Please wait a minute...
Shopping Cart Email List Chinese
Advanced Search Fig/Tab
Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering

ISSN 2095-0179

ISSN 2095-0187(Online)

CN 11-5981/TQ

Postal Subscription Code 80-969

2018 Impact Factor: 2.809

Featured Articles  |  Most Downloaded  |  Most Reading
Online Submission Subscribe to Our RSS Content Feed
Front Chem Sci Eng    2014, Vol. 8 Issue (1) : 79-86    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11705-014-1407-0
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Removal of Ni(II) ions from wastewater by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration using mixed surfactants
Amar D. Vibhandik(), Kumudini V. Marathe()
Department of Chemical Engineering, Institute of Chemical Technology, Mumbai 400019, India
 Download: PDF(164 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

Ni(II) ions were removed from aqueous waste using micellar enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) with a mixture of surfactants. The surfactant mixture was the nonionic surfactant Tween 80 (TW80) mixed with the anionic surfactant sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) in different molar ratios ranging from 0.1–1.5. The operational variables of the MEUF process such as pH, applied pressure, surfactant to metal ion ratio and nonionic to ionic surfactant molar ratio (α) were evaluated. Rejection of Ni and TW80 was 99% and 98% respectively whereas that for SDS was 65%. The flux and all resistances (fouling resistance, resistance due to concentration polarization) were measured and calculated for entire range of α respectively. A calculated flux was found to be declined with time, which was mainly attributed to concentration polarization rather than resistance from membrane fouling.
Keywords MEUF      Ni (II) ions      membrane resistance      concentration polarization      mixed surfactants     
Corresponding Author(s): Vibhandik Amar D.,Email:kv.marathe@ictmumbai.edu.in; Marathe Kumudini V.,Email:amarvibhandik@gmail.com   
Issue Date: 05 March 2014
 Cite this article:   
Amar D. Vibhandik,Kumudini V. Marathe. Removal of Ni(II) ions from wastewater by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration using mixed surfactants[J]. Front Chem Sci Eng, 2014, 8(1): 79-86.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcse/EN/10.1007/s11705-014-1407-0
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fcse/EN/Y2014/V8/I1/79
Fig.1  Schematic of experimental setup
Fig.2  Variation of CMC and counter ion binding coefficient in SDS-TW 80 mixed systems
Fig.3  Effect of the addition of non-ionic surfactant on the permeate flux and percent rejection for various solutes. The transmembrane pressure was maintained at 25 kPa with an inlet flow velocity of 100 mL/min
Fig.4  Effect of total surfactant concentration on the rejection of solutes and the permeate flux. The pressure and inlet flow were 25 kPa and 100 mL/min respectively and α = 0.3
Fig.5  Effect of pH on rejection of Ni ion
Fig.6  Effect of transmembrane pressure on the Ni rejection and permeate flux of the solvent. The value of α was 0.3
Fig.7  Effect of inlet flow velocity on the permeate flux and the rejection of Ni ions. The value of α and TMP were 0.3 and 120 kPa respectively
Fig.8  Effect of filtration time on the rejection of the solutes and on the solvent permeate flux for a system with complete recycling. TMP, α and inlet flow velocity were maintained at 120 kPa, 0.3 and 170 mL/min respectively
Fig.9  Effect of VCF on the rejection of solutes and on the solvent permeate flux for a semi batch system. TMP, α and inlet flow velocity were maintained at 120 kPa, 0.3 and 170 mL/min respectively
Fig.10  Effect on α on transport resistance. TMP and inlet flow were 25 kPa and 100 mL/min respectively
Fig.11  Effect of α on the total resistance. TMP and inlet flow were 25 kPa and 100 mL/min respectively
1 Akita S, Nii S, Takahashi K, Takenchi H, Castillo L. Separation of Co(II)/Ni(II) via micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration using organophosphorus acid extractant solubilized by nonionic surfactant. Journal of Membrane Science , 1999, 162(1–2): 111–117
doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(99)00128-3
2 Fillipi B, Christian S, Taylor R, Scamehorn J. A comparative economic analysis of copper removal from water by ligand-modified micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration and by conventional solvent extraction. Journal of Membrane Science , 1998, 145(1): 27–44
doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(98)00052-0
3 Ghezzi L, Monteleone G, Robinson B, Secco F, Tiné R, Venturini M. Metal extraction in water/micelle systems: Complex formation, stripping and recovery of Cd(II). Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects , 2008, 317(1–3): 717–721
doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2007.12.008
4 Yurlova L, Kryvoruchko A, Kornilovich B. Removal of Ni(II) ions from wastewater by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Desalination , 2002, 144(1–3): 255–260
doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(02)00321-1
5 Sadaoui Z, Azoug C, Charbit G, Charbit F. Surfactants for separation processes: Enhanced ultrafiltration. Journal of Environmental Engineering , 1998, 124(8): 695–700
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1998)124:8(695)
6 Ahmadi S, Huang Y, Batchelor B, Koseoglu S. Binding of heavy metals to derivatives of cholesterol and sodium dodecyl sulfate. Journal of Environmental Engineering , 1995, 121(9): 645–652
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1995)121:9(645)
7 Li C, Liu C, Yen W. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) with mixed surfactants for removing Cu(II) ions. Chemosphere , 2006, 63(2): 353–358
doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2005.07.017
8 Huang J, Zeng G, Xu K. Removal of cadmium ions from aqueous solution via micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China , 2005, 15: 184–190
9 Ghosh G, Bhattacharya P. Hexavalent chromium ion removal through micellar enhanced ultrafiltration. Chemical Engineering Journal , 2006, 119(1): 45–53
doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2006.02.014
10 Xu K, Zeng G, Huang J, Wu J, Fang Y, Huang G, Li J, Xi B, Liu H. Removal of Cd2+ from synthetic wastewater using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration with hollow fiber membrane. Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects , 2007, 294(1–3): 140–146
doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2006.08.017
11 Jung J, Yang J S, Kim S H, Yang J W. Jung J, Yang J, Kim S, Yang J. Feasibility of micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) for the heavy metal removal in soil washing effluent. Desalination , 2008, 222(1–3): 202–211
doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.154
12 Xu Z, Xu H, Zhai X. Treatment of waste streams containing Pb2+ and Cd2+ by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Journal of Membrane Science and Technology , 2002, 22: 15–21
13 Sadaoui Z, Azoug C, Charbit G, Charbit F. Surfactants for separation processes: Enhanced ultrafiltration. Journal of Environmental Engineering , 1998, 124(7): 695–732
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1998)124:8(695)
14 Baek K, Yang J. Competitive bind of anionic metals with cetylpyridinium chloride micelle in micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Desalination , 2004, 167: 101–110
doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.117
15 Gzara L, Dhahbi M. Removal of chromate anions by micellar-enhanced ultra-filtration using cationic surfactants. Desalination , 2001, 137(1–3): 241–250
doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(01)00225-9
16 Juang R, Xu Y, Chen C. Separation and removal of metal ions form dilute solutions using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Journal of Membrane Science , 2003, 218(1–2): 257–267
doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(03)00183-2
17 Gzara L. Removal of divalent lead cation from aqueous streams using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Revue des Sciences de l'Eau , 2000, 13(3): 289–304
doi: 10.7202/705395ar
18 Back K, Leeb H, Yang J. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration for simultaneous removal of ferricyanide and nitrate. Desalination , 2003, 158(1–3): 157–166
doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00446-6
19 Baek K, Kim B K, Cho H, Yang J W. Removal characteristics of anionic metals by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Journal of Hazardous Materials , 2003, 99(3): 303–311
doi: 10.1016/S0304-3894(03)00063-3
20 Huang J, Zeng G, Fang Y, Qu Y, Li X. Removal of cadmium ions using micellar enhance ultrafiltration with mixed anionic nonionic surfactants. Journal of Membrane Science , 2009, 326(2): 303–309
doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2008.10.013
21 Lee J, Yang J, Kim H, Baek K, Yang J W. Simultaneous removal of organic and inorganic contaminants by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration with mixed surfactant. Desalination , 2005, 184(1–3): 395–407
doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2005.03.050
22 Ghosh S, Burman A, De G, Das A. Interfacial and self-aggregation of binary mixtures of anionic and nonionic amphiphiles in aqueous medium. Journal of Physical Chemistry B , 2011, 115(38): 11098–11112
doi: 10.1021/jp204223t
23 Yenphan P, Chanachai A, Jiraratananon R. Experimental study on micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) of aqueous solution and wastewater containing lead ion with mixed surfactants. Desalination , 2010, 253(1–3): 30–37
doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2009.11.040
24 Aoudia M, Allal N, Djennet A, Toumi L. Dynamic micellar enhanced ultrafiltration: Use of anionic (SDS)-nonionic (NPE) system to remove Cr3+ at low surfactant concentration. Journal of Membrane Science , 2003, 217(1–2): 181–192
doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(03)00128-5
25 Wijmans J, Nakao S, Smolders C. Flux limitation in ultrafiltration: Osmotic pressure model and gel layer model. Journal of Membrane Science , 1984, 20(2): 115–124
doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(00)81327-7
[1] Guozhao JI, Guoxiong WANG, Kamel HOOMAN, Suresh BHATIA, Jo?o C. DINIZ da COSTA. Computational fluid dynamics applied to high temperature hydrogen separation membranes[J]. Front Chem Sci Eng, 2012, 6(1): 3-12.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed