Atkinson Ariel J, Armstrong Mikayla D, Eskew John T, Coronell Orlando
Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.
J Memb Sci. 2021 Jul 1;629. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2021.119262. Epub 2021 Mar 19.
Biofouling is difficult to control and hinders the performance of membranes in all applications but is of particular concern when natural waters are purified. Fouling, via multiple mechanisms (organic-only, biofouling-only, cell-deposition-only, and organic+biofouling), of a commercially available membrane (control) and a corresponding membrane coated with an anti-biofouling 2-aminoimidazole (2-AI membrane) was monitored and characterized during the purification of a natural water. Results show that the amount of bacterial cell deposition and organic fouling was not significantly different between control and 2-AI membranes; however, biofilm formation, concurrent or not with other fouling mechanisms, was significantly inhibited (95-98%, p<0.001) by the 2-AI membrane. The limited biofilm that formed on the 2-AI membrane was weaker (as indicated by the polysaccharide to protein ratio) and thus presumably easier to remove. The conductivity rejection by the 2-AI and control membranes was not significantly different throughout the 75-hour experiments, but the rejection of dissolved organic carbon by biofouled (biofouling-only, cell-deposition-only, and organic+biofouling) 2-AI membranes was statistically higher (10-12%, p=0.003-0.07). When biofouled, the water permeance of the 2-AI membranes decreased significantly less (p<0.05) over 75 hours than that of the control membranes, whether or not other additional types of fouling occurred concurrently. Despite the initially lower water permeances of 2-AI membranes (11% lower on average than controls), the 2-AI membranes outperformed the controls (10-11% higher average water permeance) after biofilm formation occurred. Overall, 2-AI membranes fouled less than controls without detriment to water productivity and solute rejection.
生物污染难以控制,会阻碍膜在所有应用中的性能,但在净化天然水时尤其令人担忧。在天然水净化过程中,监测并表征了市售膜(对照膜)和涂有抗生物污染2-氨基咪唑的相应膜(2-AI膜)通过多种机制(仅有机污染、仅生物污染、仅细胞沉积以及有机+生物污染)产生的污染情况。结果表明,对照膜和2-AI膜之间细菌细胞沉积量和有机污染量没有显著差异;然而,2-AI膜能显著抑制生物膜形成(95%-98%,p<0.001),无论是否同时存在其他污染机制。在2-AI膜上形成的有限生物膜较弱(以多糖与蛋白质的比例表示),因此可能更容易去除。在整个75小时的实验中,2-AI膜和对照膜的电导率截留率没有显著差异,但受生物污染(仅生物污染、仅细胞沉积以及有机+生物污染)的2-AI膜对溶解有机碳的截留率在统计学上更高(10%-12%,p=0.003-0.07)。当受到生物污染时,2-AI膜的水通量在75小时内的下降幅度明显小于对照膜(p<0.05),无论是否同时发生其他类型的污染。尽管2-AI膜最初的水通量较低(平均比对照膜低11%),但在生物膜形成后,2-AI膜的表现优于对照膜(平均水通量高10%-11%)。总体而言,2-AI膜的污染程度低于对照膜,且不影响水的生产率和溶质截留率。