Next Article in Journal
Screening and Investigation on Inhibition of Sediment Formation in a Kuwait Light Crude Oil by Commercial Additives with Some Guidelines for Field Applications
Previous Article in Journal
Special Issue “Building Three-Dimensional Integrated Circuits and Microsystems”
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Processes
Volume 11
Issue 3
10.3390/pr11030817
processes-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Fouling of the Nanofiltration Membrane NF270 Used for Separation of Fermentation Broths: Impact of Feed Pretreatment Process

by
Wirginia Tomczak
Faculty of Chemical Technology and Engineering, Bydgoszcz University of Science and Technology, 3 Seminaryjna Street, 85-326 Bydgoszcz, Poland
Processes 2023, 11(3), 817; https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11030817
Submission received: 11 February 2023 / Revised: 6 March 2023 / Accepted: 8 March 2023 / Published: 9 March 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Separation Processes)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Recent findings regarding nanofiltration (NF) have led to indications that it can be successfully used for separation of various biological solutions. As a novelty, this paper is the first to investigate the impact of the feed pretreatment process on the NF membrane performance used for separation of 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PD) fermentation broths. For this purpose, prior to the NF process, the feed was purified by microfiltration (MF) and ultrafiltration (UF) processes. Subsequently, the long-term NF process was carried out with the use of a commercial, flat-sheet, thin-film, polyamide NF270 nanofiltration membrane. Thereinto, to determine the dominant fouling mechanism, Hermia’s model was used. With regards to the pretreatment processes performed, it has been determined that the MF membrane (0.14 µm) provided the reduction in the number of bacteria cells present in the permeate, while the UF membrane (450 Da) allowed obtaining the sterile permeate. Consequently, the NF permeate flux for the UF permeate was significantly higher. Analysis of the fouling mechanisms showed that during the separation of the MF permeate, formation of a cake layer on the NF membrane surface was dominant. In turn, with regards to the UF permeate, membrane blocking occurred in two separate phases involving standard blocking and then cake layer formation. Finally, a strategy of NF membrane cleaning with the use of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution has been proposed.

1. Introduction

Presently, significant research focus is being placed on nanofiltration (NF), which is a pressure-driven membrane process characterized mainly by the high separation efficiency for polyvalent inorganic salts and small organic molecules. So far, NF is used in many fields of applications. Indeed, it has been successfully applied for desalination of seawater [1,2,3], as well as treatment of drinking water [4,5,6] and wastewaters [7,8,9]. Moreover, recently, various research has been oriented towards using NF membranes in biotechnology as one of the steps of fermentation broth separation [10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18]. A literature overview on the current advances in various applications of NF technology is given by Yadav et al. [19].
The major challenging operational issue in NF technology is membrane fouling. Indeed, NF membranes are subject to contamination by suspended matters and microorganisms present in a feed. Undoubtedly, it has a negative influence on the process performance and costs of plant operation, especially in the long term. As it has been indicated in [20], among the most important types of NF membrane fouling are scaling, particulate and organic fouling, as well as biofouling. Importantly, biofouling represents almost 45% of the total membrane fouling [21]. It is a very complicated process, which includes the following stages [22]: (i) conditioning of the membrane surface by organic and inorganic matter occurring in the feed, (ii) microorganisms adhesion and then attachment on the membrane surface, (iii) growth of deposited cells and (iv) formation of biofilm. So far, the biofouling phenomenon has been investigated in NF systems used for wastewater treatment [23,24,25]. Nevertheless, conducting a literature review allows for indicating that the biofouling of the NF membranes applied for the separation of fermentation broths has not yet been fully evaluated.
In the literature, there is general agreement that in order to maintain high NF processing performance and ensure the long-term stability of membrane systems, fouling controlling is required. For this purpose, the major employed strategies are manufacturing membranes with good antifouling abilities [26,27], as well as feed pretreatment [28], which can be achieved by pressure-driven membrane transport processes, namely, microfiltration (MF) and ultrafiltration (UF). The selectivity of the above-mentioned technologies is dominated by a sieving effect. They have the potential to replace conventional processes, such as centrifugation, which is high-power demanding and expensive. Generally, MF membranes are characterized by pore diameters of 0.1–5 μm. They would potentially remove suspended solids, macromolecular organics, colloidal particles and bacteria. In turn, UF membranes have pore sizes in the range between 0.01 and 0.04 μm. Comparing to MF, the UF process allows separating other molecules, such as carbohydrates, as well as large and small microorganisms. Moreover, the UF process requires higher operating pressures, and UF membranes are more expensive than those used for the MF process [29]. It has been documented that MF and UF membranes can be successfully used for the pretreatment of various media, for instance, raw seawater [30,31,32], as well as oily [33,34] and laundry [35,36] wastewaters. Moreover, in the recent decade, many researchers have made remarkable achievements in the application of MF processes, e.g., [29,37,38,39,40,41,42], and UF processes, e.g., [29,41,43,44,45,46], for purification of fermentation broths. This finding is confirmed by data presented in Figure 1, which clearly demonstrates the noticeable increase in the number of articles published on this issue during the last two decades. To sum up, it should be highlighted that the choice of the most suitable pretreatment process is a great challenge since it depends mainly on specific requirements for the removal of contaminants [47].
The present work is a continuation of the previous study [17], wherein it was shown that commercial, flat-sheet, thin-film, polyamide NF270 membrane ensured the high separation of 1,3-propanediol (1,3-PD) fermentation broths. Indeed, the complete 1,3-PD permeability and significant rejection of several broth components was noted. Moreover, in the above-mentioned study, the NF separation mechanisms were investigated in terms of the properties of both the NF270 membrane and the broth components. In turn, this paper, to the best of the author’s knowledge, is the first one that examines the impact of the feed pretreatment process on the long-term NF membrane performance used for the separation of fermentation broths. For this purpose, the membrane NF270 was used for separation of broths purified by MF and UF membranes. Moreover, in order to determine the dominant fouling mechanism leading to flux decline, Hermia’s model was applied. Finally, an effective cleaning method of the NF membrane is presented.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Fermentation Broths

The investigations have been focused on the separation of 1,3-PD fermentation broths obtained via glycerol fermentation with the use of Citrobacter freundii bacteria. The detailed information on the fermentation process conditions have been presented in several previous articles [39,45,48,49]. After the fermentation, the broths contained bacteria; 1,3-PD; glycerol; mono-carboxylic acids (lactic, acetic and formic acid) and dicarboxylic acid (succinic acid); and ethanol, as well as residual bacterial growth medium. The concentrations of the chemical species present in the fermentation broths used in the present study were shown in [17].

2.2. Pretreatment Processes

According to the research objectives, the impact of the pretreatment process on the NF270 membrane performance has been studied. Based on the literature data, for this purpose, 1,3-PD fermentation broths were pretreated by ceramic MF and UF membranes (TAMI Industries, Lyon, France), the specifications of which are presented in Table 1. The studies were conducted in a conventional cross-flow filtration unit (Figure 2). The methodology of the above-mentioned processes was described in detail in previous studies [39,45].

2.3. NF Process

For investigations of the NF used for the separation of purified fermentation broths, the Sepa-CFII flat membrane module manufactured by GE Osmonics (Minnetonka, MN, USA), with the commercial flat-sheet thin-film polyamide NF270 nanofiltration membrane (Table 2) from DOW-Filmtec (Minneapolis, USA), was used. A schematic diagram of the experimental apparatus is presented in Figure 3. The detailed information on the experimental set-up was described in a recently published paper [17].
For comparative purposes, the NF process for both MF and UF permeates was carried out under the same, strictly controlled conditions. The feed temperature, transmembrane pressure (TMP) and feed flow rate were equal to 298 K, 1.4 MPa and 10 L/min, respectively. Each measurement series lasted 40 h.
The NF membrane cleaning was performed under the temperature 298 K and involved two stages. In the first one, the module was rinsing with distilled water for 15 min, and then with 0.1% NaOH solution for the same period of time.

2.4. Analytical Methods

The analytical methods used in the present study were presented in the previously published works [39,50]. The NF membrane morphology and the composition of the scale layer formed on its surface were studied using a Hitachi SU80 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) with Energy-dispersive X-ray Spectrometer (EDS). Samples were sputter coated with chromium.

2.5. Analysis of Fouling Mechanism

It has been widely established in the literature that in order to determine the dominant fouling mechanism during the NF process, Hermia’s model can be used. Indeed, it is one of the most comprehensive fouling prediction models [51]. Several researchers investigated the possibility of applying this model to investigate the mechanism of the permeate flux decline during the NF process of various feed solutions, such as fermentation broth [13], surface water [51,52], wastewater [53], juice [54], acid whey [55], red dye [56] and propolis extract [57].
The above-mentioned model is expressed by the following equation [58]:
d 2 t dV 2 = k ( dt dV ) n
where t is the filtration process time; V is the permeate volume; k is constant; and n is the characteristic exponent depending on the fouling mechanism, which includes: cake formation (n = 0), intermediate blocking (n = 1.0), standard blocking (n = 1.5) and complete blocking (n = 2.0). From the literature mentioned earlier, the characteristics of the above-mentioned mechanisms are as follows. (i) Cake formation (Figure 4a): the solutes’ diameter is larger than the membrane pores’ size, they deposit on the particles that already block the pores, and as a result, a cake layer is formed on the membrane surface. (ii) Intermediate blocking (Figure 4b): a single particle can precipitate on other particles to form multi-layers. (iii) Standard blocking (Figure 4c): particles are adsorbed and deposited on the internal pore wall, constricting the pore volume. (iv) Complete blocking (Figure 4d): the foulant’s size is similar to the size of the membrane pores, and consequently, the number of open pores is reduced.
In the present study, Hermia’s model was used in order to evaluate the fouling mechanism of the NF270 membrane during the separation of pretreated fermentation broths. For this purpose, the fitness of the obtained permeate flux values with the above-mentioned mechanisms was defined by determining the correlation coefficients, R2, reported from linear regression analysis [59].

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Quality of MF and UF Permeates

In the first strategy investigated, the 1,3-PD fermentation broths were purified with the use of the MF ceramic membrane with the nominal pore size equal to 0.14 µm (Table 1). The permeate quality was determined mainly in terms of the turbidity and sterility. It was confirmed that the MF membrane ensured the permeate characterized by turbidity at the level of 0.2 NTU. This finding is in line with the results demonstrated previously [39,60]. Figure 5 shows the changes in the log CFU (colony-forming units) in the feed and permeate samples analyzed during the MF process. It was determined that throughout the process run, the log CFU in the feed and permeate was in the ranges 16.6–18.1 and 4.4–5.4, respectively. Therefore, it can be concluded that the MF membrane allowed reducing the number of bacteria cells present in the permeate. It should be pointed out that observations reported in the literature in terms of providing the sterile permeate by MF membranes are unequivocal, and in some cases, non-repetitive. The results obtained in the present study could not be unequivocally matched to the observations demonstrated in previous works [39,60], wherein it was pointed out that the membrane ensured sterile permeate. Of particular importance to the current study, the non-sterility of the permeate obtained during the MF processing of biological solutions has also been reported by Dahiya et al. [38]. The authors demonstrated that a ceramic tubular membrane with the average size of pores at 194 nm ensured the cell rejection of the bacteria Kocuria rhizophila BR-1 equal to 99.6%, with an average permeate flux of 3.6 L/m2h at a pressure of 69 kPa and a cross-flow rate of 100 L/h. In turn, Persson et al. [42] found that a ceramic tubular membrane with an average size equal to 0.2 µm provided 100% cell retention of the bacteria Lactococcus lactis ssp. lactis under a wide range of operational parameters. The varying effectiveness of bacteria retention by MF membranes results from the fact that it depends on several factors, such as the size of membrane pores and microorganisms, as well as the process conditions. In addition, as indicated in [61], bacteria of the same size may behave differently during the filtration process, since the passage of bacterial cells through the membrane pores is determined by the mechanical properties of the bacterial cell wall.
Clarification of the feed containing bacteria can cause their development in different parts of the membrane installation. Hence, to gain further insight, in the next stage of experimental research, the effectiveness of the bacteria removal with the use of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) solution was investigated. In the present study, NaOH solution was gradually added to the broth (pH = 7), and after 30 min of feed circulation, the number of bacteria was determined. As expected, the addition of NaOH solution led to a decrease in the number of bacteria present in the feed (Figure 6). Indeed, at feed pH equal to 7, 8.5 and 9.4, the log CFU was equal to 12.69, 11.90 and 10.50, respectively. Finally, after 30 min of feed (pH ≥ 10.3) recirculation, no bacteria were detected. Undoubtedly, the obtained results highlight the efficiency of NaOH in providing a sterile filtration system.
Similar to the MF process, the quality of the permeate obtained using the UF membrane was determined mainly in terms of the turbidity and sterility. It has been noted that the permeate turbidity was at the level of 0.1 NTU. Importantly, it has been determined that the obtained permeate was sterile. Hence, it should be pointed out that the results obtained in the present study are in line with those reported previously [45].
The above-discussed differences between the two pretreatment processes investigated in the present study can be attributed mainly to the significant difference in the size of the membranes’ pores. To sum up, it should be indicated that both membranes used ensured the permeate was characterized by low turbidity (˂0.2 NTU). Nonetheless, it must be noted that the MF membrane provided a reduction in the number of bacteria present in the permeate, while the UF process allowed obtaining sterile permeate.

3.2. NF Membrane Performance and Fouling Mechanism

The NF270 membrane ensured permeate characterized by a turbidity of 0.15 NTU for both type of solutions was used as a feed. Furthermore, it was determined that although the MF permeate contained the cell bacteria Citrobacter freundii, the obtained permeate was cell-free. This finding confirmed that NF technology is suitable for the treatment of fermentation broths. The retention degree of individual components was thoroughly discussed in the previously published study [17].
Figure 7 shows changes in the normalized permeate flux during the long-term NF processes performed for MF and UF permeates. Each of the NF processes was divided into five several-hour stages. After each, the membrane was rinsed with distilled water, and the process was restarted. It can be clearly seen that for both solutions, the permeate flux decreased significantly during the first hours of the process run. Indeed, after 60 min, the normalized flux of 0.30 and 0.37 was noted for the MF and UF permeates, respectively. Subsequently, the flux systematically decreased. After 6 h, the flux corresponded to 0.18 and 0.19 of its initial value for the MF and UF permeates, respectively. Undoubtedly, the obtained reduction in membrane performance was caused by the fouling phenomenon. This observation is in line with results reported in the literature. Indeed, the decrease in the NF membrane performance during the separation of fermentation broths was presented in several others studies [10,11,13]. Further investigations into the membrane performance (Figure 7, periods II-V) confirmed the low values of the normalized permeate flux. However, it should be pointed out that for each phase analyzed, the flux for the UF permeate was higher than that for the MF permeate. More specifically, the normalized flux for the UF permeate was higher by several percentage points. This observation clearly showed that the feed pretreatment process has a significant impact on the NF permeate flux. The reported difference may be attributed to different fouling mechanisms influencing the permeate decline.
The above-presented finding has been confirmed by the results obtained through the application of Hermia’s model (Equation (1)). For the two types of feed solution used, some difference in the dominant fouling mechanism was found. Indeed, in terms of the MF permeate, the experimental data fit most closely with the cake formation mechanism (Figure 4a) throughout the NF process model run (Appendix A, Table A1). As indicated earlier, cake formation is caused by foulants present in the feed that deposit on the particles that already block the pores. Hence, it can be noted that microorganisms and high-molecular-weight uncharged solutes present in the MF permeate built the cake layer on the NF membrane surface, which led to a decline in the permeate flux. In turn, for the UF permeate used as a feed, it was found that membrane blocking occurred in two separate phases. During the first stage, the standard blocking (Figure 4c) was dominant, and then cake formation occurred (Appendix A, Table A1). An important point that should be noted is that the cut-off of the used ceramic membrane was equal to 450 Da, while the molar masses of the organic species presented in the fermentation broths were in the range from 46.05 to 118.08 Da [17]. Hence, it can be indicated that first, the organic compounds blocked the membrane pores, and then formation of a cake layer was dominant.
Finally, it should be pointed out that rinsing the NF membrane with distilled water was not effective. Indeed, it led to an increase of the permeate flux up to 30% of its maximum value. However, it has been found that 0.1% NaOH solution allowed recovering the membrane performance after the separation of the MF and UF performances. It can be explained by the fact that alkaline cleaning agents remove foulants through hydrolyzing proteins, electrostatically repelling charged solutes, as well as dissolving organic macromolecules [62]. Worthy of note, NaOH is one of the most commonly used cleaning agents in membrane technology. Performing a thorough literature review allows indicating that NaOH solutions have been successfully used in membranes fouled by various biological solutions during pressure-driven membrane techniques, e.g., MF [63], UF [50,64] and NF [65].

3.3. Deposit Composition

After completing the measurements series, the NF270 membrane was removed from the module. Figure 8 presents the photography of the membrane after the treatment process of fermentation broths purified by the MF membrane. It can be clearly seen that the membrane surface was covered by foulants. A mesh pattern was created on the membrane surface. In places where its fibers touched the membrane, darker lines are visible, indicating places where a thicker layer of deposit occurred. The results of SEM studies of a new membrane (Figure 9a) and that used for the treatment process (Figure 9b) confirmed that the latter membrane was covered with a layer of deposit. Most of the deposit was amorphous, although agglomerates were also observed. With significant image magnification (35k), bacterial cells were observed (Figure 9c). To be complete, it should be noted that bacteria presence can cause the development of biofouling, which during industrial long-term operation, can lead to rapid damage of NF modules.
It is noteworthy that after the process using the broth pretreated by the UF process as a feed, the membrane color was much brighter than that shown in Figure 8, and no characteristic grid lines were visible. Indeed, the amount of deposit formed on the membrane surface was lower. Moreover, no bacteria were visible, and inorganic agglomerates were formed locally (Figure 9d). It is in agreement with findings presented earlier, which demonstrated that during the first stage of the NF process of the UF permeate, standard blocking was the dominant fouling mechanism.
Results of the SEM-EDX analysis are shown in Table 3. For both processes investigated, the greatest content was noted for such elements as C and O. It is attributed to the fact that in SEM-EDX analyses, the electron beam penetrates a few micrometers into the membrane; hence, in addition to the deposit composition, the analysis also included the elements forming the polyamide top layer of the NF270 membrane deposit [17]. It was found that the permeate MF used as a feed in the NF process formed deposits mainly containing such elements as Fe (4.678%), S (8.922%), Si (0.318%) and Ca (0.105%), as well as smaller amounts of P 50.074%) and Al (0.087%). With regards to the UF permeate, it has been noted that the deposit contained significantly less C (26.765%) compared to the results obtained for the MF permeate (41.862%). This finding indicated that during the NF process of the UF permeate, less protein was deposited on the membrane surface. It confirmed that the UF processes ensured high protein retention. Worthy of note, analysis of the inorganic agglomerates (Figure 10) composition showed the presence of Al, Si, Mg and O, indicating the formation of aluminosilicates.

4. Conclusions

The purpose of the current work was to investigate the impact of the feed pretreatment process on the performance of the long-term NF membrane used for the separation of 1,3-PD fermentation broths. A significant difference in the quality of the MF and UF permeates used as a feed in the NF process was observed. Indeed, it was found that the MF membrane (0.14 µm) endured the reduction in the number of bacteria cells present in the permeate, while the UF membrane (450 Da) allowed obtaining sterile permeate. Consequently, the NF process of the UF permeate showed several percentage points higher performance. The mechanism of the NF membrane fouling was investigated with the use of Hermia’s model. It was noted that during the separation of the MF permeate, the formation of a cake layer played a major role in the permeate flux decline. In turn, with regards to the UF permeate, membrane blocking occurred in two separate phases involving standard blocking and then cake layer formation. Finally, the strategy of NF membrane cleaning with the use of a 0.1% NaOH solution for 15 min was proposed. Undoubtedly, the findings presented in this study provide insights into the role of the feed pretreatment process in the performance of the NF process applied for the separation of fermentation broths.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Appendix A

Table
Table A1. Coefficient of determination (R2) of Hermia’s model.
Table A1. Coefficient of determination (R2) of Hermia’s model.
UF PeriodUF Time [h]Complete BlockingStandard BlockingIntermediate BlockingCake Formation
MF PermeateUF PermeateMF PermeateUF PermeateMF PermeateUF PermeateMF PermeateUF Permeate
I0–60.66890.80160.76470.8738 *0.85250.90750.9546 *0.8706
II8–150.90480.82990.93150.85590.94750.87580.9519 *0.9007 *
III17–240.82580.87020.87620.87920.90820.88700.9105 *0.8986 *
IV26–310.94240.97070.96380.97580.97230.97110.9727 *0.9766 *
V33–400.91780.94750.95410.95870.97030.96400.9719 *0.9642 *
* Indicates the best-fitting model.

References

  1. Figueira, M.; Rodríguez-Jiménez, D.; López, J.; Reig, M.; Cortina, J.L.; Valderrama, C. Experimental and economic evaluation of nanofiltration as a pre-treatment for added-value elements recovery from seawater desalination brines. Desalination 2023, 549, 116321. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Kaya, C.; Jarma, Y.; Guler, E.; Kabay, N.; Arda, M.; Yükse, M. Seawater Desalination by using Nanofiltration (NF) and Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO) Membranes in Sequential Mode of Operation. JMSR 2020, 6, 40–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Roy, Y.; Sharqawy, M.H.; Lienhard, J.H. Modeling of flat-sheet and spiral-wound nanofiltration configurations and its application in seawater nanofiltration. J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 493, 360–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Zhang, T.; He, Z.; Wang, K.; Wang, X.; Xie, Y.F.; Hou, L. Loose nanofiltration membranes for selective rejection of natural organic matter and mineral salts in drinking water treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 2022, 662, 120970. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Wang, D.; Yuan, H.; Chen, Y.; Ni, Y.; Huang, L.; Mondal, A.K.; Lin, S.; Huang, F.; Zhang, H. A cellulose-based nanofiltration membrane with a stable three-layer structure for the treatment of drinking water. Cellulose 2020, 27, 8237–8253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Hosseini, S.S.; Khodadadi, H.; Bakhshi, B. Fabrication, tuning and performance analysis of polyacrylonitrile (PAN)-derived microfiltration membranes for bacteria removal from drinking water. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 2021, 38, 32–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cifuentes-Cabezas, M.; Galinha, C.F.; Crespo, J.G.; Cinta Vincent-Vela, M.; Antonio Mendoza-Roca, J.; Álvarez-Blanco, S. Nanofiltration of wastewaters from olive oil production: Study of operating conditions and analysis of fouling by 2D fluorescence and FTIR spectroscopy. Chem. Eng. J. 2023, 454, 140025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lee, J.; Shin, Y.; Boo, C.; Hong, S. Performance, limitation, and opportunities of acid-resistant nanofiltration membranes for industrial wastewater treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 2023, 666, 121142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Cabrera, S.M.; Winnubst, L.; Richter, H.; Voigt, I.; McCutcheon, J.; Nijmeijer, A. Performance evaluation of an industrial ceramic nanofiltration unit for wastewater treatment in oil production. Water Res. 2022, 220, 118593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Mancini, E.; Ramin, P.; Styrbæck, P.; Bjergholt, C.; Soheil Mansouri, S.; Gernaey, K.V.; Luo, J.; Pinelo, M. Separation of succinic acid from fermentation broth: Dielectric exclusion, Donnan effect and diffusion as the most influential mass transfer mechanisms. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 281, 119904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Andrzejewski, A.; Szczygiełda, M.; Prochaska, K. Optimisation of lactic bio-acid separation from actual post-fermentation broth using nanofiltration process and fouling analysis. DWT 2021, 214, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Cerceau Alves, Y.P.; Fernandes Antunes, F.A.; Silverio da Silva, S.; Forte, M.B.S. From by- to bioproducts: Selection of a nanofiltration membrane for biotechnological xylitol purification and process optimization. Food Bioprod. Process. 2021, 125, 79–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Antczak, J.; Szczygiełda, M.; Prochaska, K. Nanofiltration separation of succinic acid from post-fermentation broth: Impact of process conditions and fouling analysis. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2019, 77, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Khunnonkwao, P.; Jantama, K.; Kanchanatawee, S.; Galier, S.; Roux-de Balmann, H. A two steps membrane process for the recovery of succinic acid from fermentation broth. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2018, 207, 451–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Khairul Zaman, N.; Jeng Yih, L.; Pui Vun, C.; Rohani, R.; Mohammad, A.W. Recovery of Organic Acids from Fermentation Broth Using Nanofiltration Technologies: A Review. JPS 2017, 28, 85–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Zaman, N.K.; Rohani, R.; Abdul Shukor, M.H.; Mohamad, A.W. Purification of High Value Succinic Acid from Biomass Fermentation Broth Via Nanofiltration. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 2016, 9, 21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Tomczak, W. The Application of the Nanofiltration Membrane NF270 for Separation of Fermentation Broths. Membranes 2022, 12, 1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bastrzyk, J.; Gryta, M.; Karakulski, K. Fouling of nanofiltration membranes used for separation of fermented glycerol solutions. Chem. Pap. 2014, 68, 757–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Yadav, D.; Karki, S.; Ingole, P.G. Current advances and opportunities in the development of nanofiltration (NF) membranes in the area of wastewater treatment, water desalination, biotechnological and pharmaceutical applications. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2022, 10, 108109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vrouwenvelder, J.S.; Manolarakis, S.A.; van der Hoek, J.P.; van Paassen, J.A.M.; van der Meer, W.G.J.; van Agtmaal, J.M.C.; Prummel, H.D.M.; Kruithof, J.C.; van Loosdrecht, M.C.M. Quantitative biofouling diagnosis in full scale nanofiltration and reverse osmosis installations. Water Res. 2008, 42, 4856–4868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Allaoui, B.E.; Chakhtouna, H.; Zari, N.; Bouhfid, R.; Qaiss, A. Recent developments in functionalized polymer NF membranes for biofouling control. Emergent Mater. 2022, 5, 1345–1371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhao, F.; Xu, K.; Ren, H.; Ding, L.; Geng, J.; Zhang, Y. Combined effects of organic matter and calcium on biofouling of nanofiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 486, 177–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Ivnitsky, H.; Katz, I.; Minz, D.; Shimoni, E.; Chen, Y.; Tarchitzky, J.; Semiat, R.; Dosoretz, C.G. Characterization of membrane biofouling in nanofiltration processes of wastewater treatment. Desalination 2005, 185, 255–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Du, X.; Mo, Z.; Li, Z.; Zhang, W.; Luo, Y.; Nie, J.; Wang, Z.; Liang, H. Boron-doped diamond (BDD) electro-oxidation coupled with nanofiltration for secondary wastewater treatment: Antibiotics degradation and biofouling. Environ. Int. 2021, 146, 106291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Xu, R.; Qin, W.; Zhang, B.; Wang, X.; Li, T.; Zhang, Y.; Wen, X. Nanofiltration in pilot scale for wastewater reclamation: Long-term performance and membrane biofouling characteristics. Chem. Eng. J. 2020, 395, 125087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Sun, Y.; Yi, F.; Li, R.; Min, X.; Qin, H.; Cheng, S.; Liu, Y. Inorganic–Organic Hybrid Membrane Based on Pillararene-Intercalated MXene Nanosheets for Efficient Water Purification. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2022, 61, e202200482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Liu, L.; Liu, Y.; Chen, X.; Feng, S.; Wan, Y.; Lu, H.; Luo, J. A nanofiltration membrane with outstanding antifouling ability: Exploring the structure-property-performance relationship. J. Membr. Sci. 2023, 668, 121205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Korkut, S.; Vatanpour, V.; Koyuncu, I. Pretreatments Before the Nanofiltration Technique. In Nanofiltration Membrane for Water Purification; Ahmad, A., Alshammari, M.B., Eds.; Sustainable Materials and Technology; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2023; pp. 37–54. ISBN 978-981-19531-4-9. [Google Scholar]
  29. Marzban, R.; Saberi, F.; Shirazi, M.M.A. Microfiltration and ultrafiltration of Bacillus thuringiensis fermentation broth: Membrane performance and sporecrystal recovery approach. Braz. J. Chem. Eng. 2016, 33, 783–791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Belgada, A.; Achiou, B.; Alami Younssi, S.; Charik, F.Z.; Ouammou, M.; Cody, J.A.; Benhida, R.; Khaless, K. Low-cost ceramic microfiltration membrane made from natural phosphate for pretreatment of raw seawater for desalination. J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2021, 41, 1613–1621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Samhari, O.; Alami Younssi, S.; Rabiller-Baudry, M.; Loulergue, P.; Bouhria, M.; Achiou, B.; Ouammou, M. Fabrication of flat ceramic microfiltration membrane from natural kaolinite for seawater pretreatment for desalination and wastewater clarification. DWT 2020, 194, 59–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cordier, C.; Stavrakakis, C.; Morga, B.; Degrémont, L.; Voulgaris, A.; Bacchi, A.; Sauvade, P.; Coelho, F.; Moulin, P. Removal of pathogens by ultrafiltration from sea water. Environ. Int. 2020, 142, 105809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Rasouli, Y.; Abbasi, M.; Hashemifard, S.A. Fabrication, characterization, fouling behavior and performance study of ceramic microfiltration membranes for oily wastewater treatment. J. Asian Ceram. Soc. 2019, 7, 476–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Wu, Y.; Zhang, X.; Liu, S.; Zhang, B.; Lu, Y.; Wang, T. Preparation and applications of microfiltration carbon membranes for the purification of oily wastewater. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2016, 51, 1872–1880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ghalami Choobar, B.; Alaei Shahmirzadi, M.A.; Kargari, A.; Manouchehri, M. Fouling mechanism identification and analysis in microfiltration of laundry wastewater. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 2019, 7, 103030. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Manouchehri, M.; Kargari, A. Water recovery from laundry wastewater by the cross flow microfiltration process: A strategy for water recycling in residential buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 168, 227–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Yang, X.; Zhou, S.; Li, M.; Wang, R.; Zhao, Y. Purification of cellulase fermentation broth via low cost ceramic microfiltration membranes with nanofibers-like attapulgite separation layers. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017, 175, 435–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Dahiya, D.; Kumar, M.; Pugazhenthi, G.; Vasanth, D. Separation of Bacteria Kocuria rhizophila from Fermentation Broth by Cross-Flow Microfiltration Using Inexpensive Tubular Ceramic Membrane. Arab. J. Sci. Eng. 2022, 47, 5767–5776. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. Cross-flow microfiltration of glycerol fermentation broths with Citrobacter freundii. Membranes 2020, 10, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Gryta, M.; Tomczak, W. Microfiltration of post-fermentation broth with backflushing membrane cleaning. Chem. Pap. 2015, 69, 544–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Phanthumchinda, N.; Thitiprasert, S.; Tanasupawat, S.; Assabumrungrat, S.; Thongchul, N. Process and cost modeling of lactic acid recovery from fermentation broths by membrane-based process. Process Biochem. 2018, 68, 205–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Persson, A.; Jo¨nsson, A.-S.; Zacchi, G. Separation of lactic acid-producing bacteria from fermentation broth using a ceramic microfiltration membrane with constant permeate flow. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2001, 72, 269–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Lee, H.D.; Lee, M.Y.; Hwang, Y.S.; Cho, Y.H.; Kim, H.W.; Park, H.B. Separation and Purification of Lactic Acid from Fermentation Broth Using Membrane-Integrated Separation Processes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2017, 56, 8301–8310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Kresnowati, M.T.A.P.; Desiriani, R.; Wenten, I.G. Ultrafiltration of Hemicellulose Hydrolysate Fermentation Broth; AIP Publishing: West Jakarta, Indonesia, 2017; p. 020024. [Google Scholar]
  45. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. Clarification of 1,3-propanediol fermentation broths by using a ceramic fine UF membrane. Membranes 2020, 10, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Chen, X.-S.; Gao, Y.; Zhen, B.; Han, D.; Zhang, J.-H.; Mao, Z.-G. Separation and purification of ϵ-poly- l -lysine from fermentation broth. Process Biochem. 2016, 51, 134–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Zhao, D.; Yu, S. A review of recent advance in fouling mitigation of NF/RO membranes in water treatment: Pretreatment, membrane modification, and chemical cleaning. Desalination Water Treat. 2015, 55, 870–891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Tomczak, W.; Grubecki, I.; Gryta, M. The Use of NaOH Solutions for Fouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor: A Feasibility Study. Membranes 2021, 11, 887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. The Application of Cellulose Acetate Membranes for Separation of Fermentation Broths by the Reverse Osmosis: A Feasibility Study. IJMS 2022, 23, 11738. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. The application of ultrafiltration for separation of glycerol solution fermented by bacteria. Pol. J. Chem. Technol. 2013, 15, 115–120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Chang, E.-E.; Yang, S.-Y.; Huang, C.-P.; Liang, C.-H.; Chiang, P.-C. Assessing the fouling mechanisms of high-pressure nanofiltration membrane using the modified Hermia model and the resistance-in-series model. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2011, 79, 329–336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Heidari, S.; Amirinejad, M.; Mirzadeh, S.S.; Wood, D.A. Insights into colloidal membrane fouling mechanisms for nanofiltration of surface water using single and hybrid membrane processes. Polym. Adv. Technol. 2021, 32, 2517–2530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Garcia-Ivars, J.; Martella, L.; Massella, M.; Carbonell-Alcaina, C.; Alcaina-Miranda, M.-I.; Iborra-Clar, M.-I. Nanofiltration as tertiary treatment method for removing trace pharmaceutically active compounds in wastewater from wastewater treatment plants. Water Res. 2017, 125, 360–373. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Arend, G.D.; Rezzadori, K.; Soares, L.S.; Petrus, J.C.C. Performance of nanofiltration process during concentration of strawberry juice. J. Food Sci. Technol. 2019, 56, 2312–2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Simonič, M.; Pintarič, Z.N. Study of Acid Whey Fouling after Protein Isolation Using Nanofiltration. Membranes 2021, 11, 492. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Hairom, N.H.H.; Mohammad, A.W.; Kadhum, A.A.H. Nanofiltration of hazardous Congo red dye: Performance and flux decline analysis. J. Water Process Eng. 2014, 4, 99–106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Leo, C.P.; Yeo, K.L.; Lease, Y.; Derek, C.J.C. Fouling evaluation on nanofiltration for concentrating phenolic and flavonoid compounds in propolis extract. Membr. Water Treat. 2016, 7, 327–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Hermia, J. Constant pressure blocking filtration laws-application to power-law non-newtonian fluids. Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 1982, 60, 183–187. [Google Scholar]
  59. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. Application of ultrafiltration ceramic membrane for separation of oily wastewater generated by maritime transportation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 261, 118259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Tomczak, W.; Gryta, M. Comparison of Polypropylene and Ceramic Microfiltration Membranes Applied for Separation of 1,3-PD Fermentation Broths and Saccharomyces cerevisiae Yeast Suspensions. Membranes 2021, 11, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lebleu, N.; Roques, C.; Aimar, P.; Causserand, C. Role of the cell-wall structure in the retention of bacteria by microfiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2009, 326, 178–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Huang, J.; Luo, J.; Chen, X.; Feng, S.; Wan, Y. How Do Chemical Cleaning Agents Act on Polyamide Nanofiltration Membrane and Fouling Layer? Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2020, 59, 17653–17670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Jana, A.; Ghosh, S.; Majumdar, S. Energy efficient harvesting of Arthrospira sp. using ceramic membranes: Analyzing the effect of membrane pore size and incorporation of flocculant as fouling control strategy: Energy efficient harvesting of Arthrospira sp. using ceramic membranes. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2018, 93, 1085–1096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Waszak, M.; Gryta, M. The ultrafiltration ceramic membrane used for broth separation in membrane bioreactor. Chem. Eng. J. 2016, 305, 129–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Wang, K.; Li, W.; Fan, Y.; Xing, W. Integrated Membrane Process for the Purification of Lactic Acid from a Fermentation Broth Neutralized with Sodium Hydroxide. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52, 2412–2417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Processes 11 00817 g001 550
Figure 1. Number of research papers focused on the applications of MF and UF processes for pretreatment of fermentation broths according to ScienceDirect. Data retrieved: 6 February 2023.
Figure 1. Number of research papers focused on the applications of MF and UF processes for pretreatment of fermentation broths according to ScienceDirect. Data retrieved: 6 February 2023.
Processes 11 00817 g001
Processes 11 00817 g002 550
Figure 2. Experimental set-up of the cross-flow filtration unit. 1—MF module, 2—measuring cylinder, 3—heat exchanger, 4—controller of temperature and flow rate, 5—pump, 6—rotameter, 7—feed tank, 8—heater and P—manometer.
Figure 2. Experimental set-up of the cross-flow filtration unit. 1—MF module, 2—measuring cylinder, 3—heat exchanger, 4—controller of temperature and flow rate, 5—pump, 6—rotameter, 7—feed tank, 8—heater and P—manometer.
Processes 11 00817 g002
Processes 11 00817 g003 550
Figure 3. Experimental NF set-up. 1—SEPA-CFII module, 2—pump, 3—feed tank, 4–cooling bath, 5—thermostatic Grundfos valve, P—manometer and T—thermometer.
Figure 3. Experimental NF set-up. 1—SEPA-CFII module, 2—pump, 3—feed tank, 4–cooling bath, 5—thermostatic Grundfos valve, P—manometer and T—thermometer.
Processes 11 00817 g003
Processes 11 00817 g004 550
Figure 4. Schematic description of fouling mechanisms: (a) cake formation; (b) intermediate blocking; (c) standard blocking; (d) complete blocking.
Figure 4. Schematic description of fouling mechanisms: (a) cake formation; (b) intermediate blocking; (c) standard blocking; (d) complete blocking.
Processes 11 00817 g004
Processes 11 00817 g005 550
Figure 5. Changes in the log CFU during the MF process of 1,3-PD fermentation broth.
Figure 5. Changes in the log CFU during the MF process of 1,3-PD fermentation broth.
Processes 11 00817 g005
Processes 11 00817 g006 550
Figure 6. Impact of feed pH on the log CFU in the fermentation broth.
Figure 6. Impact of feed pH on the log CFU in the fermentation broth.
Processes 11 00817 g006
Processes 11 00817 g007 550
Figure 7. Changes in the normalized permeate flux during the long-term NF of MF and UF permeates. Dashed line—rinsing the membrane with distilled water.
Figure 7. Changes in the normalized permeate flux during the long-term NF of MF and UF permeates. Dashed line—rinsing the membrane with distilled water.
Processes 11 00817 g007
Processes 11 00817 g008 550
Figure 8. Photography of the NF membrane after treatment of MF permeate.
Figure 8. Photography of the NF membrane after treatment of MF permeate.
Processes 11 00817 g008
Processes 11 00817 g009 550
Figure 9. SEM images: (a) New (clean) NF270 membrane surface; (b) NF270 membrane surface covered by deposit after the separation of MF permeate; (c) Bacterial cells present in the deposit shown in Figure 9b; (d) NF270 membrane surface covered by deposit after the separation of UF permeate.
Figure 9. SEM images: (a) New (clean) NF270 membrane surface; (b) NF270 membrane surface covered by deposit after the separation of MF permeate; (c) Bacterial cells present in the deposit shown in Figure 9b; (d) NF270 membrane surface covered by deposit after the separation of UF permeate.
Processes 11 00817 g009
Processes 11 00817 g010a 550Processes 11 00817 g010b 550
Figure 10. SEM-EDX analysis (elements mapping) of deposit formed on the NF membrane surface during the separation of UF permeate: (a) O; (b) Mg; (c) Al; (d) Si; (e) Fe.
Figure 10. SEM-EDX analysis (elements mapping) of deposit formed on the NF membrane surface during the separation of UF permeate: (a) O; (b) Mg; (c) Al; (d) Si; (e) Fe.
Processes 11 00817 g010aProcesses 11 00817 g010b
Table
Table 1. Specifications of the MF and UF membranes used for pretreatment of fermentation broths.
Table 1. Specifications of the MF and UF membranes used for pretreatment of fermentation broths.
ParameterMembrane MFMembrane UF
Number of channels [-]11
Selective layerZrO2TiO2
Support materialTiO2α-Al2O3
Nominal pore size µm/Cut-off [Da]0.14450
Internal diameter [mm]5.67.0
Surface area [m2]0.00390.0047
Table
Table 2. Specification of the NF membrane used in the present study.
Table 2. Specification of the NF membrane used in the present study.
ParameterMembrane NF
Skin-layer materialpolyamide
Cut-off [Da]200–300
Average pore radius [mm]0.43
MgSO4 rejection [%]97
NaCl rejection [%]50
Surface area [m2]0.0150
Table
Table 3. Results of the SEM-EDX analysis: membrane NF270 after the treatment of MF and UF permeate.
Table 3. Results of the SEM-EDX analysis: membrane NF270 after the treatment of MF and UF permeate.
ElementWeight [%]
MF PermeateUF Permeate
C41.86226.765
O43.95352.898
Nand5.702
Al0.0870.124
Si0.3180.017
P0.0745.201
Clnd0.671
Knd0.359
S8.922nd
Ca0.1050.551
Fe4.6787.712
nd—not detected.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tomczak, W. Fouling of the Nanofiltration Membrane NF270 Used for Separation of Fermentation Broths: Impact of Feed Pretreatment Process. Processes 2023, 11, 817. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11030817

AMA Style

Tomczak W. Fouling of the Nanofiltration Membrane NF270 Used for Separation of Fermentation Broths: Impact of Feed Pretreatment Process. Processes. 2023; 11(3):817. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11030817

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tomczak, Wirginia. 2023. "Fouling of the Nanofiltration Membrane NF270 Used for Separation of Fermentation Broths: Impact of Feed Pretreatment Process" Processes 11, no. 3: 817. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11030817

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop