A combination of serial resistances and concentration polarization models along the membrane in ultrafiltration of pectin and albumin solutions

Ultrafiltration of pectin and albumin solutions was carried out on two different membranes. For both solutions, tests were performed at different transmembrane pressures, concentrations and velocities. A model combining the serial resistances and concentration polarization models in the steady state and laminar flow regime was proposed and compared with the experimental results. The model takes into account the mass-transfer and the transmembrane pressure along the membrane to determine a possible transition from pressure- to mass-transfer-controlled regime and to estimate the average permeate flux. For the most part of the tests, the observed behaviour of albumin and pectin ultrafiltration and measured fluxes were in accordance with the model predictions.

[1]  L. Ricq,et al.  Effects of proteins on electrokinetic properties of inorganic membranes during ultra- and micro-filtration , 1996 .

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

[3]  N. Blumenkrantz,et al.  New method for quantitative determination of uronic acids. , 1973, Analytical biochemistry.

[4]  Pierre Aimar,et al.  A unifying model for concentration polarization, gel-layer formation and particle deposition in cross-flow membrane filtration of colloidal suspensions , 2002 .

[5]  Alan S. Michaels,et al.  SOLUTE POLARIZATION AND CAKE FORMATION IN MEMBRANE ULTRAFILTRATION: CAUSES, CONSEQUENCES, AND CONTROL TECHNIQUES , 1970 .

[6]  A. Zydney,et al.  Effects of intermolecular thiol–disulfide interchange reactions on bsa fouling during microfiltration , 1994, Biotechnology and bioengineering.

[7]  P. Bacchin.  A possible link between critical and limiting flux for colloidal systems: consideration of critical deposit formation along a membrane , 2004 .

[8]  W. Bowen,et al.  Properties of microfiltration membranes. Part 2. Adsorption of bovine serum albumin at aluminium oxide membranes , 1990 .

[9]  P. Prádanos,et al.  Mechanisms of protein fouling in cross-flow UF through an asymmetric inorganic membrane , 1996 .

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

[11]  Michel Y. Jaffrin,et al.  Effect of cake thickness and particle polydispersity on prediction of permeate flux in microfiltration of particulate suspensions by a hydrodynamic diffusion model , 2000 .

[12]  M. Doshi,et al.  Limiting flux in ultrafiltration of macromolecular solutions , 1980 .

[13]  M. Jaffrin,et al.  Analysis of cake build-up and removal in cross-flow microfiltration of CaCO3 suspensions under varying conditions , 2000 .

[14]  L. Choplin,et al.  Ultrafiltration of non-newtonian fluids , 1996 .

[15]  Robert H. Davis,et al.  Membrane fouling during microfiltration of protein mixtures , 1996 .

[16]  J. Howell,et al.  Sub-critical flux operation of microfiltration , 1995 .

[17]  S. Karode.  A method for prediction of the gel concentration in macromolecular ultrafiltration , 2000 .

[18]  Andrew L. Zydney,et al.  Mechanisms for BSA fouling during microfiltration , 1995 .

[19]  Shoji Kimura,et al.  Characteristics of macromolecular gel layer formed on ultrafiltration tubular membrane , 1979 .

[20]  M. C. Porter.  Concentration Polarization with Membrane Ultrafiltration , 1972 .

[21]  Andrew L. Zydney,et al.  A CONCENTRATION POLARIZATION MODEL FOR THE FILTRATE FLUX IN CROSS-FLOW MICROFILTRATION OF PARTICULATE SUSPENSIONS , 1986 .

[22]  J. Gunnink,et al.  Fouling of ultrafiltration membranes. The role of protein adsorption and salt precipitation , 1989 .