Recovery of surfactant from an aqueous solution using continuous multistage foam fractionation: Influence of design parameters

Rujirawanich, Visarut; Chuyingsakultip, Nopparat; Triroj, Manutchanok; Malakul, Pomthong; Chavadej, Sumaeth

doi:10.1016/j.cep.2011.12.002

Cited by 23 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…With this technique, 10-fold and 5-fold enrichments of Triton X-100 and CPC were reached, respectively. Boonyasuwat et al [ 90 ] and Rujirawanich et al [ 91 ] used specific perforated trays separating the column into sections to collect the drained liquid for a higher enrichment and recovery of CPC. By the sudden de- and increasing of flow areas, as achieved by separating the column with a plate that only allowed the rise of the foam through a narrower tube, the liquid flux of an SDS foam could be reduced by 35% [ 92 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncoupling Foam Fractionation and Foam Adsorption for Enhanced Biosurfactant Synthesis and Recovery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The production of biosurfactants is often hampered by excessive foaming in the bioreactor, impacting system scale-up and downstream processing. Foam fractionation was proposed to tackle this challenge by combining in situ product removal with a pre-purification step. In previous studies, foam fractionation was coupled to bioreactor operation, hence it was operated at suboptimal parameters. Here, we use an external fractionation column to decouple biosurfactant production from foam fractionation, enabling continuous surfactant separation, which is especially suited for system scale-up. As a subsequent product recovery step, continuous foam adsorption was integrated into the process. The configuration is evaluated for rhamnolipid (RL) or 3-(3-hydroxyalkanoyloxy)alkanoic acid (HAA, i.e., RL precursor) production by recombinant non-pathogenic Pseudomonas putida KT2440. Surfactant concentrations of 7.5 gRL/L and 2.0 gHAA/L were obtained in the fractionated foam. 4.7 g RLs and 2.8 g HAAs could be separated in the 2-stage recovery process within 36 h from a 2 L culture volume. With a culture volume scale-up to 9 L, 16 g RLs were adsorbed, and the space-time yield (STY) increased by 31% to 0.21 gRL/L·h. We demonstrate a well-performing process design for biosurfactant production and recovery as a contribution to a vital bioeconomy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncoupling Foam Fractionation and Foam Adsorption for Enhanced Biosurfactant Synthesis and Recovery

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Davis et al [4] used foam fractionation to recover fermentation products from culture broths. Another use of foam fractionation for surfactant recovery was reported by Rujirawanich et al [5]. They used multistage foam fractionator with bubble caps to remove cationic surfactants from water.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Removal of MDEA foam creators using foam fractionation: Parametric study coupled with foam characterization

Alhseinat¹,

Amr

Jumah

et al. 2015

Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This is a major disadvantage of the foam separation process in comparison with solvent extraction, where non-target species are preferentially removed in a multistage operation. Many attempts have been made to overcome this problem by adding a reflux [13,15,17], operating in multi-stage mode [14,20,102], installing various partitions in the column [18,19,21,74] and incorporating ultrasonic generation [79,101].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Foam Separation of Metal Ions and the Potential ‘Green’ Alternative to Solvent Extraction

Kinoshita

Nii

2012

SERDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Foam separation has been applied to recover or remove various substances from dilute aqueous solutions in various industries because it is an environment-and cost-friendly process. The literature has been reviewed focusing on the separation of metal ions.From an operational point of view, various methods are discussed for the removal of metal ions from solution, and on the selective recovery of a specific target metal ion.The former applications are designed to purify industrial effluents, and the performance of foam separation is well proven. The latter examples are aimed at recovering valuable metals, which has been shown to be difficult due to the inherent problem of contamination in foam separation. An operation mode was developed to overcome this problem and to enhance the selectivity for separating a specific target metal from solutions containing multi-metals. The method, called continuous counter-current foam separation, was developed, and its performance was demonstrated by the experimental results for Ga(III) separation. Since both high selectivity and recovery was obtained by this method, foam separation is potentially a "solvent-free" alternative to solvent extraction.

show abstract

Recovery of surfactant from an aqueous solution using continuous multistage foam fractionation: Influence of design parameters

Cited by 23 publications

References 19 publications

Uncoupling Foam Fractionation and Foam Adsorption for Enhanced Biosurfactant Synthesis and Recovery

Uncoupling Foam Fractionation and Foam Adsorption for Enhanced Biosurfactant Synthesis and Recovery

Removal of MDEA foam creators using foam fractionation: Parametric study coupled with foam characterization

Foam Separation of Metal Ions and the Potential ‘Green’ Alternative to Solvent Extraction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About