Influence of pore size and membrane surface properties on arsenic removal by nanofiltration membranes

Highlights

Four NF membranes were compared regarding arsenate rejection and their properties.

Rejection of arsenate had no relationship with membrane pore size.

A more negative surface charge was favorable for arsenate rejection at neutral pH.

A severe membrane fouling could lead to a great reduction of arsenic rejection.

Abstract

Nanofiltration (NF) has a great potential in removing arsenate from contaminated water. The performance including arsenate rejection, water permeability and resistance to fouling could however differ substantially among NF membranes. This study was conducted to investigate the influence of membrane pore size and surface properties on these aspects of membrane performance. Four fully-aromatic NF membranes with different physicochemical properties were adopted for this study. The results showed that surface charge, hydrophobicity, roughness and pore size could affect water permeability and/or arsenate rejection considerably. A more negative surface charge was desirable to enhance arsenate rejection rates. NF90 and a non-commercialized membrane (M#1) demonstrated the best performance in terms of arsenate rejection and water permeability. The M#1 membrane showed less membrane fouling than NF90 when used for filtration of real arsenic-containing groundwater. This was mainly due to its distinct chemical composition and surface properties. A severe membrane fouling could lead to a substantial reduction of arsenic rejection. The M#1 membrane showed the best performance, which indicated that membrane modification could indeed enhance the overall membrane performance for water treatment.

Graphical abstract

Keywords

Arsenate / Nanofiltration / Drinking water / Membrane property / Membrane fouling

References

[1] Chang F F, Liu W J, Wang X M (2014). Comparison of polyamide nanofiltration and low-pressure reverse osmosis membranes on As(III) rejection under various operational conditions. Desalination, 334(1): 10–16

[2] Cheng X Q, Ding S G, Guo J, Zhang C, Guo Z H, Shao L (2017). In-situ interfacial formation of TiO₂/polypyrrole selective layer for improving the separation efficiency towards molecular separation. Journal of Membrane Science, 536: 19–27

[3] Cheng X Q, Wang Z X, Jiang X, Li T X, Lau C H, Guo Z H, Ma J, Shao L (2018). Towards sustainable ultrafast molecular-separation membranes: From conventional polymers to emerging materials. Progress in Materials Science, 92: 258–283

[4] Fang J, Deng B (2014). Rejection and modeling of arsenate by nanofiltration: Contributions of convection, diffusion and electromigration to arsenic transport. Journal of Membrane Science, 453: 42–51

[5] Figoli A, Cassano A, Criscuoli A, Mozumder M S, Uddin M T, Islam M A, Drioli E (2010). Influence of operating parameters on the arsenic removal by nanofiltration. Water Research, 44(1): 97–104

[6] Harisha R S, Hosamani K M, Keri R S, Nataraj S K, Aminabhavi T M (2010). Arsenic removal from drinking water using thin film composite nanofiltration membrane. Desalination, 252(1–3): 75–80

[7] He Y, Liu J, Han G, Chung T S (2018). Novel thin-film composite nanofiltration membranes consisting of a zwitterionic co-polymer for selenium and arsenic removal. Journal of Membrane Science, 555: 299–306

[8] He Y R, Tang Y P, Ma D, Chung T S (2017). UiO-66 incorporated thin-film nanocomposite membranes for efficient selenium and arsenic removal. Journal of Membrane Science, 541: 262–270

[9] Hirose M, Ito H, Kamiyama Y (1996). Effect of skin layer surface structures on the flux behaviour of RO membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 121(2): 209–215

[10] Hoek E M, Elimelech M (2003). Cake-enhanced concentration polarization: a new fouling mechanism for salt-rejecting membranes. Environmental Science & Technology, 37(24): 5581–5588

[11] Jadhav S V, Marathe K V, Rathod V K (2016). A pilot scale concurrent removal of fluoride, arsenic, sulfate and nitrate by using nanofiltration: Competing ion interaction and modelling approach. Journal of Water Process Engineering, 13: 153–167

[12] Jiang M, Ye K, Deng J, Lin J, Ye W, Zhao S, Van der Bruggen B (2018). Conventional ultrafiltration as effective strategy for dye/salt fractionation in textile wastewater treatment. Environmental Science & Technology, 52(18): 10698–10708

[13] Lau W J ( 2016 ).Nanofiltration Membranes: Synthesis, Characterization, and Applications. Abingdon: CRC Press Taylor & Francis

[14] Lau W J, Ismail A F, Goh P S, Hilal N, Ooi B S (2015). Characterization methods of thin film composite nanofiltration membranes. Separation and Purification Methods, 44(2): 135–156

[15] Lin J Y, Ye W Y, Zeng H M, Yang H, Shen J G, Darvishmanesh S, Luis P, Sotto A, Van der Bruggen B (2015). Fractionation of direct dyes and salts in aqueous solution using loose nanofiltration membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 477: 183–193

[16] Lin Y L, Chiang P C, Chang E E (2007). Removal of small trihalomethane precursors from aqueous solution by nanofiltration. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 146(1–2): 20–29

[17] Mojarrad M, Noroozi A, Zeinivand A, Kazemzadeh P (2018). Response surface methodology for optimization of simultaneous Cr(VI) and As(V) removal from contaminated water by nanofiltration process. Environmental Progress & Sustainable Energy, 37(1): 434–443

[18] Nghiem L D, Schäfer A I, Elimelech M (2004). Removal of natural hormones by nanofiltration membranes: measurement, modeling, and mechanisms. Environmental Science & Technology, 38(6): 1888–1896

[19] Nguyen C M, Bang S, Cho J, Kim K W (2009). Performance and mechanism of arsenic removal from water by a nanofiltration membrane. Desalination, 245(1–3): 82–94

[20] Oh J I, Yamamoto K, Kitawaki H, Nakao S, Sugawara T, Rahman M M, Rahman M H (2000). Application of low-pressure nanofiltration coupled with a bicycle pump for the treatment of arsenic-contaminated groundwater. Desalination, 132(1–3): 307–314

[21] Richards L A, Richards B S, Schäfer A I (2011). Renewable energy powered membrane technology: Salt and inorganic contaminant removal by nanofiltration/reverse osmosis. Journal of Membrane Science, 369(1–2): 188–195

[22] Saitúa H, Campderrós M, Cerutti S, Padilla A P (2005). Effect of operating conditions in removal of arsenic from water by nanofiltration membrane. Desalination, 172(2): 173–180

[23] Sato Y, Kang M, Kamei T, Magara Y (2002). Performance of nanofiltration for arsenic removal. Water Research, 36(13): 3371–3377

[24] Su M, Wang D X, Wang X L, Ando M, Shintani T (2006). Rejection of ions by NF membranes for binary electrolyte solutions of NaCl, NaNO₃, CaCl₂ and Ca(NO₃)₂. Desalination, 191(S1–3): 303–308

[25] Tang C Y, Kwon Y N, Leckie J O (2007). Probing the nano- and micro-scales of reverse osmosis membranes-A comprehensive characterization of physiochemical properties of uncoated and coated membranes by XPS, TEM, ATR-FTIR, and streaming potential measurements. Journal of Membrane Science, 287(1): 146–156

[26] Tang C Y, Kwon Y N, Leckie J O (2009). Effect of membrane chemistry and coating layer on physiochemical properties of thin film composite polyamide RO and NF membranes: I. FTIR and XPS characterization of polyamide and coating layer chemistry. Desalination, 242(1–3): 149–167

[27] Tanninen J, Mänttäri M, Nyström M (2006). Effect of salt mixture concentration on fractionation with NF membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 283(1–2): 57–64

[28] Uddin M T, Mozumder M S I, Islam M A, Deowan S A, Hoinkis J (2007). Nanofiltration membrane process for the removal of arsenic from drinking water. Chemical Engineering & Technology, 30(9): 1248–1254

[29] Vrijenhoek E M, Waypa J J (2000). Arsenic removal from drinking water by a “loose” nanofiltration membrane. Desalination, 130(3): 265–277

[30] Waypa J J, Elimelech M, Hering J G (1997). Arsenic removal by RO and NF membranes. Journal- American Water Works Association, 89(10): 102–114

[31] Xu R, Zhang P, Wang Q, Wang X M, Yu K C, Xue T, Wen X H (2019). Influences of multi influent matrices on the retention of PPCPs by nanofltration membranes. Separation and Purification Technology, 212: 299–306

[32] Ye W Y, Lin J Y, Borrego R, Chen D, Sotto A, Luis P, Liu H M, Zhao S F, Tang C Y, Van der Bruggen B (2018). Advanced desalination of dye/NaCl mixures by a loose nanofiltration membrane for digital ink-jet printing. Separation and Purification Technology, 197: 27–35

[33] Zhang S Y, Williams P N, Luo J M, Zhu Y G (2017). Microbial mediated arsenic biotransformation in wetlands. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 11 (1): 1

[34] Zhao Y Y, Kong F X, Wang Z, Yang H W, Wang X M, Xie Y F, Waite T D (2017). Role of membrane and compound properties in affecting the rejection of pharmaceuticals by different RO/NF membranes. Frontiers of Environmental Science & Engineering, 11(6): 20

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the International Cooperation Program of MOST of China (No. 2016YFE0118800) and the major water project of China (No. 2017ZX07103). There is no conflicts of interest in this research.

Electronic Supplementary Material

Supplementary material is available in the online version of this article at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11783-019-1105-8 and is accessible for authorized users.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2019 Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature