2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.desal.2005.02.031
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

UF pretreatment for SWRO: pilot studies

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
27
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(28 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
27
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In one case, no chemicals were injected into the UF-SWRO system, neither through the feed water nor the backwash water, which may be attributed to a sand filter preceding the UF [124]. In the other case, the UF-SWRO received its feedwater from a beachwell [118].…”
Section: Integrated Membrane Systems (Ims)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…In one case, no chemicals were injected into the UF-SWRO system, neither through the feed water nor the backwash water, which may be attributed to a sand filter preceding the UF [124]. In the other case, the UF-SWRO received its feedwater from a beachwell [118].…”
Section: Integrated Membrane Systems (Ims)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Of the 26 UF/MF pilot studies (Table 7), ten reported chlorine use in CEB only [98, 99, 102, 104, 107-110, 112, 123], and seven reported chlorine addition to the UF feed and CEB [101,[117][118][119][120][121][122]. The given chlorine doses to the feed water were 1 mg/l in winter and 2 mg/l in summer [117], which is comparable to the levels in the operational plants [e.g., a dosage of 1 mg/l results in a chlorine residual of 0.5 mg/l, 86].…”
Section: Integrated Membrane Systems (Ims)mentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Over the last decade, UF membranes have been tested and applied at pilot and commercial scale as pretreatment for SWRO (Rosberg, 1997;van Hoof et al, 1999;Brehant et al, 2002;Glueckstern et al, 2002;Wolf et al, 2005;Halpern et al, 2005;Gille and Czolkoss, 2005) and are reported to offer several advantages over conventional pretreatment systems; namely, lower footprint, constant high permeate quality (in terms of SDI), higher retention of large molecular weight organics, lower overall chemical consumption, etc. (Wilf and Schierach, 2001;Pearce, 2007).…”
Section: Ultrafiltration (Uf)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A considerable number of reports can be found in the literature associated with conventional and membrane pretreatments (Rosberg, 1997;Vial et al, 2003;Halpern et al, 2005;Bonnelye et al, 2008;Voutchkov, 2010, van Hoof et al, 1999Brehant et al, 2002;Pearce et al, 2004;Kumar et al, 2006;Xu et al, 2007;Lorain et al, 2007;Bonnelye et al, 2008;Shon et al, 2008;Salinas Rodriguez et al, 2009). Nevertheless, dosages of biocides (often chlorinated substances) are the currently employed common strategy to prevent biofouling because biocides can kill nearly all microorganisms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%