Integration of vacuum and non-condensable sweep gas pervaporation to recover organic compounds from wastewater
Lipnizki, Frank LU
and Field, Robert W.
(1999)
Euromembrane 1999
p.2-204
- Abstract
- Introduction
Within the concept of waste water treatment the opportunity of integrating pervaporation has been widely recognised. Applying pervaporation, generally two different process designs can be applied – vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation. Previous research focused primarily exclusive on one of this process designs. In this study the benchmarks of vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation are defined for the recovery of phenol and pyridine from water. The aim of this work is, therefore, to optimise the integration sweep gas and vacuum pervaporation in the concept of waste water treatment.
Theoretical Development
Both process design are modelled using PVModel a design tool developed at the University of Bath. This... (More) - Introduction
Within the concept of waste water treatment the opportunity of integrating pervaporation has been widely recognised. Applying pervaporation, generally two different process designs can be applied – vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation. Previous research focused primarily exclusive on one of this process designs. In this study the benchmarks of vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation are defined for the recovery of phenol and pyridine from water. The aim of this work is, therefore, to optimise the integration sweep gas and vacuum pervaporation in the concept of waste water treatment.
Theoretical Development
Both process design are modelled using PVModel a design tool developed at the University of Bath. This simulation combines theoretical modelling with experimental data based on the phenomenological resistance-in-series model taking process conditions, membrane properties and module geometric into account. Using this design tool the properties of the final permeate and retentate stream for both process designs can be derived for further analysis.
Results and Discussion
Parameter studies have been performed for both process designs to demonstrate the effect of temperature, retentate concentration, permeate pressure, flow pattern and sweep gas stream on the required membrane area. This initial analysis of both system showed that in case of vacuum pervaporation the a linear membrane area decrease of membrane area with permeate pressure while in case of sweep gas pervaporation an exponential decrease of membrane area with an increasing sweep gas stream has been observed. Furthermore, for both process designs a reduction in the retentate desired retentate concentration lead to an exponential increase in membrane area required.
Based on this, further, two alternative process designs have been analysed: (a) a process combination of sweep gas with a moderate vacuum on the permeate side and (b) a process integration of moderate vacuum pervaporation followed by the combination of sweep gas with a moderate vacuum. These final two process designs lead to a significant reduction in membrane area when (1) low organic concentrations in the retentate are targeted or (2) low flux-high selectivity membranes are applied to achieve high organic concentration in the permeate. Therefore, this design have been found to be superior from an economic point than the conventional process designs.
(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/2688410e-c870-4ba5-849e-ba80e2ce9d13
- author
- Lipnizki, Frank
LU
and Field, Robert W.
- publishing date
- 1999-09-19
- type
- Contribution to conference
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Membranes, Pervaporation, Wastewater
- pages
- 2 pages
- conference name
- Euromembrane 1999
- conference location
- Leuven, Belgium
- conference dates
- 1999-09-19 - 1999-09-23
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- 2688410e-c870-4ba5-849e-ba80e2ce9d13
- date added to LUP
- 2019-05-23 07:28:31
- date last changed
- 2020-10-24 02:19:55
@misc{2688410e-c870-4ba5-849e-ba80e2ce9d13,
abstract = {{Introduction<br/>Within the concept of waste water treatment the opportunity of integrating pervaporation has been widely recognised. Applying pervaporation, generally two different process designs can be applied – vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation. Previous research focused primarily exclusive on one of this process designs. In this study the benchmarks of vacuum and sweep gas pervaporation are defined for the recovery of phenol and pyridine from water. The aim of this work is, therefore, to optimise the integration sweep gas and vacuum pervaporation in the concept of waste water treatment. <br/><br/>Theoretical Development<br/>Both process design are modelled using PVModel a design tool developed at the University of Bath. This simulation combines theoretical modelling with experimental data based on the phenomenological resistance-in-series model taking process conditions, membrane properties and module geometric into account. Using this design tool the properties of the final permeate and retentate stream for both process designs can be derived for further analysis. <br/><br/>Results and Discussion<br/>Parameter studies have been performed for both process designs to demonstrate the effect of temperature, retentate concentration, permeate pressure, flow pattern and sweep gas stream on the required membrane area. This initial analysis of both system showed that in case of vacuum pervaporation the a linear membrane area decrease of membrane area with permeate pressure while in case of sweep gas pervaporation an exponential decrease of membrane area with an increasing sweep gas stream has been observed. Furthermore, for both process designs a reduction in the retentate desired retentate concentration lead to an exponential increase in membrane area required. <br/>Based on this, further, two alternative process designs have been analysed: (a) a process combination of sweep gas with a moderate vacuum on the permeate side and (b) a process integration of moderate vacuum pervaporation followed by the combination of sweep gas with a moderate vacuum. These final two process designs lead to a significant reduction in membrane area when (1) low organic concentrations in the retentate are targeted or (2) low flux-high selectivity membranes are applied to achieve high organic concentration in the permeate. Therefore, this design have been found to be superior from an economic point than the conventional process designs.<br/>}},
author = {{Lipnizki, Frank and Field, Robert W.}},
keywords = {{Membranes; Pervaporation; Wastewater}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{09}},
pages = {{2--204}},
title = {{Integration of vacuum and non-condensable sweep gas pervaporation to recover organic compounds from wastewater}},
year = {{1999}},
}