Evaluation of crossflow filtration models based on shear-induced diffusion and particle adhesion: Complications induced by feed suspension polydispersivity

Abstract Specific flux data were obtained during the transient period of flux decline in laminar crossflow filtration. Effects of hydrodynamics on cake parameters such as specific resistance, mass and particle size distribution were studied experimentally. An evaluation of crossflow filtration models suggests that a model based on shear-induced diffusion [1] is a better predictor of specific flux decline than a particle adhesion model [2]. Even for relatively narrowly distributed suspensions, polydispersivity complicates analyses in a manner that is not adequately addressed by these models. Changes in experimental specific cake resistances with module hydrodynamics coupled to the inadequacy of these models for accurately predicting time-dependent specific flux profiles, cake specific resistances, and mass suggests that cake morphology is a key variable that needs to be incorporated in future modeling efforts.

[1]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Experimental verification of the shear-induced hydrodynamic diffusion model of crossflow microfiltration , 1991 .

[2]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Global model of crossflow microfiltration based on hydrodynamic particle diffusion , 1988 .

[3]  Anthony G. Fane,et al.  Factors affecting flux in crossflow filtration , 1985 .

[4]  Chi Tien,et al.  A simple model of cross‐flow filtration based on particle adhesion , 1993 .

[5]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  EXPERIMENTAL DETERMINATION OF THE PERMEABILITY AND RELATIVE VISCOSITY FOR FINE LATEXES AND YEAST SUSPENSIONS , 1990 .

[6]  J. C. Schippers,et al.  The modified fouling index, a method of determining the fouling characteristics of water , 1980 .

[7]  Shankararaman Chellam.  Laminar fluid flow, particle transport and permeate flux behavior in crossflow membrane filters , 1996 .

[8]  Mark R. Wiesner,et al.  Membrane Filtration of Coagulated Suspensions , 1989 .

[9]  Mark R. Wiesner,et al.  Particle back-transport and permeate flux behavior in crossflow membrane filters , 1997 .

[10]  K. Hoffmann,et al.  Computational Fluid Dynamics for Engineers , 1989 .

[11]  Wei-Ming Lu,et al.  Selective Particle Deposition in Crossflow Filtration , 1989 .

[12]  K. Nakanishi,et al.  FILTRATION BEHAVIORS OF ROD-SHAPED BACTERIAL BROTHS IN UNSTEADY-STATE PHASE OF CROSS-FLOW FILTRATION , 1996 .

[13]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  The behavior of suspensions and macromolecular solutions in crossflow microfiltration , 1994 .

[14]  Anthony G. Fane,et al.  Ultrafiltration of suspensions , 1984 .

[15]  F. Tiller,et al.  Role of porosity in filtration: XII. Filtration with sedimentation , 1995 .

[16]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Crossflow Microfiltration of Yeast Suspensions in Tubular Filters , 1993, Biotechnology progress.

[17]  Jakob Murkes,et al.  Crossflow Filtration: Theory and Practice , 1988 .

[18]  J. Ranville,et al.  Collection and analysis of colloidal particles transported in the Mississippi River, U.S.A. , 1990 .

[19]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Shear-induced transport of a particle layer along a porous wall , 1987 .

[20]  A. Acrivos,et al.  The lift on a small sphere touching a plane in the presence of a simple shear flow , 1985 .

[21]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Transient model of crossflow microfiltration , 1990 .