Modification Strategies in Developing Antifouling Nanofiltration Membranes: History
View Latest Version
Please note this is an old version of this entry, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Contributor:
Nor Naimah Rosyadah Ahmad
,
Abdul Wahab Mohammad
,
Ebrahim Mahmoudi
,
Wei Lun Ang
,
Choe Peng Leo
,
Yeit Haan Teow

Nanofiltration (NF) is one of the promising technologies for water reclamation application, particularly in desalination, water, and wastewater treatment fields. A membrane with antifouling capability can be developed by tuning the membrane’s physicochemical properties to alter the membrane-foulant interaction.

  • nanofiltration
  • antifouling
  • modification
  • membrane

1. Introduction

It is undeniable that the world is facing increasingly severe problems with water and energy scarcity. More than 50% of the world’s population has severe water shortages, which are forecast to worsen in the coming years due to population growth [1]. This situation calls for urgent action to increase the clean water supply globally. Thus, the United Nations (UN) has established a target for water as part of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) agenda, namely Goal No. 6—“Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for everyone” [2]. To accomplish this goal, desalination technology and water recycling and reuse can be implemented.
Membrane technologies have become a possible option for increasing freshwater water supplies due to their low energy requirement, small footprint, clean process, and high productivity [3]. Nanofiltration (NF) membrane is one of the promising membrane processes for desalination and wastewater treatment. NF membranes typically have a molecular weight cut-off (MWCO) of 100–2000 Da with a nominal pore size of 1 nm, allowing them to separate monovalent salts and water from multivalent salts and low-molecular weight organics [4]. Moreover, the NF process possesses a good balance between energy usage and treatment capacity [5]. Despite the unique feature of NF and its advantages, fouling susceptibility is one of the challenges to the widespread implementation of NF membranes. In actual applications, the fouling problem is typically the most crucial aspect that may define the cut-off point of the membrane’s performance [5][6]. Membrane fouling can lead to a loss of water production and membrane integrity, lower water quality, and a shorter membrane life span [7]. Cleaning up the foulant to maintain the membrane’s performance usually involves more chemicals or energy, thereby increasing operational costs. As a result, the plant operation must bear a significant financial burden [7][8]. Therefore, it is essential to address the fouling issue to ensure the effectiveness of a membrane process in water reclamation applications, particularly in desalination, water, and wastewater treatment fields.
To alleviate the fouling problem, the research and development of antifouling membranes has become an important area. Compared to other fouling mitigation strategies, such as optimizing the operating conditions, the membrane modification approach to improve the antifouling feature is preferred because it will require only minor adjustments to existing setups [9]. Several reviews related to various NF aspects have been published thus far, including the NF application in water and wastewater treatments [10][11][12], overall NF process development and trends [13][14], ceramic NF [15][16], NF for resource recovery [17], NF for water recycling and reuse [3], and NF for dye/salt separation [18]. Concerns about the antifouling membrane topic have been reflected in some reviews, most of which focus on reverse osmosis (RO) membranes [19][20][21][22]. There are still no comprehensive reviews in the past five years that concentrate on the development of antifouling NF membranes.

2. Membrane Fouling

Generally, a fouled membrane refers to a phenomenon where an undesired accumulation of solutes occurs either outwardly on the membrane surface, inside the pores (porous membrane case), or both [23]. Unlike low pressure-based membranes such as ultrafiltration (UF) and microfiltration (MF), which experience internal fouling, the NF membrane is primarily controlled by the surface fouling and scaling associated with divalent ions [22][24]. Fouling formation causes an increase in mass transfer resistance for water permeation, reducing membrane productivity.
Based on the nature of the foulants, it is possible to classify fouling as colloidal, inorganic, organic, and biofouling (Figure 1). Colloidal fouling occurs when the colloidal particles (size range of 1 nm–1 μm) adhere or deposit on the membrane surface [20]. Natural organic matter and organic and inorganic colloids, such as iron and silica, are examples of colloidal particulates. Since colloidal foulants can include both inorganic and organic elements, some sources classify colloidal fouling as part of either inorganic or organic fouling. Inorganic fouling (scaling) occurs when the level of inorganic ions in water exceeds the saturation point. This phenomenon leads inorganic ions to enter the nucleation step, forming the crystal that can deposit on the membrane surface or pores [25]. The most prevalent scalants on the membrane surface are inorganic salts with very low solubilities, such as barium sulfate (BaSO4), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), calcium sulfate (CaSO4), and silica (SiO2). Organic fouling describes the accumulation of organic matter on the membrane structure. Examples of organic matter include proteins, organic acids, nucleic acids, humic substances, and lipids [25]. Low- to medium-molecular weight organic foulants (300–1000 Da) have been observed to play a substantial role in the early phases of membrane fouling. On the other hand, high-molecular weight organic matter (> 50,000 Da) ruled the later stages of fouling layer development [26]. Biofouling, also known as proliferative fouling, involves the adhesion and proliferation of biologically active organisms on the membrane surface [27]. Biofoulants such as fungi, viruses, and bacteria create the biofilm layer. Moreover, the presence of salt in water or wastewater can stimulate the endogenous respiration and cell aggregation of bacteria, which in turn leads to an increase in the amount of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) produced by cell secretion [28][29]. The high amount of EPS may cause the viscosity of the wastewater to rise even more and may also lead to the formation of an intractable cake layer on the surface of the membrane [30][31].
Membranes 12 01276 g001
Figure 1. The schematic (a–d) and real membrane surface images (e–h) of different types of fouling (image (e) adapted from ref [32]).
A recent study by Lin et al. [33] demonstrated the intricacies of the fouling phenomena occurring during the actual two-stage module NF process. It was found that at different locations of the modules, different types of fouling predominated. Biofouling and organic-biological fouling were found to dominate at the head of the first module, while organic fouling was predominant at the head of the second module. It was concluded that the type of fouling shifted at different locations in the module due to the continuous water quality change throughout the process. Thus, NF membranes must be able to cope with different fouling types for real water and wastewater treatment applications.
Diverse strategies may be employed to reduce membrane fouling. Pre-treatment is a common method to minimize the foulants level in feed water before reaching the membrane unit. Some pre-treatment processes involve the feed pH adjustment and employ several techniques; either membrane (e.g., UF and MF) or non-membrane processes such as coagulation to remove pollutants that can exacerbate fouling [34][35][36]. In certain cases, anti-scalants can also be added to the pre-treated water before entering the membrane process but their amount needs to be regulated appropriately to prevent increased fouling accumulation caused by overdosing [37]. Besides feed water quality, hydrodynamic conditions associated with different crossflow velocities, specific transmembrane pressures, and other operating conditions such as permeate recovery rate could also influence the fouling phenomenon [7]. A membrane’s surface or pore interior can become fouled even if operating conditions and antiscalant dosage are optimised. Thus, membrane cleaning procedures such as chemical cleaning and physical cleaning (e.g., backwashing, reverse flush, and air spurge) have been implemented in the membrane process [7][23]. Even so, it is possible to lessen the frequency of these fouling mitigation measures by altering the membrane to make it less vulnerable to fouling.
A membrane with antifouling capability can be developed by tuning the membrane’s physicochemical properties to alter the membrane-foulant interaction. For instance, it is known that most foulants, including proteins, are hydrophobic by nature [38]. Thus, a hydrophilic membrane will have a lower fouling tendency since more water molecules could be adsorbed on the membrane surface, creating a hydration layer that could minimize the membrane–hydrophobic foulant interaction (Figure 2a) [20]. Typically, a hydrophilic surface is characterized by a low water contact angle (0° < Ɵ < 90°) and a higher value of Gibbs free energy [39][40]. Nevertheless, in practical applications, water contact angle measurement is considerably more frequently used for evaluating membrane surface hydrophilicity since it is simpler and easier to use. In terms of surface morphology, a smoother surface is less likely to become clogged with the foulant, whereas a rougher surface has a greater fouling propensity [41][42]. The fouling phenomenon can occur on thin-film composite (TFC) polyamide NF membranes despite their relatively hydrophilic surface. This is because the interfacial polymerization process used to fabricate the polyamide-based TFC often results in a rough membrane surface [23]. Therefore, membrane modification to reduce surface roughness can enhance the antifouling property. Meanwhile, tuning the surface charge is another approach to fabricating an antifouling membrane [22]. The fouling can be minimized by improving the electrostatic repulsion between the charged membrane surface and charged foulants. Hence, adjusting the membrane surface charge should consider the charge characteristics of targeted foulants in the water or wastewater to be treated. For instance, the negatively charged membrane is anticipated to have superior anti-biofouling efficacy since most bacteria are negatively charged at neutral pH [43].
Membranes 12 01276 g002
Figure 2. Illustration of membrane surface properties and antifouling mechanism.

3. Strategies for the Development of Antifouling NF Membrane

Generally, two common strategies have been identified for fabricating the antifouling NF membrane, namely (i) blending the additive or surface modifying agents with membrane casting solution (for asymmetric membranes) or blending the additive with monomer during interfacial polymerization step (for thin-film nanocomposite (TFN)) and (ii) surface modification of pre-formed membrane. Coating, grafting, covalent coupling, plasma treatment, and surface patterning are examples of surface modification techniques that have been employed in improving antifouling properties [22]. The coating technique is a straightforward process in which a thin layer of material (e.g., nanoparticles, macromolecules, and polymers) is introduced onto the membrane surface without any covalent attachment. Solution coating or layer-by-layer (LBL) techniques can create a coating layer during surface modification. A curing procedure is sometimes applied to the coating layer to ensure stability. The grafting technique is conducted by adhering the surface-modifying polymers or macromolecules to the membrane surface via various grafting mechanisms such as redox, free radical, plasma enzymatic, cationic, anionic, and atom transfer radical polymerization (ATRP). Unlike grafting, the covalent coupling method uses low-molecular weight materials to adhere to the membrane surface via interaction with reactive functional groups. Meanwhile, surface hydrophilicity or surface crosslinking can be achieved by plasma treatment or irradiation procedures [22].

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/membranes12121276

References

  1. Yaqub, M.; Nguyen, M.N.; Lee, W. Treating reverse osmosis concentrate to address scaling and fouling problems in zero-liquid discharge systems: A scientometric review of global trends. Sci. Total Environ. 2022, 844, 157081.
  2. United Nations. Envision2030 Goal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation. Available online: https://www.un.org/development/desa/disabilities/envision2030-goal6.html (accessed on 1 July 2022).
  3. Ahmad, N.N.R.; Ang, W.L.; Teow, Y.H.; Mohammad, A.W.; Hilal, N. Nanofiltration membrane processes for water recycling, reuse and product recovery within various industries: A review. J. Water Process Eng. 2022, 45, 102478.
  4. Ang, M.B.M.Y.; Trilles, C.A.; De Guzman, M.R.; Pereira, J.M.; Aquino, R.R.; Huang, S.-H.; Hu, C.-C.; Lee, K.-R.; Lai, J.-Y. Improved performance of thin-film nanocomposite nanofiltration membranes as induced by embedded polydopamine-coated silica nanoparticles. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019, 224, 113–120.
  5. Qian, Y.; Wu, H.; Sun, S.-P.; Xing, W. Perfluoro-functionalized polyethyleneimine that enhances antifouling property of nanofiltration membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 611, 118286.
  6. Zhao, X.; Zhang, R.; Liu, Y.; He, M.; Su, Y.; Gao, C.; Jiang, Z. Antifouling membrane surface construction: Chemistry plays a critical role. J. Membr. Sci. 2018, 551, 145–171.
  7. Andrade, L.; Aguiar, A.; Pires, W.; Grossi, L.; Amaral, M. Comprehensive bench-and pilot-scale investigation of NF for gold mining effluent treatment: Membrane performance and fouling control strategies. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2017, 174, 44–56.
  8. Ma, H.-P.; Wang, H.-L.; Qi, Y.-H.; Chao, Z.-L.; Tian, L.; Yuan, W.; Dai, L.; Lv, W.-J. Reducing fouling of an industrial multi-stage nanofiltration membrane based on process control: A novel shutdown system. J. Membr. Sci. 2022, 644, 120141.
  9. Yi, M.; Lau, C.H.; Xiong, S.; Wei, W.; Liao, R.; Shen, L.; Lu, A.; Wang, Y. Zwitterion–Ag complexes that simultaneously enhance biofouling resistance and silver binding capability of thin film composite membranes. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2019, 11, 15698–15708.
  10. Alcaina-Miranda, M.; Barredo-Damas, S.; Bes-Pia, A.; Iborra-Clar, M.; Iborra-Clar, A.; Mendoza-Roca, J. Nan-ofiltration as a final step towards textile wastewater reclamation. Desalination 2009, 240, 290–297.
  11. Shahmansouri, A.; Bellona, C. Nanofiltration technology in water treatment and reuse: Applications and costs. Water Sci. Technol. 2015, 71, 309–319.
  12. Abdel-Fatah, M.A. Nanofiltration systems and applications in wastewater treatment. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2018, 9, 3077–3092.
  13. Mohammad, A.W.; Teow, Y.; Ang, W.; Chung, Y.; Oatley-Radcliffe, D.; Hilal, N. Nanofiltration membranes review: Recent advances and future prospects. Desalination 2015, 356, 226–254.
  14. Oatley-Radcliffe, D.L.; Walters, M.; Ainscough, T.J.; Williams, P.M.; Mohammad, A.W.; Hilal, N. Nanofiltration membranes and processes: A review of research trends over the past decade. J. Water Process Eng. 2017, 19, 164–171.
  15. Arumugham, T.; Kaleekkal, N.J.; Gopal, S.; Nambikkattu, J.; Rambabu, K.; Aboulella, A.M.; Wickramasinghe, S.R.; Banat, F. Recent developments in porous ceramic membranes for wastewater treatment and desalination: A review. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 293, 112925.
  16. Cabrera, S.M.; Winnubst, L.; Richter, H.; Voigt, I.; Nijmeijer, A. Industrial application of ceramic nanofiltration membranes for water treatment in oil sands mines. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2021, 256, 117821.
  17. Guo, S.; Wan, Y.; Chen, X.; Luo, J. Loose nanofiltration membrane custom-tailored for resource recovery. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 409, 127376.
  18. Feng, X.; Peng, D.; Zhu, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, Y. Recent advances of loose nanofiltration membranes for dye/salt separation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2022, 285, 120228.
  19. Guo, Y.; Liu, C.; Liu, H.; Zhang, J.; Li, H.; Zhang, C. Contemporary antibiofouling modifications of reverse osmosis membranes: State-of-the-art insights on mechanisms and strategies. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 429, 132400.
  20. Zhao, S.; Liao, Z.; Fane, A.; Li, J.; Tang, C.; Zheng, C.; Lin, J.; Kong, L. Engineering antifouling reverse osmosis membranes: A review. Desalination 2021, 499, 114857.
  21. Goh, P.; Zulhairun, A.; Ismail, A.; Hilal, N. Contemporary antibiofouling modifications of reverse osmosis desalination membrane: A review. Desalination 2019, 468, 114072.
  22. Choudhury, R.R.; Gohil, J.M.; Mohanty, S.; Nayak, S.K. Antifouling, fouling release and antimicrobial materials for surface modification of reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes. J. Mater. Chem. A 2018, 6, 313–333.
  23. Miller, D.J.; Dreyer, D.R.; Bielawski, C.W.; Paul, D.R.; Freeman, B.D. Surface modification of water purification membranes. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 4662–4711.
  24. AlSawaftah, N.; Abuwatfa, W.; Darwish, N.; Husseini, G. A comprehensive review on membrane fouling: Mathematical modelling, prediction, diagnosis, and mitigation. Water 2021, 13, 1327.
  25. Jiang, S.; Li, Y.; Ladewig, B.P. A review of reverse osmosis membrane fouling and control strategies. Sci. Total Environ. 2017, 595, 567–583.
  26. Lee, E.K.; Chen, V.; Fane, A. Natural organic matter (NOM) fouling in low pressure membrane filtration—Effect of membranes and operation modes. Desalination 2008, 218, 257–270.
  27. Lau, S.K.; Yong, W.F. Recent progress of zwitterionic materials as antifouling membranes for ultrafiltration, nanofiltration, and reverse osmosis. ACS Appl. Polym. Mater. 2021, 3, 4390–4412.
  28. Ahmad, N.N.R.; Ang, W.L.; Leo, C.P.; Mohammad, A.W.; Hilal, N. Current advances in membrane technologies for saline wastewater treatment: A comprehensive review. Desalination 2021, 517, 115170.
  29. Tan, X.; Acquah, I.; Liu, H.; Li, W.; Tan, S. A critical review on saline wastewater treatment by membrane bioreactor (MBR) from a microbial perspective. Chemosphere 2019, 220, 1150–1162.
  30. Capodici, M.; Cosenza, A.; Di Bella, G.; Di Trapani, D.; Viviani, G.; Mannina, G. High salinity wastewater treatment by membrane bioreactors. In Current Developments in Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; pp. 177–204.
  31. Liu, L.; Xiao, Z.; Liu, Y.; Li, X.; Yin, H.; Volkov, A.; He, T. Understanding the fouling/scaling resistance of superhydrophobic/omniphobic membranes in membrane distillation. Desalination 2021, 499, 114864.
  32. ElSherbiny, I.M.; Khalil, A.S.; Ulbricht, M. Influence of surface micro-patterning and hydrogel coating on colloidal silica fouling of polyamide thin-film composite membranes. Membranes 2019, 9, 67.
  33. Lin, W.; Li, M.; Xiao, K.; Huang, X. The role shifting of organic, inorganic and biological foulants along different positions of a two-stage nanofiltration process. J. Membr. Sci. 2020, 602, 117979.
  34. Nadjafi, M.; Reyhani, A.; Al Arni, S. Feasibility of treatment of refinery wastewater by a pilot scale MF/UF and UF/RO system for reuse at boilers and cooling towers. J. Water Chem. Technol. 2018, 40, 167–176.
  35. Chang, H.; Liu, B.; Yang, B.; Yang, X.; Guo, C.; He, Q.; Liang, S.; Chen, S.; Yang, P. An integrated coagulation-ultrafiltration-nanofiltration process for internal reuse of shale gas flowback and produced water. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2019, 211, 310–321.
  36. Ricci, B.C.; Ferreira, C.D.; Aguiar, A.O.; Amaral, M.C. Integration of nanofiltration and reverse osmosis for metal separation and sulfuric acid recovery from gold mining effluent. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2015, 154, 11–21.
  37. Duong, H.C.; Chivas, A.R.; Nelemans, B.; Duke, M.; Gray, S.; Cath, T.Y.; Nghiem, L.D. Treatment of RO brine from CSG produced water by spiral-wound air gap membrane distillation—A pilot study. Desalination 2015, 366, 121–129.
  38. Kang, G.-d.; Cao, Y.-m. Development of antifouling reverse osmosis membranes for water treatment: A review. Water Res. 2012, 46, 584–600.
  39. Ma, R.; Ji, Y.-L.; Guo, Y.-S.; Mi, Y.-F.; An, Q.-F.; Gao, C.-J. Fabrication of antifouling reverse osmosis membranes by incorporating zwitterionic colloids nanoparticles for brackish water desalination. Desalination 2017, 416, 35–44.
  40. Hurwitz, G.; Guillen, G.R.; Hoek, E.M. Probing polyamide membrane surface charge, zeta potential, wettability, and hydrophilicity with contact angle measurements. J. Membr. Sci. 2010, 349, 349–357.
  41. Zhao, L.; Zhang, M.; He, Y.; Chen, J.; Hong, H.; Liao, B.-Q.; Lin, H. A new method for modeling rough membrane surface and calculation of interfacial interactions. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 200, 451–457.
  42. Chen, L.; Tian, Y.; Cao, C.-q.; Zhang, J.; Li, Z.-n. Interaction energy evaluation of soluble microbial products (SMP) on different membrane surfaces: Role of the reconstructed membrane topology. Water Res. 2012, 46, 2693–2704.
  43. Seyedpour, S.F.; Rahimpour, A.; Najafpour, G. Facile in-situ assembly of silver-based MOFs to surface functionalization of TFC membrane: A novel approach toward long-lasting biofouling mitigation. J. Membr. Sci. 2019, 573, 257–269.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
This entry is offline, you can click here to edit this entry!
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback