Role of Titanium Dioxide-Immobilized PES Beads in a Combined Water Treatment System of Tubular Alumina Microfiltration and PES BeadsSungtaek Hong, Sungwoo Park, Jin Yong Park
- Filtration and Separation
- Chemical Engineering (miscellaneous)
- Process Chemistry and Technology
The membrane process has a limit to the decay of various pollutants in water. To improve the problem, the roles of backwashing media and titanium dioxide (TiO2) photocatalyst-immobilized-polyethersulfone (PES) beads’ concentration were investigated in a combined system of tubular alumina MF and the PES beads for advanced drinking water treatment. The space between the outside of the MF membrane and the module inside was filled with the PES beads. UV at a wavelength of 352 nm was irradiated from outside of the acryl module. A quantity of humic acid and kaolin was dissolved in distilled water for synthetic water. Water or air intermittent backwashing was performed outside to inside. The membrane fouling resistance after 3 h process (Rf,180) was minimum at 30 g/L of the PES beads for water backwashing, and at 40 g/L for air backwashing when increasing the PES beads from 0 to 50 g/L. The irreversible membrane fouling resistance after physical cleaning (Rif) was at the bottom at 5 g/L of the PES beads for water backwashing, which was 3.43 times higher than minimal at 40 g/L of the PES beads for air backwashing. The treatment effectiveness of turbidity increased when increasing the PES beads’ concentration from 0 to 50 g/L; however, it reached a maximum at 98.1% at 40 g/L and 99.2% at 50 g/L for water and air backwashing, respectively. The treatment effectiveness of UV254 absorbance, which was dissolved organic matter (DOM), increased dramatically when increasing the PES beads; however, it reached a peak of 83.0% at 40 g/L and 86.0% at 50 g/L for water and air backwashing, respectively. Finally, the best PES beads’ concentration was 20~30 g/L to minimize the membrane fouling; however, it was 50 g/L to remove pollutants effectively. The water backwashing was better than the air at treating DOM; however, the air backwashing was more effective than the water at removing turbid matter and reducing membrane fouling.