h of operation and then it decreases linearly. In Fig. 3. the flux decreases up to around 450 h without incorporating the concentration polarization, whereas in Fig. ii the flux increases gradually due to change in feed concentration. After 650 h of operation. the change in flux is slow with concentration polarization. The variation of feed concentration with time has been shown in Fig. 7. The feed concentration decreases almost linearly at a slow rate with time up to around 400 h of operation of the system.

25

100

200

300

400

500

6Mf

700

800

900

10

Time, t (br)

Fig. 7. Simulation results oE feed concentration vs. rime

with concentration polarization.

After this period,the feedconcentration increases exponentially with time. In Fig. 4, the feed concentrationgot increasedup to 400 h of operation without concentrationpolarization, which is the contrastwith concentration polarization. Fig. 8 shows the variation of permeateconcentrationand averageproduction concentration with time. The permeate concentration remains C?P almost constantwith time up to around450 h of operation as is the case without concentration polarization. Beyond time t - 450 11,the CP increaseslinearly at a high rate. This trend was observedalmost sameasexplainedin Fig. 5. The variation of averagepermeate concentrationwith time remains same as observedfor the case of without concentration polarization.
7. Conclusions

1. The model developed without concentration polarizationwaseffectively usedfor the prediction of feed concentration,permeateconcentration, rejection andflux asa function of operatingtime. 2. The proposedmodel developedwith consideration of spatial dependence solute feed of concentration (hencethe permeate concentration, averagepermeateconcentrationand rejection as a functionoftime andspace) simulationshowed on good agreementwith the actual reverseosmosis processand improved the permeateflux. 3. In theproposed model thebulk feedvelocity shows the important role which is the remedial factor for improvementof permeateflux.
Symbols

The following conclusionscan bedrawn from the presentstudy:

u,-n, 4 B.% c c, C; C,, c;, c c: ,,Y CT C/J

q,, c w/r D

de 4,.
0 loo .200 300 4lm 500 600 700 flcn 900 loo0

Time, t (iv)

$ .p H j,,

Fig. 8. Simulation results of permeate concentration and average permeate concentration vs. time with concentlation polarization.

Constantsin model equations Solventpermeabilityconstant.h/m Solutepermeabilityconstant.m!h Concentration, kg/m Solutebulk concentration flow, kg/m) Solute feedconcentration,kg/m Initial solutefeedconcentration,kg/m? Solute concentrationin the feed tank, kg/m Solutepermeateconcentration,kg/m Averagepermeate concentration, kg/m3 Soluteretentateconcentration,kg/m Concentration a flinction of time and as space,kg/m Solutewall concentration, kg/m: Solventpermeate concentration (water): kg/m3 Diffusion coefficient,m/h Equivalent diameter,(Wtl;)i(H+ WY), m Equivalent diameter of fluidized bed, d,/[ 1 + (3/2) (1 --E)(djc$J]t m Diameterof the fluidized particles,m Tube diameterof the fluidized bed.m Volumetric flux rate,m-ilm2li Friction factor Height of the channel,m Chilton-Colbumj factor, (/&?)lU,,

A. .Jand

et al. , Iksaiinrrlion

160 (2004)

29. -/2

31

--...... Solute

flux:

kg/111~11

References
A.M. Al-Mudaiheem and H. Miyamura, Con-

- Solvent (water flux). kg/m% - Mass transfer coefficient: m/h .-..-Length of the channel or height of the bed, m - Number of moles of species i --...-Membrane pressure gradient, kg/,/m hZ - Volumetric feed tlow rate, m/h - Volumetric permeate flow rate, m/h .--...Volumetric retentate flow rate, m/h - Solute rejection - Reynolds number, (pql,fjh!y,) _--- Reyolds number (tluldlzed bed) - Universal gas constant, kg mZ/h2 k - Membrane surface area. m* ----..Schmidt num bcr (p/p n) - Sherwood number (u, k/D) - Sherwood number (fluidized bed) - Absolute temperature, K - Time, h ....-.-HuIk feed velocitv: m/h - Feed volume. m - Initial feed volume, my -..--.Feed tank volume. m - Permeate volume. m - W number (F,q,~~jl>) ..--.-Channel width, m - Overall system recovery - Space coordinate, m ---. Single-pass system recovery
Greek

struction and commissioning of Al Jobail Phase 11 desalination plant. DesaIinat-ion,55 (1985) IL.1 I.
S.E. Aly, Combined RO/VC desalination system.

Desalination, 58 (1986) 85-97.

D. Mahlab, N. Ben Yosef and G. Belfort, Concentration polarization profile for dissolved species in unstirred batch hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis). II. Transient case.Desalination, 34 ( 1978) 297-303.

K.B. Bird,WE. Stewart and E.N.Li~htFoot.~Iransport Phenomena. Wiley International Edition. Yew York. 1960,663 p.
D.C. Brandt, Seawaterreverseosmosis:an economic alternative to distillation. Desalination. 52 (1985 ) 177-186 A. Chiolle, G Gianotti, M. Gramondo and G Parrini, Mathematical model of reverse osmosis in paralielwall channels with turbulence promoting nets. Desalination. 26 ( 1978) 3--16. J.E. Cruver, 1JS Department of Interior, Office of Saline Water Res. Dcvel. Progr. Rept., NTIS: PB 223 181, No. 882, Sept. 1973. E. Drioli and F. Bellucci, Concentration polarization and solute-membrane interactions affecting pressure driven membrane processes. Desalination, 26 (1978) 17.--36. G. Green and G. Belfort, Fouling of ultrafiltration membranes: lateral migration and the particle trajectory model, Desalination, 35 (1980) 129--147. H. Ohya. Reverse Osmosis Method, Cltrafiltration Method. 1. Theory. Sachu Publisher, Japan. 1976. NM. Jackson, ;Llodel to simulate the structure and

performance of cellular polymeric membranes:

structure, flux and filtration characteristics. Filtr.

Separ.,Jan (199.5)69.
G. Jonsson, Overview of theories for water and

- Thickness of the boundary layer. m - Voidage ..---Absolute viscosity, kg h/m - Density. kg/m - Osmotic pressure, kg/m Ii ......-Osmotic pressure coefticient, m*/h - Osmotic pressure to solute concentration ratio, m2/h .....-.... number (dC F:, p/p) X - X, number (fluidized bed). (4,. F,, p/p)

solute transport in UF!RO membranes. Desalination, 35 (198Oi2L38.

Y. Kurokawa, M. Lurashige and K. \iui. A viscoelastic model for initial flux decline through reverse

osmosismembrane. Desalination, 52 (1981) 9--14. E3.R. Min, AL. Gill and W.K. Gill,.4 note on fluoride removal by reverseosmosis. Desalination, 49 ( 1984)
89-93.

DE Potts, R.C. i\hlert and S.S. Wang. .A critical review of fouling of reverse osmosis membranes.
Desalination. 36 (198 1) 135-264.

[161 B. Ramachandaran and B.M. Mishra, Mechanism and transport through reverse osmosis membranes. Lecture Notes: Membrane and Its Application, Organized by Dept. Chem. Eng. and Dept. Biochem. Eng. and Biotechnology, IlT Delhi, Feb. 13-l 5 (1996) 27. 1171 C.S. Slater. J.M. Zielinski, R.G. Wendel and C.Ci. L&in, Modeling of a small scale reverse osmosis systems. Desalination, 52 (1985) 267-284. [18] M. Soltanieh and W. Gill, Review ofR0 membranes and transport tnodels. Chem. Eng. Comm., I2 ( 198 1)
279, [19] S. Sourirajan and T. Matsura, RO:Ultrafiltration

brane systems.I.>esalination,22 (1977) 465 -483. PI] W.J. Weber. Physicochemical Processesfor Water Quality Control, Wiley, New York. 1972. [22] A.B. Mindler and A.C. Epstein, Measurements and control in reverse osmosis desalination. Desalination. 59 (1986) 343-379. [23] K. Jamal, Modeling of reverse osmosis membrane system, M. Tech. dissertation. AMU Aligarh, 1996. [24] X. Wang, Mass transfer and the fluidized bed iniensification ofreverse osmosis. Desalination, 62 ( 1987)
2 1 l-220. [25] D. Bhattacharyya. S.L. Back and R.I. Kermode,

Principles. Ottawa, Canada, NRC. 1985. [.?(I] M.J. van der Waal. P.M. van der Veiden, J. Koning, CA. Smolders and W.P.M. van Swaay, Use of fluidised beds as turbulence promotors in tubular mem-

Prediction of concentration polarization and flux behavior in reverse osmosis by numerical analysis. J. Membr. Sci., 48 (1990) 23 1.