26 Feature
Filtration+Separation September/October 2019
Water & wastewater
Successful removal
of trace substances
he latest analysis technology makes it possible to test
T water supplies for substances which occur in small
quantities but place a burden on humans and the
environment. Here, we look at the reliable rejection of
micropollutants/trace substances by reverse osmosis.
Over the past few decades, the water
quality of surface waters has improved
significantly due to the introduction of
modern wastewater treatment technolo-
gies and a tightening of discharge limits.
However, it is only thanks to the latest
analysis technology that it is also possible
to test water supplies for substances
which, although they only occur in small
quantities, can nevertheless place a
burden on humans and the environment.
These ‘trace substances’ are present in
stretches of water at concentrations of
nanograms per liter or a few micrograms
per liter at most. Entering the water cycle
via domestic or industrial wastewater, the
synthetic organic substances originate
from a variety of sources, such as Pharma-
ceutical and Personal Care Products
(CCPC’s), pesticides, or household and
industrial chemicals. They cannot be
removed from wastewater using conven-
tional treatment technology and therefore
enter the environment.
There are various approaches to the
removal of trace substances. For example,
research projects are currently examining
adsorptive and oxidative treatments, as
well as membrane filtration or a combina-
tion of these technologies. The latter
approach is the most promising, as the
technologies each exhibit different weak-
nesses. One weakness using RO in this
application is fouling and the energy
consumption due to the applied pressure.
A project to improve the fouling and the
www.filtsep.com
energy consumption is ongoing. In this
article the focus is the status of the opti-
mization of the RO element to the
mentioned tasks.
BMBF research project
With support from the German Federal
Ministry of Education and Research
(BMBF), a project entitled ‘Multi-ReUse’
(www.water-multi-reuse.org) is currently
underway with a view to comparing and
evaluating various technologies. As well as
institutes (e.g., IWW Water Centre
Mülheim) and universities, the project’s
participants include a manufacturer of
ultrafiltration (UF) elements (Inge GmbH),
the water supplier Oldenburgisch-Ostfrie-
sische Wasserverband (OOWV), and the
Lanxess Liquid Purification Technologies
business unit, represented by IAB Bitter-
feld (a wholly owned subsidiary of
Lanxess) as a producer of RO elements.
The project aims to develop and pilot
modular process chains and to demon-
strate the flawless production of service
Results of RO pilot test as a fourth treatment stage
Precipitation/
flocculation
Biological treatment with
clarifier
Ultrafiltration
Figure 1: Wastewater treatment at the BMBF research project’s pilot plant in Nordenham.
water in the necessary quantities. For this
purpose, a pilot plant was installed at a
water treatment plant in Nordenham, in
northern Germany, as one possible
application for the reuse of wastewater in
coastal areas is in supplying service water
to businesses and industry. In the district
of the plant, this is currently supplied by
long water pipes running from the water-
works of surrounding regions. Otherwise,
more-expensive desalination processes
would be necessary to meet the water
demand of local industry.
Pilot process
The pilot unit consists of two separate
lines to allow the comparison of different
process conditions. Following the biolog-
ical stage, the wastewater is pretreated by
precipitation or flocculation followed by
ultrafiltration (UF). Whereas the function
of UF is to remove particles, the removal
of salts and micropollutants is performed
by reverse osmosis. Another objective was
to implement a stable and energy-effi-
cient process. Each RO line has a 4 in
Reverse osmosis
 Feature 27
Filtration+Separation September/October 2019

biofouling. The feed spacer is a crucial

component of spiral wound elements, as
it influences both the height of the feed
channel and the flow. Compared to the
standard spacer, the new feed spacer has
different thread filament heights. Thick
and thin filaments alternate (called ASD
spacer for alternating-strand design).

During almost 200 days of testing, the

elements were exposed to different
temperatures and water qualities.
During the period indicated (Figure 2),
cleaning was carried out on days 83
and 147 on both lines. The line
Figure 2. Normalized flux of the FR and ULP element type. equipped with ASD elements showed a
lower pressure drop throughout the test
Results of RO pilot test as a fourth treatment stage phase compared to the parallel line
with standard spacers.
16

14 At the end of the test phase, the elements

hydraulic pressure drop [psi]

were removed and opened to determine

12
the type and strength of the fouling. Here
it became clear that the fouling in the
10
elements with the ASD spacer was signifi-
8 cantly lower than with the standard spacer.
The autopsy showed less organic/biological
6
fouling in the case of the ASD spacer.
RO1-ULP-std
Additionally, the rejection of critical
4 RO2-ULP-ASD
compounds was measured frequently. The
1st CIP
2 results of some are presented in Table 1.
2nd CIP
An impact of different spacer design on
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
the rejection was not observed.

Figure 3. Normalized pressure loss of the two pressure vessels.

Summary and outlook
pressure vessels with three installed As these membranes have different speci- The findings from the first experiments
elements. The element type Lewabrane® fications, the applied pressure for the FR with Lewabrane® as part of the ‘Multi-
B085 FR 4040 (FR = fouling resistance) is type was around 30% higher than that for ReUse’ project confirm the reliable rejec-
installed in one line, and the type the ULP type. However, the FR type’s tion of micropollutants/trace substances
Lewabrane® B085 ULP 4040 (ULP = ultra rejection rate both for organic substances, by reverse osmosis. It was also possible to
low pressure) is installed in the other. measured as total organic carbon (TOC), reduce the energy requirement signifi-
and for salts (measured as conductivity) cantly using a ULP membrane.
was, as expected, approx. 1.5% higher. It
RO results was shown that very high-water quality Still the denser FR membrane showed a
The test phase with the first elements could be achieved with the tested RO more stable performance due to less
lasted for around two months. During membranes, with rejection rates of over fouling. The usage of a novel feed spacer
this time, the pressure, flow rate, conduc- 95% for TOC and 97% for salts. design ASD could reduce the biological
tivity, pH, and temperature were meas- fouling, which confirmed the measure-
ured automatically several times a day. Although the pressure of the FR type was ments in the laboratories. In the next step
Water analyses were also carried out on higher the performance of this element a membrane with a permeability between
a regular basis. The same recovery and type was more constant than the ULP, as ULP and FR is tested to evaluate further
flow rates were configured for both shown in the normalized data below. the impact of the fouling on different
membrane types to allow comparison of
the fouling behavior and the elements’ In the second part of the project a novel
membrane types.
•
performance. spacer was tested to reduce the https://lanxess.com

Compound Family Ave. rejection

About the author
Sulfamethoxazol antibiotic 87.5%
Uli Doelchow, Julien Ogier of IAB
Diclofenac anti-inflammatory drug 98.5% Ionenaustauscher GmbH, Bitterfeld and
EDTA sequestrate 99.5% Dr. Jens Lipnizki of LANXESS Deutschland
GmbH
Glyphosate herbicide 94.5%

www.filtsep.com