King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Water Desalination and Reuse Center (WDRC), Division of Biological and Environmental Science and Engineering (BESE), Thuwal 23955-6900, Saudi Arabia.
LANXESS BU Liquid Purification Technologies, R&D Membranes, 06803 Bitterfeld-Wolfen, Germany.
Water Res. 2017 Aug 1;119:304-311. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2017.04.034. Epub 2017 Apr 13.
The porosity of spacer-filled feed channels influences the hydrodynamics of spiral-wound membrane systems and impacts the overall performance of the system. Therefore, an exact measurement and a detailed understanding of the impact of the feed channel porosity is required to understand and improve the hydrodynamics of spiral-wound membrane systems applied for desalination and wastewater reuse. The objectives of this study were to assess the accuracy of porosity measurement techniques for feed spacers differing in geometry and thickness and the consequences of using an inaccurate method on hydrodynamic predictions, which may affect permeate production. Six techniques were applied to measure the porosity namely, three volumetric techniques based on spacer strand count together with a cuboidal (SC), cylindrical (VCC) and ellipsoidal volume calculation (VCE) and three independent techniques based on volume displacement (VD), weight and density (WD) and computed tomography (CT) scanning. The CT method was introduced as an alternative for the other five already existing and applied methods in practice. Six feed spacers used for the porosity measurement differed in filament thickness, angle between the filaments and mesh-size. The results of the studies showed differences between the porosities, measured by the six methods. The results of the microscopic techniques SC, VCC and VCE deviated significantly from measurements by VD, WD and CT, which showed similar porosity values for all spacer types. Depending on the maximum deviation of the porosity measurement techniques from -6% to +6%, (i) the linear velocity deviations were -5.6% and +6.4% respectively and (ii) the pressure drop deviations were -31% and +43% respectively, illustrating the importance of an accurate porosity measurement. Because of the accuracy and standard deviation, the VD and WD method should be applied for the porosity determination of spacer-filled channels, while the CT method is recommended for numerical modelling purposes. The porosity has a linear relationship with the flow velocity and a superlinear effect on the pressure drop. Accurate porosity data are essential to evaluate feed spacer performance in spiral-wound membrane systems. Porosity of spacer-filled feed channels has a strong impact on membrane performance and biofouling impact.
填充分离层的流道的孔隙率会影响螺旋卷式膜系统的流体动力学,从而影响系统的整体性能。因此,为了了解和改善用于海水淡化和废水再利用的螺旋卷式膜系统的流体动力学,需要对填充分离层的流道的孔隙率进行精确测量和详细了解。本研究的目的是评估不同几何形状和厚度的流道分离层的孔隙率测量技术的准确性,以及使用不准确的方法对流体动力学预测的影响,这可能会影响渗透物的产量。本研究应用了六种技术来测量孔隙率,分别是基于分离层股线计数的三种体积技术,以及立方体(SC)、圆柱(VCC)和椭球体积计算(VCE),和基于体积位移(VD)、重量和密度(WD)和计算机断层扫描(CT)扫描的三种独立技术。CT 方法被引入作为另外五种已经存在并在实践中应用的方法的替代方法。用于孔隙率测量的六种流道分离层在股线厚度、股线之间的角度和网眼尺寸上有所不同。研究结果表明,六种方法测量的孔隙率存在差异。微观技术 SC、VCC 和 VCE 的结果与 VD、WD 和 CT 的测量结果有显著差异,后三种技术对所有类型的流道分离层都显示出相似的孔隙率值。根据孔隙率测量技术的最大偏差从-6%到+6%,(i)线性速度偏差分别为-5.6%和+6.4%,以及(ii)压降偏差分别为-31%和+43%,这说明了准确测量孔隙率的重要性。由于精度和标准偏差,VD 和 WD 方法应该用于填充分离层流道的孔隙率确定,而 CT 方法则推荐用于数值建模目的。孔隙率与流速呈线性关系,与压降呈超线性关系。准确的孔隙率数据对于评估螺旋卷式膜系统中分离层的性能至关重要。填充分离层的流道的孔隙率对膜性能和生物污垢影响有很大的影响。