Abstract
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-h 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.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have