Ceramic Membrane Market

5/24/2018 Ceramic Membrane Market

1/28

Ceramic MembranesA Pilot Evaluation of an Emerging

Reuse Technology

Randall Booker, PhD, PE


2/28

Outline

Wastewater Membrane Applications

Ceramic Membrane Characteristics

Ceramic Membrane Applications

Project Background Pilot Results and Observations

Next Steps


3/28

Collaborative Pilot Effort

Dallas Water Utilities


4/28

Membrane Filtration for WWMF UF membranesare ideal for WWreuse applications: Consistent WQ Barrier to solids andpathogens Reliability Automation

Typical Application is PolymericMembrane (e.g. PVDF, PS, PP)

o Tertiary MF/UF (on secondaryeffluent)

Hollow-fiber encased elementwith cross-flow operation

Submerged systemso MBR MF/UF (on screened

influent)

Hollow-fiber submerged

Flat-sheet submerged


5/28

What are Ceramic Membranes?

Made from Ceramic Materials

o (e.g., oxides of titanium, zirconium,aluminium)

Single channel tube

o Similar to hollow fiber (larger diameter)

Flat Sheet/submerged (Kubota)

Monolith (MetaWater-NGK)

o Multi-channel tubular membrane element

MetaWater (NGK) monolithic ceramicmembrane selected for pilot study

o Pressurized Inside-out flow

o Dead-end filtration operation


6/28

0 0001 0 001 0 01 0 1 1 10 100 m

hairCrypto-

sporidium

smallest

micro-

organism

polio virus

Suspended solids

Parasites

Bacteria

Org. macro. molecules

Viruses

ColloidsDissolved salts

Sand Filtration

Microfiltration

Ultrafiltration

Nanofiltration

Reverse Osmosis

Membrane Rejection Characteristics

Ceramic Membranes


7/28

Ceramic Membrane Surface Properties

Ceramic Polymeric

Metal Oxide Surface Chemistry

Metal Sites for Binding Foulant (as a

ligand)

Ligand Sites for Binding Metal

Coagulant

Amphoteric

Use of coagulant to manage surface

chemistry is key


8/28

Pilot Ceramic Membrane Element

Filtrate slits

Filtrate collecting channel

FiltrateRaw water

Feed Channel 2 5 mm Dead End

Operationwith PeriodicBackwash

Parameter Detail

MembraneMaterial Innerpressurizedtypemonolith

Membranefiltrationchannelsize 0.008inch

Lengthof

Membrane

Element 39.3

inch

SurfaceAreaofMembraneElement 4.4squarefeet(sf)

Outsidediameter 1.25inch

FlowDirection Insideout

NominalPore

Size 0.1

micron

NominalFlow 0.611gpm @100gfd


9/28

Flow Pattern in Monolith Membrane Module(Watanabe, 2008)

Module Casing

Membrane

Feed

Dead-end point


10/28

Ceramic Membrane Module(Panglish, 2009)


11/28

Ceramic Membranes vs.

Polymeric Membranes

Attributes

Higher flux at relatively low pressure Comparable recovery (to 99%)

Aggressive flux maintenance capabilities

High durability against oxidants, strong acids, bases,

and temperature Hydrophilic membrane surface

More robust membrane integrity

Low Replacement frequency (~ 20 Years) Challenges

Relatively smaller packing density

Relatively higher cost

Limited US track record


12/28

Ceramic Membrane Applications

First full-scale system operational in France, 1990

Presently, over 70 installations in Japan (


13/28

PROJECT BACKGROUND


14/28

Ceramic Membrane Pilot System

Two trains - 1 gpm each

Ability to test variablesin parallel

Fully automated w/ data

acquisition


15/28

SWWTP - Pilot Site Location

Pilot Skid Area

Feed Water Locations

Secondary

Clarifiers

ChlorineContact

Basin


16/28

Pilot Testing Approach - Proof of Concept

Feed waterso SWWTP Secondary Effluent

Chlorinated

Non-Chlorinated

Objectiveso Demonstrate Proof of Concept for WW reuse applications

TCEQ reuse compliance (Type I , 3 NTU)

Criteria for sustainable operation

Establish basis for subsequent full-scale demonstration

Constraintso Pilot scale element/skid

o Short pilot test period (~ 1 month)


17/28

Pilot Testing Variables

Feed: Chlorinated/Non-chlorinated Secondary Effluent

Coagulant dose:


18/28

Proof of Concept Operational Goals

Maximize permeability (gfd/psi)

Maximize flux (Target = 100 gfd) Minimize TMP rise (5-8 psi per filtration cycle)

Optimize CEB (1-2 per day)

Initial TMP rise over 2 CEBs/ 24 hours ~ 0.1 psi CIPs: 2 -4 per year


19/28

Results - Chorinated Secondary Effluent

Train A (Acid CEB)


20/28

Results - Chlorinated Secondary Effluent

Train B (Acid/Hypo CEB)


21/28

Chlorinated Effluent Observations

Filtrate turbidity < 0.5 NTU (TCEQ Type 1 met)

Coagulant is required for sustainable operation Change in TMP over 30 min filtration cycle met goal @ 100 gfd

TMP recovery after CEB was higher than goal (0.1 psi/d)@ 100 gfd

~ 0.5 psi/day for Train A (Acid)

~ 0.3 psi/day for Train B (Acid/Hypo)

TMP recovery optimization needed

o Coagulant

o CIP frequency/protocol

Results suggests sustainable operation possible

Stress Test @ 100 gfd and 60 min filtration cycles appears

unsustainable


22/28

Results - Non-Chlorinated Secondary Effluent

Train A (Acid CEB)


23/28

Results - Non-Chlorinated Secondary Effluent

Train B (Acid/Hypo CEB)


24/28

Non-Chlorinated Effluent Observations

Filtrate quality similar to chlorinated feed (TCEQ Type I stds

met)

Change in TMP over 30 min filtration cycle met goal @ 100 gfd

Notably steeper rise in initial TMP compared to chlorinated

effluent

TMP recovery after CEB was higher than goal (0.1 psi/d)@ 100

gfd:

~ 0.7 psi/day for Train A (Acid)

~ 0.8 psi/day for Train B (Acid/ Hypo)

Suggests TMP recovery may be enhanced by a low level of

oxidant in the feed stream


25/28

ProjectedFull

Scale

Operating

Conditions

Parameter ChlorinatedSecondaryEffluent

Stream

Flux,gfd 100

FerricSulfateDose,mg/L 50

Filtration Cycle,min 30

NormalBackwash

Duration

22

45sec

CEB 2acid/hypochloriteCEBsperday

CIPsperyear >2*

* To be refined during full scale element demonstration


26/28

Pilot Study Conclusions

Reuse Proof of Concept demonstrated

Ceramic membranes have beneficial characteristicsrelative to performance in reuse applications

Sustainable operation at a high flux is possible

Optimization of operating conditions at full-scale elementdemonstration level will refined for use in life cycle

cost/benefit

Optimization focus areas for full scale demonstration

Coagulant addition

CEB/ CIP protocol and interval


27/28

Next Steps

Side by Side Pilot Testing with 20

gpm Ceramic & Polymeric Unitso Optimize operation

o Perform 90 day testing to meet TCEQ

requirements

Obtain TCEQ approval of the pilot

testing for ceramic membranes

Evaluate life cycle cost/ benefit vspolymeric membranes


28/28

Acknowledgments

Chris Kaakaty, Dallas Water Utilities

Mark Evers, Dallas Water Utilities

Robert Mikel, Dallas Water Utilities

Nathen Myers, Veolia Water Michael Sparks, Veolia Water

Randy McIntyre, Malcolm Pirnie

Chamindra Dassanayake, Malcolm Pirnie Joe Husband, Malcolm Pirnie

Brandt Miller, Malcolm Pirnie

James Howard, Malcolm Pirnie

Documents

Ceramic Membrane Market