Advertisement

Polymer Bulletin

, Volume 76, Issue 5, pp 2481–2497 | Cite as

Ammonia removal from aquaculture wastewater by high flux and high rejection polysulfone/cellulose acetate blend membrane

  • Pourya MoradihamedaniEmail author
  • Abdul Halim Abdullah
Original Paper
  • 57 Downloads

Abstract

Polysulfone (PSf)/cellulose acetate (CA) blend membranes with different compositions (100/0, 90/10, 85/15, 80/20, 75/25 and 70/30) were prepared and characterized for removal of low concentration ammonia (1–10 mg/L) from aquaculture wastewater. The performance of prepared membranes in terms of pure water flux and ammonia removal percentage was analyzed by different experimental variables such as blend membrane compositions, ammonia concentration in feed tank (1, 5 and 10 mg/L) and membrane thickness (80 and 100 µm). The permeability of prepared membranes was examined by pure water flux measurement in feed pressure range of 1–3 bar. The contact angle measurement indicates that the hydrophilicity of PSf/CA blend membranes is enhanced by increasing the CA concentration in the casting solution. This increment improves the pure water flux of blend membranes. The ammonia removal by PSf/CA 80/20 (80 µm) was 79%, 99% and 92% from feed solutions containing 1, 5 and 10 mg/L of ammonia, respectively. The ammonia removal from feed solution containing 1 mg/L of ammonia is improved from 79 to 95% (at 2 bar feed pressure) by increasing the thickness of PSf/CA (80/20) membrane from 80 to 100 µm.

Keywords

Blend membrane Polysulfone Cellulose acetate Ammonia removal Aquaculture wastewater 

References

  1. 1.
    Ali N, Halim NSA, Jusoh A, Endut A (2010) The formation and characterization of an asymmetric nanofiltration membrane for ammonia-nitrogen removal: effect of shear rate. Biores Technol 101(5):1459–1465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ali N, Mohammad AW, Jusoh A, Hasan MR, Ghazali N, Kamaruzaman K (2005) Treatment of aquaculture wastewater using ultra-low pressure asymmetric polyethersulfone (PES) membrane. Desalination 185(1–3):317–326Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Abedini R, Mousavi SM, Aminzadeh R (2011) A novel cellulose acetate (CA) membrane using TiO2 nanoparticles: preparation, characterization and permeation study. Desalination 277:40–45.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.03.089 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ahmadiannamini P, Eswaranandam S, Wickramasinghe R, Qian X (2017) Mixed-matrix membranes for efficient ammonium removal from wastewaters. J. Membr. Sci. 526:147–155.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2016.12.032 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ali N, Mohammad AW, Jusoh A, Hasan MR, Ghazali N, Kamaruzaman K (2005) Treatment of aquaculture wastewater using ultra-low pressure asymmetric polyethersulfone (PES) membrane. Desalination 185:317–326.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.03.084 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ashrafizadeh SN, Khorasani Z (2010) Ammonia removal from aqueous solutions using hollow-fiber membrane contactors. Chem Eng J 162:242–249.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.05.036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aspé E, Jara MA, Roeckel M (1997) Ammonia inhibition in the anaerobic treatment of fishery effluents. Water Environ Res 73:154–164.  https://doi.org/10.2307/25045477 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bai H, Zhou Y, Wang X, Zhang L (2012) The permeability and mechanical properties of cellulose acetate membranes blended with polyethylene glycol 600 for treatment of municipal sewage. Proc Environ Sci 16:346–351.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2012.10.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Brazil BL (2006) Performance and operation of a rotating biological contactor in a tilapia recirculating aquaculture system. Aquac Eng 34:261–274.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2005.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Crab R, Kochva M, Verstraete W, Avnimelech Y (2009) Bio-flocs technology application in over-wintering of tilapia. Aquac Eng 40:105–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2008.12.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghaly AE, Kamal M, Mahmoud NS (2005) Phytoremediation of aquaculture wastewater for water recycling and production of fish feed. Environ Int 31:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2004.05.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Han B, Zhang D, Shao Z, Kong L, Lv S (2013) Preparation and characterization of cellulose acetate/carboxymethyl cellulose acetate blend ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination 311:80–89.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.11.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hasanoglu A, Romero J, Perez B, Plaza A (2010) Ammonia removal from wastewater streams through membrane contactors: experimental and theoretical analysis of operation parameters and configuration. Chem Eng J 160:530–537.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.03.064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hussain S, Aziz HA, Isa MH, Adlan MN, Asaari FAH (2007) Physico-chemical method for ammonia removal from synthetic wastewater using limestone and GAC in batch and column studies. Bioresour Technol 98:874–880.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2006.03.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jayalakshmi A, Rajesh S, Senthilkumar S, Mohan D (2012) Epoxy functionalized poly(ether-sulfone) incorporated cellulose acetate ultrafiltration membrane for the removal of chromium ions. Sep Purif Technol 90(April):120–132.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2012.02.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jorgensen TC, Weatherley LR (2003) Ammonia removal from wastewater by ion exchange in the presence of organic contaminants. Water Research 37:1723–1728.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0043-1354(02)00571-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kamal H, Abd-Elrahim FM, Lotfy S (2014) Characterization and some properties of cellulose acetate-co-polyethylene oxide blends prepared by the use of gamma irradiation. J Radiat Res Appl Sci 7:146–153.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2014.01.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lalia BS, Kochkodan V, Hashaikeh R, Hilal N (2013) A review on membrane fabrication: structure, properties and performance relationship. Desalination 326:77–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2013.06.016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leo CP, Cathie Lee WP, Ahmad AL, Mohammad AW (2012) Polysulfone membranes blended with ZnO nanoparticles for reducing fouling by oleic acid. Sep Purif Technol 89:51–56.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2012.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mook WT, Chakrabarti MH, Aroua MK, Khan GMA, Ali BS, Islam MS, Abu Hassan MA (2012) Removal of total ammonia nitrogen (TAN), nitrate and total organic carbon (TOC) from aquaculture wastewater using electrochemical technology: a review. Desalination 285:1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.09.029 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moradihamedani P, Abdullah AH Bin (2016) Phosphate removal from water by polysulfone ultrafiltration membrane using PVP as a hydrophilic modifier. Desalin Water Treat 3994:1–9.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2016.1150890 Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Moradihamedani P, Ibrahim NA, Zin W, Yunus W, Yusof NA (2014) Study of morphology and gas separation properties of polysulfone/titanium dioxide mixed matrix. Membranes.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pen Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moradihamedani P, Kalantari K, Abdullah AH, Morad NA (2016) High efficient removal of lead(II) and nickel(II) from aqueous solution by novel polysulfone/Fe3O4–talc nanocomposite mixed matrix membrane. Desalin Water Treat 3994:1–10.  https://doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2016.1193449 Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pielesz A, Biniaś W (2010) Cellulose acetate membrane electrophoresis and FTIR spectroscopy as methods of identifying a fucoidan in Fucus vesiculosus Linnaeus. Carbohydr Res 345:2676–2682.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.carres.2010.09.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rezakazemi M, Shirazian S, Ashrafizadeh SN (2012) Simulation of ammonia removal from industrial wastewater streams by means of a hollow-fiber membrane contactor. Desalination 285:383–392.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.10.030 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Riyasudheen N, Sujith A (2012) Formation behavior and performance studies of poly(ethylene-co-vinyl alcohol)/poly(vinyl pyrrolidone) blend membranes prepared by non-solvent induced phase inversion method. Desalination 294:17–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.03.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sadrzadeh M, Amirilargani M, Shahidi K, Mohammadi T (2009) Gas permeation through a synthesized composite PDMS/PES membrane. J Membr Sci 342:236–250.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2009.06.047 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Salehi E, Madaeni SS (2014) Influence of poly(ethylene glycol) as pore-generator on morphology and performance of chitosan/poly(vinyl alcohol) membrane adsorbents. Appl Surf Sci 288:537–541.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsusc.2013.10.067 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sivakumar M, Mohan DR, Rangarajan R (2006) Studies on cellulose acetate-polysulfone ultrafiltration membranes. J Membr Sci 268:208–219.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2005.06.017 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory CenterXiamen University MalaysiaSepangMalaysia
  2. 2.Materials Science and Characterization Laboratory, Institute of Advanced TechnologyUniversiti Putra MalaysiaSerdangMalaysia

Personalised recommendations