A NANO FILTRATION (NF) MEMBRANE

PRETREATMENT OF SWRO FEED AND MSF MAKE-UP

(PART - II)
1

A. NF SWRO demonstration plant using commercial size modules, and
B. NF system optimization.

A. M. Hassan, M. AK. Al-Sofi, A. M. Farooque, A. G. I. Dalvi, A. T. M. Jamaluddin,
N. M. Kither, A. S. Al-Amoudi, and I. A. R. Al-Tisan

Saline Water Conversion Corporation
P.O.Box 8328, Al-Jubail -31951, Saudi Arabia
Tel: + 966-3-343 0012, Fax: + 966-3-343 1615
Email: rdc@swcc.gov.sa


SUMMARY

Earlier pioneering work done at SWCC RDC demonstrated that the NF
pretreatment of seawater feed to seawater desalination plants: (1) prevented
SWRO membrane fouling by the removal of turbidity and bacteria, (2) prevented
plants scaling (in both SWRO and MSF) by removal of scale forming hardness
ions, e.g., SO
=
4
by up to 98%, total hardness by up to 93%, and (3) lowered
required pressure to operate SWRO plant by reducing TDS of seawater feed by
better than 50%. The net effect of this NF pretreatment was to increase SWRO
potable water yield by up to 100% and recovery from 35% without NF
pretreatment to 70% with NF feed pretreatment. Likewise, it increased MSF
distillate recovery from 35% up to 80% without and with NF pretreatment,
respectively. Moreover, it allowed for the operation of SWRO and MSF without the
addition of antiscalant. It also allowed for the operation of the latter also without
antifoaming agent and without scale formation at MSF top brine temperature of
120
o
C. This work was covered under Part I of the project on A Nanofiltration (NF)
Membrane Pretreatment of SWRO feed and MSF make-up. Part II, which is a
continuation of the above project, deals with two main tasks: (1) Optimization of
the NF pretreatment process, and (2) Construction and the Evaluation of a
Commercial-like NF-SWRO Demonstration Plants. This report describes the
results obtained under Part II of the project

All the previous work (Part I) was done employing only one type of NF membrane
Filmtec NF-70. Although, the NF permeate quality was excellent, nonetheless, the

1
Issued as Technical Report No. (TR-3807/APP96008-II) in December 1999, also Desalination 118 (1998) 35-51.

I
NF permeate water recovery ratio was modest about 50%, at an applied pressure
of 30 bar. To optimize the NF pretreatment of seawater feed to seawater
desalination plants, the performance behavior of a total of 13 different NF
membranes, made by different membrane manufacturers, size 4" x 40" and some
in 8" x 40", were investigated along with the influence on SWRO membrane
performance when using NF permeate as feed. Although all NF membranes
examined showed excellent rejection of SO
=
4
, from 3200 to less than 70 ppm, for a
rejection of 98% or better, nevertheless, each membrane was found to differ from
other membranes in performance behavior, which is measured by NF permeate
flow, permeate recovery ratio and hardness ions concentration (SO
=
4
, HCO
-
3
, Ca
++

and Mg
++
) as well as TDS rejection. From the study, it is shown that NF
membranes can be divided, more or less, into three groups : Group A with high
ion rejection and low permeate flow in contrast to Group C of high flow and
modest ions rejection particularly TDS, while Group B has a good balanced
performance of permeate flow and ionic rejection.

In view of the positive and encouraging results obtained on a pilot plant scale in
Part-I of the project, triasl on a commercial-like NF-SWRO demonstration unit was
not only logical but essential to determine the operating conditions as well as to
establish plant performance parameters. The demonstration unit built for this
purpose consisted of 6 NF spiral wound membrane elements, size 8"x40" followed
by a SWRO unit comprising 3 HFF SWRO elements 8"x40" or 9"x40", where in
both cases the membranes are arranged in series in a brine staging process. The
report describes the NF-SWRO demonstration unit along with the experimental
approach used in this investigation and the results obtained thereof from both the
NF optimization process and the demonstration plant. The results obtained from
the demonstration unit confirm the earlier results, which were obtained from the
pilot plant study.


1. INTRODUCTION

The application of nanofiltration (NF) membrane pretreatment of seawater feed to seawater
desalination plants (Project APP 3807/96008, Part-I) was started on 22.3.1997. The three
main tasks of the project dealing with the establishment and evaluation of this new approach in
NF-SWRO, NF-MSF and NF-SWRO
reject
-MSF seawater dual and triple hybrid desalination
processes along with technoeconomic evaluation of the NF-SWRO seawater desalination
?
process were completed on time as specified in the project and results obtained thereof were
published in a series of papers in international Journals on desalination or conference
proceedings and also presented in a series of lectures to SWCC management and technical
staff [1-6]. All the previous work, however, was done utilizing one type of NF (Filmtec NF-
70) membrane.

In view of the positive and encouraging results obtained in Part-I, the project was continued
under Part-II which covers the following tasks:

(1) NF process optimization by increasing recovery and improving quality of NF
products;
(2) Scaling-up of the NF and NF-SWRO processes from pilot plant to demonstration
plant scale, utilizing large NF and SWRO of 8" x 40" or 9 " x 40" membrane elements;
(3) Supply of NF product or SWRO reject from an NF-SWRO unit as make-up to an
MSF unit, and also,
(4) To perform various tasks on chemical, biological and technoeconomical analyses.

In order to optimize the process by increasing water recovery to 60 -70% level and improving
water quality by increasing the hardness ions rejection and minimizing the TDS level in NF
permeate, the effect of changing NF membrane process operation parameters, on NF
permeate recovery and quality was investigated for thirteen different NF membranes, which
are produced commercially by various NF membrane makers. These membranes differ vastly
in their performance, water yield and recovery ratios.

Operation of the proposed demonstration plant (Task 2) should allow for the determination of
the operating conditions and the performance parameters of large scale NF-SWRO plants as
well as the technoeconomic evaluation of the process itself. Although, the task of evaluating
the NF product or SWRO reject from an NF-SWRO hybrid as make-up to the MSF pilot
plant were completed as defined in Part-I, nevertheless, more work on this task was done
under this investigation (Part-II). The NF permeate or the reject from SWRO in an NF-
SWRO hybrid was supplied, for a period of 3 months, as make-up to MSF pilot plant.
?
Results of this work will be reported under Part-III (NF-MSF and NF-SWRO
reject
-MSF),
which deals with the upgrading and operation of MSF pilot plant at top brine temperature
(TBT) 120
o
C.

This progress report describes the results obtained from the execution of the above tests from
the start of the project May 30, 1998 to present. The report also covers the work done on
modification of the present NF pilot plant, which utilizes 4" x 40" NF membrane elements, to
allow for testing and performance evaluation of two different sets of NF membranes
simultaneously within a series of pressure vessels and also, to allow for the performance
evaluation of each NF membrane module separately. It also covers the conversion of existing
SWRO units to an NF and NF-SWRO demonstration units in which commercial size 8" x 40"
NF and 8" x 40" or 9"x40" SWRO membranes elements were utilized, respectively (see
Section 2, where the 9" x 40" elements were utilized only part of the time). The experimental
work is covered under Section 3 of this report, while results obtained from Tasks 1 & 2 are
described in Sections 4 and 5, respectively. As mentioned earlier, results obtained under
Task 3 shall be described separately under Part III of the proposed NF R&D project.


2. NF AND NF-SWRO SYSTEM MODIFICATION

Luckily, there are three SWRO pilot plants available at RDC. The first unit, with its own
pretreatment system (capacity 3-4 m
3
/hr), utilizes 4" x 40" NF or ultrafiltration (UF)
membrane fully integrated with 2.5 " x 40" SWRO membrane unit, and as required can be also
integrated with an existing 8" x 40" SWRO unit. The second and third SWRO units are
based on spiral wound (SW) and hollow fine fiber (HFF) SWRO membranes and with both
units fed from one common pretreatment (capacity 5 - 7 m
3
/hr). The pretreatment for both
systems consists of dual media followed by fine sand filters. A good deal of work which is
discussed in the following sections, was done to convert or to upgrade the three pilot plants to
allow, as mentioned earlier, for (i) NF process optimization and (ii) Evaluation of commercial
size 8" x 40" NF or 9" x 40" SWRO membranes in an NF-SWRO demonstration unit.

2.1 Upgrading of Pretreatment Units
?
In all the pretreatment units, the sand filter and anthracite media were in service for several
years and contained within their layers various contaminants. First task was to replace these
old media with fresh new media. The thickness and particle size of the old and new media are
as shown in Table 1. To allow for finer filtration, both the thickness of the various replaced
media and their particle size were changed as shown in the same table. In both pilot and
demonstration plants, one type of fine sand was used in filter #2. For example, the fine sand
thickness and particle size in pilot plant filter #2 are 640 and 0.55 mm compared to media
thickness of 800 mm and particle size of 0.25 to 0.45 mm for the same filter #2 in
Demonstration plant.

2.2 Modification of NF-SWRO Pilot Plant ( 4" x 40" Membrane Elements)

In Part I of this investigation using Filmtec NF-70 Membranes, the product recovery ratio was
maintained at 50% or less while maintaining good quality product having very low content of
hardness ions and relatively low TDS [1-6]. For economical and cost effectiveness of water
production, the recovery ratio is expected to be raised to 60 to 70% or better, while
maintaining good quality product. The optimization of the NF process was accomplished by
examining the effect of operation conditions, i.e., feed pressure, temperature, feed flow and
pH, on the performance and recovery ratio of numerous NF membranes produced
commercially by various NF membrane makers.

To perform the above optimization process, certain modifications were introduced in the NF
part of the NF-SWRO pilot plant. The five pressure vessels, each contains two NF
elements, were arranged as shown in Figure 1. This arrangement allowed for the
measurement of permeate flow for each module separately as well as the determination of the
permeate quality and consequently the evaluation of NF membranes performance within each
pressure vessel separately. This way the permeate quality and flow from each module can be
accurately established. The arrangement also allowed for the evaluation of one or more of
same or different NF membranes simultaneously. Also, due to this flexibility in membrane
arrangement, the effect of membrane staging on their performance and the overall
performance of the system can be established. The present flexibility in module layout also
allows for the determination of best and most efficient mode for membrane staging in
?
commercial plants. As was done in earlier work, the full integration of the NF pilot plant with
SWRO or MSF pilot plant or SWRO Demonstration plant was maintained (Figs. 1 to 3).

2.3 Conversion of Present Two 8" 40" SWRO Plants to an NF-SWRO
Demonstration Unit

According to their use in the past, the two SW and HFF SWRO plants, which were described
earlier, received their feed from the 7 m
3
/hr pretreatment unit, where the feed is split equally
between them. To convert the two SWRO units into a fully integrated NF-SWRO
demonstration plant, the spiral wound SWRO unit was converted to serve as a SW NF unit
and with all the feed from the pretreatment unit (7-8 m
3
/h) was channeled to it, while its NF
product was made feed to the HFF SWRO unit or used as a make-up to the MSF pilot plant,
to form a dual hybrid of an NF-SWRO in the former case, and to form an NF-MSF in the
latter case (Figure 2). Alternatively, the NF-SWRO dual hybrid system was integrated with
MSF to form a trihybrid NF-SWRO
reject
_
MSF desalination system, where the SWRO reject
from the NF-SWRO unit serves as make-up to the MSF unit (Figure 3). For a greater degree
of integration, especially during the cold season, the seawater from the MSF heat rejection
section was made feed (by blending it with seawater) to the NF pretreatment unit to raise the
feed temperature to 30 - 33
o
C (Figure 3).

The above forms of NF integration with SWRO and MSF and the conversion of the SW
SWRO to a SW NF unit required changes in piping systems connecting the various units and
the addition of a high pressure pump, capacity 7 m
3
/h at pressure of 28 bar, to provide
sufficient feed to the SW NF unit. Figure 2 illustrates the new NF-SWRO set up. The NF
membrane arrangement, which is similar to that in commercial plants, consists of three 8"
pressure vessels, each contains two 8"x40" SW NF membrane elements. The HFF SWRO
membrane arrangement is made of two pressure vessels the first is fitted with two 8"x40"
Toyobo HM 8255 HFF membrane elements followed by a second pressure vessel fitted with
one 8"x 40" Toyobo HM 8355 NF membrane element. In all cases, the NF and SWRO
membranes are arranged in series, as it is done in commercial large size NF and SWRO plants
with reject staging, i.e., reject from first membrane element constituted the feed to the second
(following) membrane element and so on. Such arrangement is necessary because the results
O
obtained and plant performance will be close, if not similar, in values to those obtained from
the large size commercial NF & SWRO plants.

Towards the end of November, 1998, the two SWRO modules which were fitted with two 8"
x40" membrane elements in the first pressure vessel and one element in the second pressure
vessel, were replaced by two larger SWRO modules, each contains two of the same Toyobo
HFF membrane elements, but of larger size 9"x40", i.e., HM 9255 instead of HM 8255
model. The above modifications and arrangements allowed, as illustrated in later sections of
this report, for the performance evaluation of various commercial size 8" x40" NF and SWRO
membranes.


3. EXPERIMENTAL WORK

3.1 NF Process Optimization

This step involved the operation of the 4" x 40" NF unit (Figure 1) to establish the optimum
membrane performance at different operating conditions of feed pressures (10 to 40 bars),
feed temperatures (25 to 40
o
C), feed pH of 6.5 to 8.2, feed SDI 2.0 to 4.0 and also at
various rates of feed flow. Also, the operation of the NF unit with and without a secondary
ultrafiltration (UF) membrane pretreatment was tried by placing the SW UF membrane
modules ahead of the SW NF modules. The operation of both the UF and NF membranes
was made with the same pump and under nearly same pressure. Although this secondary UF
pretreatment removed all the very fine particles and bacteria, which was not removed by the
primary pretreatment, nevertheless, this arrangement failed to yield high flow of UF filtrate and
thus was discontinued after only a few days of operation. The UF membrane used in this trial
were Desal 50, with a molecular weight (mw) cut-off of 15,000. This experiment in which UF
is utilized in the pretreatment of feed to seawater desalination plants, shall be tried again , as
time allows, by using either hollow fine fiber UF membranes, pore size 0.05 m, and/or SW
UF with larger MW cut-off > 100,000. Such cases of UF membrane proved to be effective
as a primary pretreatment of seawater feed, and it yields high quality pretreated feed with SDI
<1.0 [7]. The following 4"x 40" NF membranes were purchased and tried: Filmtec NF 90,
NF 70 and NF 45, Toray SU 610; Osmonics HL 4040F DK 4040F and DL4040, Trisep
TS40TSA and Trisep TS 80TSR; Hydranautics ESNA ; Fluid System 4721SR.
?

3.2 Operation of NF SWRO Demonstration Unit

The operation of the NF part of the demonstration 8" x 40" NF-SWRO plant (Figure 2) was
done at ambient seawater temperature, feed pH 6.6, feed flow of about 4 -6 m
3
/h and feed
pressure of 17.4 bar (250 psi), and for certain membranes was raised to reach 40 bar.
Operation of the SWRO unit, however, was done utilizing the NF product at ambient
seawater temperature and feed pressure of 25 - 60 bar. The 8" x 40" NF membranes which
were purchased and tried in this study are : Filmtec NF 70, Osmonics HL 8040FL, Fluid
System TFC NF 8921S, Toray SU620F and Hydranautics ESNA. The latter two
membranes were tried for a limited time and their results will not be discussed in this report.

Product of the 4"x 40" NF membrane elements of Filmtec NF 45, Toray SU 610, Osmonics
HL 4040F and Trisep TS 40TSA as well as DK 4040 and Trisep TS 80 TSA were also tried
for a limited period, separately or in combination of two as feed to the 8" x 40" SWRO part of
the demonstration plant.

For both the 4"x40" and 8"x40" NF units in the pilot and demonstration plants, the seawater
feed pretreatment consisted of minor coagulation (0.4 ppm of Fe
+3
from FeCl
3
) without
chlorination followed by dual media, fine sand and cartridge filtration. The pH of pretreated
feed was adjusted to about 6.6. The pretreated feed was then passed under pressure to the
NF units and their products were passed as feed to SWRO units or made make-up to the
MSF unit. In one set of experiments, the SWRO reject from the NF-SWRO hybrid was fed
as make-up to the MSF unit (Figure 3).

Experiments were also carried out to determine the scaling tendency, i.e., scaling potential, for
various NF permeates. Two procedures were utilized: the first by threshold effect method and
second by evaporation method. The threshold effect for each of the NF permeate was
determined by adding 5 ml of 1 molar solution of sodium carbonate (Na
2
CO
3
) to an already
heated (to 95
o
C) 500 ml sample of the permeate in a special experimental set up, details of
which are given elsewhere [8]. Five minutes after the addition of Na
2
CO
3
, a known amount
(25 ml) of the solution was withdrawn for M-Alkalinity measurement and the same was
repeated at an interval of 5 minutes. The experiment was carried out for a total of 30 minutes.
?
Throughout the experiment the solution temperature was maintained at 95
O
C. For comparison,
the experiment was repeated also for seawater as well as brine with and without antiscalant.

As an alternative to the above threshold effect experiment, the scaling potential experiment
was conducted by the evaporation of a certain percentage of 250 ml permeate from different
NF membrane followed by cooling of the remaining portion to room temperature, after which
the solution turbidity was determined. The solution was also visually inspected for clarity and
for the observation of scalent precipitation. The same evaporation procedure was repeated
for several times until up to 90 to 92% of the sample was evaporated. For example, the first
evaporation experiment performed on permeate from Filmtec NF 45 reduced the initial
permeate volume from 250 down to 120 ml for 52% volume evaporation. Second, third and
fourth evaporation reduced the volume from 120 to 78, from 78 to 39 and from 39 to 20 ml
for percentage evaporation, as compared to initial volumes, of 69, 84 and 92%, respectively.
Chemical and biological analyses were made as required by skilled staff from Chemistry and
Biology Departments, according to established ASTM methods.

Performance parameters were measured daily, on a routine basis by staff working on the
project from SWRO and Pilot Plant Departments. No membrane cleaning were carried out,
only simple flushing of membrane with MSF distillate or SWRO permeate was done
occasionally.


4. RESULTS & DISCUSSION OF NF PROCESS OPTIMIZATION

4.1 Quality of Pretreated Feed

With the replacement of sand filter media with high quality and finer particle size sand and in
some cases thicker sand media, the quality of the pretreated feed improved significantly and
was exceptionally good. This is in spite of feed non-chlorination and minimum use of
coagulant, i.e., 0.4 ppm Fe
+3
. Most of the time, the pretreated feed quality, as measured by
SDI, was less than 3, and for more than 50% of the time, SDI < 2.0. Occasionally the SDI<4
but it never exceeded the SDI <5, which is the SDI water quality limit required by the SW NF
membrane makers. These SDI values compare to SDI < 1.0 for the NF permeate. Thus, no
I ?
SWRO membrane fouling was expected, as already was observed here and earlier, when the
SWRO feed consisted of NF permeate [1-6, 9].

4.2 Bacteriological Study of NF Process

Obviously, and as is expected, the number of bacteria in colony forming unit/ml (CFU/ml)
should be at maximum and minimum values in raw seawater and in NF permeate, respectively.
Furthermore, the bacteria count in feed should decrease with feed pretreatment. This is
illustrated in Figure 4, which shows the bacteria count for feed samples taken at various stages
of the seawater pretreatment and the NF membrane process. The plotted data, also shown in
table form in the same figure, are the average bacteria count per month for the months of May
to mid December, 1998. The bacteria count is reported in CFU/ml before dual media filter
(BDMF), after dual media filter (ADMF), after micron cartridge filter (AMCF), in NF brine
(NFB) and in NF permeate (NFP). The results indicate that the pretreatment is very effective
in reducing number of bacteria, in pretreated feed after dual media filter and after micron
cartridge filters (AMCF). It is noticed that the monthly average of bacteria count in raw
seawater (BDMF), in pretreated feed and in NF product and brine are greater during the hot
months of June to September than they are during the months of October to December, yet
regardless of the season, they are the least in NFP. Theoretically, from size comparison of
about 1 m for bacteria to less than 0.01 m for NF pore size, no bacteria is expected to
pass through the NF membrane and, therefore, the bacteria count in NFP is expected also to
be near the zero count instead of the values showing in Figure 4. This hypothesis of near zero
bacteria count in NFP, however, can be supported by the observed differential pressure
across the SWRO membrane (P), which remained constant at 1 bar when the SWRO unit
was operated for a long period on feed consisting of NF product. Moreover, no decline in
SWRO membrane performance due to biofouling was observed. Even the NF membrane
itself, did not show any biofouling as evidenced by the steadiness of its P and membrane
autopsy results[10]. Earlier studies showed also the same trend in constancy of P 1.0 bar
[1-3].

4.3 Chemical Composition of NF Permeates

I I
Tables 2, 3 and 4 summarize the average concentration of the various ions in Gulf seawater,
Al-Jubail, before and after their NF treatment by the various NF membranes investigated in
this study. The three tables carry the same information except for membrane arrangement,
wherein Tables 2, 3 and 4 membranes are arranged serially according to their ability to lower
TDS, Ca
++
, and total hardness in NF permeate, respectively. A bar chart representation of
results selected for 7 NF membranes is given also in Figure 5. The results obtained from same
membranes wound in 4" x 40" or in 8" x 40" size are similar and, therefore, the data reported
in Tables 2, 3, 4, and Figure 5 applies for both membrane sizes.

At an applied feed pressure of 17.4 to 22 bar, the concentration of hardness ions in the NF
permeate of the various membranes examined differs from one NF membrane to another. In
all cases, the NF pretreatment of seawater feed reduced the SO
=
4
content from 3200 in
seawater to less than 70 ppm in NF permeate, for SO
=
4
rejection of better than 97%. For
some membranes, such as Osmonics DK4040 no sulfate could be detected in the permeate.
In other permeate from Filmtec NF-45, the SO
=
4
rejection is better than 99.7%, and still is
better than 98% for the NF membrane, Toray SU 610, Trisep TS40TSA and Osmonics HL
4040F. Likewise, at feed pH of 6.6 the M-alkalinity was reduced from 128 in seawater to
30 ppm in NF permeate of Filmtec NF 70 for about 77% rejection. This compared to 46
ppm or 63% when feed pH=8.2, i.e., nonacidified seawater (11). The rejection of M-
alkalinity differs from one NF membrane to another, and is pH dependent. Thus the M-
alkalinity concentration varied from 50 (rejection 61%) in NF permeate of Osmonics
HL4040F and Trisep TS40 TSA when feed pH = 6.8, down to 15 (rejection 88%) in
permeate of NF - 90 at feed pH = 6.17.

The reduction in concentration of hardness cations of Ca
++
and Mg
++
in seawater caused by
the NF pretreatment varied over a wide range from one NF membrane to another. This is
clearly illustrated in Figure 5 and Tables 2 and 3. For example, the Ca
++
concentration in
permeate from Filmtec NF-90, NF-70 and NF-45 are 19, 84 and 108 ppm for a percentage
rejection of 96, 82.5 and 77.5%, respectively. By comparison, the Ca
++
concentration in
permeates from Osmonics HL4040F and Trisep TS40TSA are 204 and 300 ppm,
respectively, for a percentage rejection by the former of 57.5% and by the latter membrane by
I I
only 37.5%. However Osmonics DK 4040F and Trisep TS80 have excellent Ca
++
rejection.
The Ca
++
concentration in the former permeate is only 44 ppm as compared to 99 ppm in the
latter permeate. The same trend is observed for the rejection of the Mg
++
ions. The Mg
++

content is again lowest in permeate of Filmtec membranes NF-90 (32 ppm) and with similar
values for Osmonics DK4040F permeate, for a rejection of better than 96%. These values
compare to Mg
++
concentration of 260 and 425 ppm in NF permeate from Osmonics
HL4040F and Trisep TS40 TSA, respectively, for Mg
++
rejection by the former membrane of
83.8% and only for 73.5% by the latter one. Concentration of Ca
++
and Mg
++
ions in the
permeate of other NF membranes is as shown in Tables 2, 3 and Figure 5. In general it can
be concluded that within the exception of the last three membranes in Table 3, the rest of the
NF membranes have good rejection of Ca
++
ions and , more or less, Mg
++
ions in their
permeate. Moreover, the NF membranes ionic rejection improves as the applied pressure is
increased.

Maximum reduction in seawater conductivity and TDS and, therefore, maximum total ions
rejection by the NF pretreatment, more or less, follows the same order as the NF membrane
arrangement in Table 2. This tends to be the case for rejection of Cl
-
ions and also as
expected for the Na
+
and K
+
(although concentrations of the latter two ions are not shown in
Table 2). These chemical analyses results are further discussed in latter Sections 4.3, 4.4 and
4.6, where in the latter section they are discussed with respect to their effect as feed on the
performance of SWRO membranes. According to their TDS rejection, the NF membranes
can be divided into three groups:

Group A with TDS < 25,000 ppm in permeate includes NF membranes of Filmtec NF-90,
Fluid Systems TFS 8921S and Hydranautics ESNA ;

Group B with TDS > 25,000 but < 33,000 ppm in permeate includes NF membranes of
Trisep TS80, Osmonics DK 4040F, Filmtec NF-70 Toray SU620F and NF 45; and

Group C includes the rest of the membranes in Table 2 with TDS > 33,000 ppm in
permeate.

I ?
The relationship between NF permeate TDS and conductivity is shown in Figure 6 and can be
defined by the following equation:

TDS
NF permeate
= 317.16 x Conductivity
1.1512
(1)

4.4 Scaling Potential of NF Permeate

Scaling in the desalination processes occurs when the concentration of scale forming ions
(hardness ions) reaches the saturation points (solubility limit) at which after a certain time,
scales nucleation starts, followed by the precipitation of scale matter. Antiscalants are
normally added to interfere with the nucleation process, therefore, preventing (delaying) up to
a certain concentration and temperature levels, the scale formation, and thus, allowing for the
operation of the seawater desalination plants at high saturation of hardness ions in seawater.
Methods initially developed to measure the efficiency of antiscalant in retarding scale formation
are the threshold effect and evaporation techniques.

The scaling threshold is considered to be the maximum permissible concentration factor of
hardness ions in water samples at fixed temperature prior to the start of the nucleation process.
Here in this investigation, both the threshold and evaporation techniques were utilized in
determining the effectiveness of NF pretreatment, which causes, among other changes in
seawater qualities, a high degree of hardness ions rejection, on retardation of scale formation
as compared to the antiscale additive approach. To re-emphasize, no antiscalant was added to
the NF permeate when used in both the threshold and evaporation experiments.

4.4.1 Threshold Effect of NF Permeate

The threshold effect at 95
o
C for each sample of NF permeate or seawater or brine with and
without antiscalant was determined here in terms of changes in the M-alkalinity, which is
measured in ppm as CaCO
3
, versus time, i.e., 0 to 30 minutes. The scaling threshold effect
curves for various permeates of Trisep 4040 TS40TSA, Osmonics HL8040F and Filmtec NF
70(8" x 40") are shown in Figure 7. For comparison, the scaling threshold effect curves for
seawater, MSF recycled seawater brine with and without the antiscalant poly phosponate
(PPN) are shown in the same figure. The brine consisted of seawater concentrated by 1.5
folds. Chemical composition of the seawater and permeate examined in this investigation are
shown in Table 5 with emphasis on their hardness (Ca
++
, Mg
++
, SO
=
4
, HCO
3
-
and total
I ?
hardness) content. The TDS, conductivity, Cl
-
and pH values of each sample are also shown
in the same table. As can be seen in Figure 7, the NF permeate threshold curves are quite
different in shape from those for seawater, brine and brine with PPN antiscalant. Moreover,
differences are also noticed among the NF permeate curves themselves. From the loss in their
M-alkalinity as shown in Figure 7, the NF-permeate scaling tendency ranking will be as
follows:
TrisepTS40TS > Osmonics HL 4040F > Permeate NF 70 (2)

Moreover, both the NF-70 and NF Osmonics permeate threshold curves are characterized
by having a slow gradual decline in their M-alkalinity values within the time scale region 5 to
30 minutes. This is also true for Trisep NF permeates but with some deviations from this
generalization within the first 5 to 10 minutes time scale region, where the loss in M-alkalinity is
more pronounced for the Trisep TS40TS NF permeates than it is observed for the Filmtec
NF-70 and Osmonics HL4040F permeates.

By contrast to NF permeates, the brine sample without antiscalant addition showed no
threshold range, while seawater sample had only a 5 minute threshold range. For both
samples, however, a drastic drop in M-alkalinity is noticed at very early stages of the test,
within the first 10 to 15 minutes. The addition to brine of 2 ppm PPN, which is considered to
be one of the best antiscalant at 95
o
C, delays the onset of decline in the threshold curve by
maintaining high degree of supersaturation of hardness ions (CaCO
3
) in brine and, therefore,
extends the threshold range to 20 minutes.

From this discussion and from the threshold curves in Figure 7, it can be concluded that within
the time region of 5 to 20 minutes, the scaling tendency of the various samples follow the
following scaling tendency ranking:

Brine > Seawater > Trisep > Osmonics 8" > Brine -PPN > Filmtec NF-70 (3)

where Trisep is NF TS40TS, Osmonics is NF HL4040F and Osmonics -8" indicates use of
8" HL8040F membranes. This means that within this time region, the scaling tendency is
I ?
maximum for brine followed by seawater and is minimum for Filmtec NF-70. Scaling
tendency for the other membranes falls in between the values for seawater and NF-70.

The scaling threshold tendency is also a function of Ca
++
concentration and as evidenced in
Figure 7 (bearing in mind that samples used in these analyses are not the same as in tabulation
because they were from different runs at somewhat different conditions), it increases as the
Ca
++
concentration in the sample is increased (see Figure 7 and Table 5). An exception to this
generalization is the brine -PPN curve. As mentioned earlier, the addition of the antiscalant
delays the scale nucleation process, allowing for operation at high degree of supersaturation
for an extended period. But, unlike the NF permeate threshold curves, which can be
characterized by having a slow, gradually declining curves with no steep drop in M-alkalinity
even at 30 minutes, the brine-PPN threshold curve exhibited a steep drop in M-alkalinity after
20 minutes, where it drops rapidly to threshold values less than those for Trisep TS40TS
permeate. From this, the above scaling tendency ranking as under 3 is valid only for the first
20 minutes.

4.4.2 Evaporation Measurements of NF Permeates
The evaporation measurements were made in four consecutive steps for permeates from
Filmtec NF70, and NF45, Osmonics HL8040F and Toray SU 610. Composition of the
samples were as shown in Table 6. Figure 8 shows the scaling potential of their NF product
as compared to the scaling potential of seawater and seawater treated with antiscalant.
Although as shown in same table, differences are noticed in chemical composition of the
samples, especially in their Ca
++
and Mg
++
, content (also TDS), the permeate solution turbidity
remained zero up to 92 and 94% without scale matter precipitation for HL4040F and NF-70,
respectively, and up to 92 for both NF 45 and SU 610 permeates. For the latter two NF
permeates, however, white crystalline precipitates appeared at 92%. From samples chemical
composition consideration and by comparison to evaporation performance of NF 70 and
HL4040F, this situation of precipitate formation at 92
o
C is not expected to occur at least in
the case of NF 45. Nevertheless, the results points out that at 95
o
C, it should be safe to
evaporate up to 90% of the NF permeate without scale formation. This means that at least
up to 90% distillate recovery can be realized without scale formation. Actually, this was
I ?
observed at least for the NF-70 permeate at the MSF pilot plant level. The MSF unit was
operated on NF-70 permeate as make-up at 120
o
C and distillate recovery of over 80%
without scale formation [1-5]. Unlike the NF permeate, which showed no scaling tendency ,
up to 90% or better, both the seawater sample with and without antiscalant showed scaling
tendency at about 30% and 20% of product evaporation, respectively (see Table 6 and Figure
8).

4.5 Performance of Various NF Membranes

The 4" x 40" membranes performance, as measured by their product (1) flow (2) recovery
(3) conductivity are shown vs operation time in Figures 9 to 19 for Filmtec NF-70, NF 45
and NF-90; Toray SU 610, Osmonics HL 4040F, DK 4040F and DL4040F; Trisep
TS40TS and TS80TS; Hydranautics ESNA and Fluid System NF-4721SR. In each figure the
operation conditions (temperature, pressure and feed SDI) are also indicated. For each NF
membrane two pressure vessels (V-1 and V-2), which were arranged in series in a brine
staging operation, were utilized in its performance evaluation. For each NF membrane case,
the individual performance of each module (a module consists of one pressure vessel
containing two membrane elements) is plotted separately vs operation time along with the
overall performance of the two modules (V-1 + V-2) combined. Figure 20 shows a
performance comparison of the same above nine membranes (using two vessels) vs operation
time.

The composition of the NF permeate from the NF membranes shown in Figures 9-29 are
given in a previous section and are listed in Table 2, which also shows the flow characteristics
and recovery ratios for the same NF membranes. From Figures 7 to 20, Table 2 and the
scaling tendency studies (Section 4.4) the following conclusions can be drawn:

(1) Permeate flow and recovery ratio increase as the feed temperature or applied pressure
is increased.
(2) As mentioned earlier, the SO
=
4
rejection of all NF membranes examined here is
considered to be excellent. For the one module case, the SO
=
4
rejection by the NF
membrane is better than 98% (Table 2).
I O
(3) The rejection of the hardness cation of Ca
++
and Mg
++
differ from one membrane to
another and in general is inferior in percentage value to same NF membrane rejection
of SO
=
4
. This variation especially in NF membrane rejection of Ca
++
, causes the
variation in scaling potential as measured by the threshold effect (Figure7). This is also
supported by earlier work done at RDC [1].
(4) The Ca
++
ion rejection by NF membranes follows the following order:
Group A & B > C (4)
(5) Mg
++
ion rejection by the various NF membranes tends to follow their same order of
rejection of Ca
++
.

By contrast to the rejection order of Ca
++
and Mg
++
by NF membranes, the flow and
recovery rates are as follows :
Group C > B> A (5)

For example, at 17.4 bar and 34.8 l/min feed flow, the permeate and recovery ratios for
Osmonics HL4040 (Group C) are 25.2 l/min and 64.6%, respectively, as compared to only
6.3 l/min. and recovery ratio of 43% for the NF-70 membrane (Group A), even at the
higher applied pressure of 22 bar (see Table 2). Group B membranes tends to have
balanced properties of permeate flow and ions rejection.

The observed differences in salt rejection and permeate flow and, therefore, permeate
recovery ratio among the various NF membranes examined here, can be explained in terms of
the membranes physical structure. Membranes with tight structure, thus small size pores, are
likely to have high salt rejection but low permeate flow, while the reverse tends to be the case
for membranes with less of a tight structure and larger size pores. The former tight structure
membrane resembles RO membrane in behavior, while the latter membrane with more of an
open structure resembles UF membranes in behavior. Rejection of SO
=
4
which as seen in
Table 2 and Figure 5 is more than 98% for all membranes, is not governed by the physical
structure of the NF membranes but rather by the membrane surface composition, which is
negatively charged. Evidently, all the NF membranes shown in Table 2 have sufficient negative
I ?
charge to perform the observed excellent SO
=
4
rejection, but not a high rejection for Ca
++
and
Mg
++
cations.

4.6 Effect of NF Permeate Feed Quality on SWRO Membrane Performance

This is discussed in some detail in earlier reference [1-3 and 5-6]. Here, it suffices to discuss
the effect of variation in NF permeates TDS and hardness ions concentration on SWRO
membrane performance.

The SWRO performance measured by permeate: a. flow, b. recovery and c. conductivity is
plotted vs. feed applied pressure in Figure 21. Feed to the SWRO unit consisted of the NF
permeate from Filmtec NF70 & NF45; Osmonics DK4040F & HL 4040F; Toray SU 610
and Ttrisep TS80NF membranes or conventionally pretreated seawater but without NF
pretreatment. In all cases, both the yield and SWRO permeate recovery increased as the
applied feed pressure is increased. The SWRO permeates yield and their recovery, however,
are much greater when using NF permeate as SWRO feed than when using seawater as feed.
Moreover, the rate of increase in both values (yield and recovery) is inversely related to feed
TDS. Thus, at pressure of 60 bar, the SWRO permeate yield and recovery are at maximum
values of 7.1 l/min and 70.7%, respectively, when the feed consisted of NF-70 permeate,
(TDS = 13,700 ppm), and dropped to minimum values of 3.6 l/min and 36% when the
SWRO feed consisted of seawater (TDS 44,000 ppm). The SWRO permeate yield and
recovery when using the other NF permeates (shown in Figure 21) as feed to SWRO, fall in-
between the above two ranges. This dependence of SWRO yield and recovery on feed TDS
is very well established through the equation :

P
net
= P
appl
- (6)

where P
net
equals the effective pressure, P
appl
and are the differential applied pressure
and osmotic pressure across the membrane, respectively. Obviously, as the feed TDS is
increased the P
net
, which drives the permeate through the membrane, will decrease and
consequently the quantity of permeate is also decreased. The permeate starts to flow from
SWRO membrane as the applied feed pressure exceeds the osmotic pressure, which is for
I ?
permeate of FilmTec NF-70 equals 9.6 as compared to 17.7, 22.6, and 25.5 bar for Trisep
TS80, Osmonics DK 4040F, Filmtec NF 45 and Osmonics HL 4040F, respectively, and 31
bar for seawater.

A linear relationship (straight line) is noticed between permeate flow and pressure (Figure
21a). This same relationship should also apply to percent permeate recovery, which follows
the permeate flow, provided all the tests of feeding SWRO with different NF permeate are
conducted under standard, same operating conditions of pressure, temperature and feed flow.
The noticed deviation of same recovery data in Figure 21b, especially in the high pressure
region above 65 bar, is mostly due to seasonal variation in operating temperature and/or
variation in the feed quantity.

Figure 22 illustrates the dependence of SWRO permeate flow on SWRO feed TDS at
different pressure of 40 to 70 bar, where the feed consisted of permeate derived from NF
Trisep TS 80 (TDS 25,000 ppm) NF Osmonics DK 4040 (TDS 29,000), Filmtec NF 45
(TDS 30,200), NF Toray SU610 (TDS 32500), NF Osmonics HL4040 (TDS 33,500) and
Seawater (TDS 44,000). For each feed the SWRO permeate flow increases as the feed
pressure increased. At the same pressure, however, the permeate flow increases inversely
with the decrease in TDS of feed. Moreover, the rate of increase is 0.176 l/bar at feed TDS
of 25,000 ppm for Trisep TS80 permeate as compared to only 0.103 l/bar at the larger feed
TDS of 44,000 ppm for seawater feed i. e., for the ratio of former : later of 1.7:1.

Major differences are noticed in SWRO product quality as measured by conductivity, which
at 60 bar pressure equals less than 800 s/cm when the feed consists of NF permeate and
about 2200 s/cm when it consists of seawater, requiring in the latter case further treatment to
reduce its conductivity to drinking water standards.


5. RESULTS & DISCUSSION OF NF-SWRO DEMONSTRATION PLANT
TRIALS

Work done under this section involved the following tasks which were completed on time
according to schedule: (1) Basic design of the NF-SWRO demonstration plant, (2)
I ?
Conversion and upgrading of existing SWRO pilot plants to an NF-SWRO demonstration
plant utilizing commercial large size 8" x 40" and 8" x 40" or 9" x 40" NF and SWRO
membrane elements respectively, (3) Modification and upgrading of SWRO pretreatment to
provide sufficient good quality feed to the NF unit of the NF-SWRO demonstration plant, (4)
Operation and optimization of the NF-SWRO demonstration plant and (5) Supply to MSF
pilot plant of make-up, which consisted of NF permeates or reject from SWRO unit in the
NF-SWRO dual hybrid plant.

Work done on the first three tasks and results obtained on modification and upgrading of
pretreatment pilot plant (Task-3 above) were described in earlier sections 2.1 and 2.3. The
NF permeate and the SWRO reject from an NF-SWRO unit were supplied as make-up to
MSF. As mentioned earlier the results of this work are to be reported in Part-III of this
program in the project titled "MSF Operation at TBT of 120-160
o
C in the hybrid NF-MSF
and NF-SWRO
reject
-MSF". This section covers only the results obtained under Section (4) the
"operation and optimization of the NF-SWRO demonstration plant" and more specifically,
deals with the operation and determination of its operating and performance parameters which
are essential for the operation of commercial plants utilizing same size NF and SWRO
modules.

5.1 NF 8 x 40 membrane elements Trials Operating Conditions

To establish the operating parameters, first work was done by the operation of the NF unit,
which is shown in Figure 2, as part of the NF-SWRO demonstration plant, at different
operating conditions of feed flow, temperature and applied pressure. The NF unit consists, as
mentioned above, of three brine staged 8" modules connected in series, where each module
consists of a pressure vessel fitted with two 8" x 40" NF membranes, which are, again, brine
staged.

Figure 23 shows the effect of applied pressure on permeates from Filmtec NF-70: flow,
recovery and conductivity at a feed flow rate of 4m
3
/h and feed temperature of 33
o
C. Both
the permeates flow and their recovery ratios increased as the applied pressure was increased,
while only the permeates conductivity from first module decreased with applied pressure. The
I I
permeate conductivity from module #2, however showed, more or less, a steady value with an
increase in applied pressure, while the conductivity of permeate from module #3 showed an
increase in permeate conductivity with the applied pressure. Reason for this increase is the
high salinity of feed to this third module combined with the reduction in quantity of feed it
received. By comparison to modules # 1 and #2 which at P = 35 bar, received 4 m
3
/h at
TDS of about 44,000 ppm and 3.2 m
3
/h at TDS about 60,500 ppm, respectively, module #3
received only 2.7 m
3
/h feed with high TDS of about 71,700 ppm. The net effect of the
changes in feed flow and salinity of the various modules on conductivity of their combined
product is as shown in Figure 23, where the conductivity of the combined product decreased
with some sort of leveling - off towards the end of the conductivity - pressure curve. For the
total permeate at pressure of 38 bar , the conductivity was about 18,000 s/cm ( TDS
10,000 ppm) as compared to 44,000 ppm in gulf seawater , for reduction in TDS of about
77%.

The effect of feed flow rate at different applied pressure on performance of NF-70 membrane
(8") is shown in Figure 24. The decrease in the combined permeates conductivity with increase
in feed flow is accompanied by an increase in both permeate flow and recovery up to a feed
flow of about 6.5 m
3
/h, thereafter the recovery started to decline. This indicates that the
optimum feed flow for this three module series arrangement is about 6.5 m
3
/h. This optimum
feed flow case prevails under the present operation conditions, however, it is expected to
change with operation time and operation conditions. As shown in Figure 24c, a sharp drop in
conductivity of the combined permeates from about 30,000 s/cm to about 22,000 s/cm is
noticed when the applied pressure was increased from 20 to 30 bar, respectively, and it
continued to drop but at a slow rate up to 35 bar, thereafter it tended to level-off when the
feed flow 5.5 m
3
/h, but permeate conductivity continued to drop when the feed flow 6
m
3
/h.

Both the permeate flow and recovery increased as the feed temperature was increased. This
is shown in Figure 25, which shows the performance of the 4" NF-70 membrane at various
temperatures. The changes in permeate flow with temperature is about 3% per one degree
o
C. Permeate conductivity, however, tends to increase slightly with an increase in feed
temperature.
I I

The composition, percentage salt and individual hardness ions rejection in Filmtec NF-70-
8040 permeate, from the first module (2 NF elements) and the combined product from three
modules, are shown in Table 7. At an applied feed pressure of 28 bar, the total ions rejection,
as represented by TDS rejection, is quite significant and equals 73.2% and 65.9% for
permeate from the first module and the combined product from the three modules,
respectively. By comparison to TDS rejection, superior ion rejection of 98.4, 99.6, 94 and
87.5% were obtained from the first module permeate for the hardness ions SO
=
4
, Mg
++
, Ca
++

and M-alkalinity, respectively.

Similar but slightly lower hardness ions rejection values were obtained for the combined
product from the three module units (Table 7). What is impressive also is that the NF-70
rejection of the monovalent ions, e.g., Cl
-
by about 68.8 and 61.2% for permeate from the
first module and the combined product from the three modules, respectively. Some changes
in ionic rejection values, however, are noticed with passage in operation time and also with the
applied feed pressure, e.g., compare ion rejection for NF-70 at 28 bar in Table 7 to its ion
rejection at 22 bar in Table 2.

5.2. Performance Evaluation of 8" x 40" NF Membranes

Performance evaluation studies were made for the following 8" x 40" NF membranes utilizing
the NF part of the demonstration plant shown in Figure 2: Filmtec NF-70, Osmonics HL
8040F, Toray SU 620F, Fluid System NF 8921S and Hydranautics 8040 UHY ESNA.
The latter two membranes were screen tested only for a short period, and since they gave very
little flow their results will not be discussed in this report. Figure 26 shows the Filmtec NF-70
permeate : b. Flow, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity vs operation time at the a. operation
conditions shown also in the same figure. The V
1
, V
2
and V
3
, as usual are pressure vessels
#1, #2 and #3, respectively, where pressure vessel with its two membrane elements
constitutes a module. As expected, the permeates flow and their recovery are greatest for
module #1 followed by these for module #2 and least yield was obtained from module #3.
At an applied pressure of 28 bar and feed flow of about 6 m
3
/h, the total permeate flow of
over 2 m
3
/h at the start of the experiment dropped to about 1.5 and 1.2 m
3
/h in about 500 and
1450 operation hours, respectively. For the same period, the product conductivity from first
I ?
module decreased from about 20,000 to about 15,000 s/cm, while the conductivity of the
combined product from the three modules decreased from 35,000 to about 23,000 s/cm.

The case that both the differential pressure (P) across the membranes and feed SDI were
steady, with P 1 bar and SDI 3.5, could suggest no membrane fouling or very little of it.
Perhaps, the more than expected loss in permeate flow and their recovery as well as improved
salt rejection within the 0 to 500 hour operational time scale (Figures 26) could be attributed
partially to a higher than expected membrane compaction and/or to the settling of the very fine
particle on NF-70 membrane surface. The high compaction, however, was not observed
earlier for the same NF-70 membrane, when using size 4" x 40" (Figure 9). Other than this
difference in membrane size, the only other difference in operating conditions between the
earlier (using 4" x 40" ) and the present (using 8" x 40" ) evaluation of NF-70 membranes was
in the applied pressure, where 22 and 28-40 bar were used in earlier and present evaluation
test, respectively (Figures 9 and 26). Perhaps, this difference in working pressure could
account for the observed greater than normally expected compaction of NF-70 membrane in
the latter evaluation test. Raising the pressure to about 42 bar, while reducing the feed flow
rate to about 3.5 m
3
/h (which is the maximum flow that can be obtained from the pump at this
pressure) increased both the permeate flow and recovery to about 1.8 m
3
/h and to about 45
2 %, respectively (Figure 26). Moreover, the permeate flow, more or less, remained
steady over the operation time scale of 1440 to 2850 hours, which means that within this time
scale region not only the membrane compaction is occurring at the normally expected rate but
also suggests that no membrane fouling, is occurring, otherwise the membrane yield should
have dropped. This case is further discussed in Section 5.5, which deals with the restoration of
NF -70 membrane performance. It is interesting to note that this type of behavior, i.e., decline
in permeate flow with operation time, has not been noticed with many other membranes (see
Figures 10 to 19).

Figure 27 shows the performance of NF membranes in a mixed arrangement of Osmonics NF
HL 8040 membrane elements placed in first vessel (V
1
) and Filmtec NF-70 8040 membrane
elements placed in second and third vessels (V
2
and V
3
) of the NF unit shown in Figure 2.
Figure 28 shows also the performance of the same NF membranes in a mixed arrangement but
I ?
with same Osmonics membrane elements placed in V
3
, while the same Filmtec NF-70
membrane elements were placed in V
1
and V
2.
Again each of the 8" pressure vessels
contained two NF membrane elements of 8" x 40".

Initially, for the first 450 hours of operation, at an applied pressure of 18 bar (250 psi) and
feed temperature of 35
o
C, the permeate flow from the Osmonics membrane of 1.8 m
3
/h
constituted about 80% of the combined permeate flow from V
1
+V
2
+V
3.
The permeate flow
rose to about 2.3 m
3
/h when the pressure raised to 25 bars (Figure 27) The same
generalization can be made for the NF membranes recovery ratios. The 80% ratio of
permeate flow and their recovery ratio from Osmonics membranes to the total permeate flow
and total recovery ratio of the three vessels (V
1
+V
2
+V
3
) were, more or less, maintained during
the extended operation period, even when changing the membrane arrangement as shown in
Figures 28 and 29. Of course, as usual, an increase in applied pressure and/or feed
temperature resulted in an increase in both permeates feed flow and their recovery ratio and
vice versa (Figures 23 to 25).

Contrary to the case of permeates feed flow and recovery ratios, which for Osmonics HL
8040F are much superior to those of Filmtec NF-70, the latter yields permeate with a much
lower conductivity and TDS values than those observed for the former NF membranes. One
remarkable aspect of the Osmonics NF HL 8040FL membrane is that, in addition to its high
permeate flow and recovery performance, it practically maintained a normal compaction
behavior with, more or less, a steady performance from 0 to 1400 hours of operation. Its salt
and hardness ions rejections are as shown in Table 2 and Figure 5.

Comparison of permeate yield of Osmonics DK, HL and DL (Figures 14, 13 and 15) shows
that at a pressure of 25 bar, the yield from 4 of 4x40 elements, arranged in series in a brine
staging operation, were in the ratio of 20 : 25 : 50 l/min or the permeate yield from the DL is
twice, or more than, the permeate quantity produced by the same number of DK or HL NF
membrane elements. Stated differently, twice the number of DK or HL membrane elements
are required to produce the same quantity of permeate from NF DL membrane elements. The
ionic rejection of the Osmonic NF membrane, however, is reversed, i.e., DK > HL > DL (see
Table 2). Thus, a trade off in properties of flow and rejection of those membranes is to be
I ?
made when selecting one membrane type or another. Utilization of 4 DL elements of 8x40
in series is expected to give yield of over 6 m
3
/h. This very high flow characteristic is quite
interesting and an economic consideration of its use in an NF-SWRO plants worth further
investigation, which shall be carried out under a new project dealing with the technoeconomic
evaluation of using NF groups B and C membranes (Table 2) in the pretreatment of feed
to seawater desalination plants.

Figure 29 shows the performance vs operation time of NF 8x40 Toray SU 620F in pressure
vessel 1, Filmtec NF 70 in pressure vessel 2 and Osmonic HL in pressure vessel 3. Operating
conditions were as shown in same Figure 29a. At a pressure of 17.4 bar, the Toray SU 620F
produced about 3 m
3
/h from the first two elements in the six elements modules, which was
maintained over the entire operation time and it accounts for ~70% of the module total yield of
4.2 m
3
/h from a feed of about 6.5 m
3
/h, for a total recovery of about 60%. The 6.5 m
3
/h is
approaching the maximum flow limit for the present pump at this pressure. Higher feed flow
definitely will not only increase the permeate flow from SU 620F and other membranes, as
well as the total flow, but also should improve the permeate quality. This matter deserves
further investigation, which shall be carried out in the near future. Even when placing SU 620F
in second module, after over 1000 hours of operation while in first module it continued to
produce over 3.2 m
3
/h, thus maintaining a steady flow. The productivity of the 8 x 4 Toray
SU 620F is the highest among all the 8 x 4 NF membrane tested so far. Moreover,
product TDS is about 30460 ppm for a TDS rejection of 31%. Hardness rejection is as
shown in Table 2.

5.3 Operating Conditions of SWRO in an NF-SWRO Hybrid

The effect of feed pressure on the performance of SWRO membrane, Toyobo HFF HM
8255, fed NF-70 permeate is shown in Figure 30. Permeate flow and recovery ratio were
increased as the feed pressure was increased. For example, the total permeate flow at 30 bar
was 1.2 m
3
/h as compared to 2.1 m
3
/h at an applied feed pressure of 55 bar or greater by
75%. This represents an increase in permeate flow with pressure ( flow/P) of 0.036
m
3
/bar or about 3%/bar. Likewise, under same operating conditions, the recovery increased
with pressure in the same manner as SWRO permeate flow (see Figure 30b).
I ?

As expected, among the three membrane elements, the first element has the highest yield
followed respectively by the flow from second and third elements. Conductivity is best for
permeate from second element, although it should have been best for permeate from first
element and is considerably much higher than expected for the third element which was
malfunctioning since its initial operation. The high conductivity of permeate from the third
element has a significant influence on the average conductivity of the total product, which at a
pressure of 50 bar is about 750 s/cm. Without mixing of permeate from element #3 with
permeate from elements #1 and #2, the average permeate conductivity of the mixture (from
the latter two elements) at a pressure of 50 bar is about 300 s/cm (Figure 30).
The influence of feed flow rate on SWRO membrane performance in an NF-SWRO
demonstration plant is shown in Figure 31. Increasing the flow rate of feed (consisting of NF-
70 permeate) to SWRO membrane increased its permeate flow rate but not the recovery ratio
and in this case has a hardly detectable increase in permeate conductivity. For comparison,
Figure 31 shows also the performance of the same SWRO membrane when operated on feed
consisting of seawater without the NF pretreatment. At 3.0 m
3
/h feed and at an applied
pressure of 50 bar, the recovery from the conventionally operated plant (SWRO curve) is only
26% compared to 70% when operated on feed consisting of NF-70 permeate, or in the ratio
of 1:2.69 by the latter case over the former case by, i.e., an increase by 2.7 folds. This is in
addition to the improvement in permeate quality when the SWRO plant is operated on NF
permeate.

5.4 Performance evaluation of SWRO membrane in an NF-SWRO hybrid
Figures 32 shows the performance of SWRO Toyobo HFF HM 8255 SWRO membrane
operated on NF-70 permeate as feed under the operating conditions as shown under (a) in
same figure. Membrane performance is measured by permeate flow, recovery and
conductivities, as shown respectively by curves (b), ( c ) and (d) of the same figure. Because
of the low TDS of NF permeate which constituted the SWRO feed, recovery of 50% was
obtained at a very low pressure of 35 bar or less. Upon increasing the applied feed pressure,
permeate recovery and permeate flow are expected to rise significantly. This has been
discussed in an earlier section, and as shown in Figure 30 recovery of 75% can be obtained at
I O
an applied pressure of 60 bar. In spite of the high TDS of permeate of over 1000 ppm from
element #3, nevertheless, the average conductivity of total permeate from the three SWRO
elements ranged between 600 to 700 s/cm.

Figure 33 shows the performance for over 1700 hours of operation of Toyobo HM9255
(9x40) HFF SWRO membranes on feed consisting of :
(1) for the first 900 hours of a mixed permeate in the ratio of 50 : 50 of Filmtec NF45 and
Toray SU610, and
(2) for the remaining 800 hours of , again, a mixed permeate in the ratio of 30:70 of Filmtec
NF70 to Osmonic HL8040, and with the Osmonic membrane placed in vessel 3, while
Filmtec NF membrane was placed in vessel 1 and 2 of the 8 inch NF unit. In both cases
a SWRO permeate recovery of about 50% was obtained at pressure of 50 bar. This
ratio is expected to increase as the feed, which was low about 2.8 to 3.0 m
3
/h and less
than the normal feed requirement of over 4 m3/h, and applied pressure are increased.

Figure 34 shows the permeate of Toyobo HM9255 HFFF SWRO membrane fed on mixed
permeate from Toray SU620F, Filmtec NF70 8040 and Osmonics HL8040, in the ratio 67 :
6 : 27, respectively (for detail of permeate flow and ratio see Figure 29). As in the previous
case, permeate recovery of 42% was obtained at an applied pressure of 50 bar. Higher
SWRO permeate recovery is expected by increasing the pressure and the feed flow, where
the feed flow in the latter case (Figure 34) was not sufficient. Same discussion applies to the
case shown in Figure 35, where feed to SWRO unit was shown in same figure. By lowering
the TDS of feed, the overall permeate recovery at operating pressure of 50 bar was 50%
(Figure 35) as compared to 42% (Figure 34) where in the latter case the TDS of the feed to
SWRO unit from NF product was higher than that in the former case.

5.5 The NF 70 Membrane Performance Restoration

In Section 5.2, the larger than expected decline in NF70 performance (Figure 26) was
discussed, and the assumption was made that this case could be attributed (or partially) to a
high degree of membrane compaction at high pressure of up to 40 bar or to membrane fouling.
To rule out fouling an investigation was started by cleaning the membrane. Detail of this
experiment is discussed in a special report to be issued on a later date. Here, it suffices to
I ?
summarize the results obtained by using an effective cleaning method consisting of cleaning the
membrane by a special cleaning solution containing 1,000 ppm Cl
2
with or without H
2
O
2
at
0.5% concentration in the solution. The solution pH was maintained at 11, otherwise it will
damage the membrane. In this trial H
2
O
2
was used as part of the cleaning solution. Six NF70,
4x40 membrane elements were arranged in series with brine staging, utilizing the NF part of
the pilot plant shown in Figure 1. At feed flow of 60 l/min , and pressure of 25 bar, the total
permeate flow before membrane cleaning was 4.5 l/min. Under same operating conditions, but
after cleaning, the flow rose to an amazing value of 30 l/min or by about 6.66 folds, and in the
expected ratio of 12 : 10 : 8 l/min for the first, second and third vessel, respectively. Before
cleaning the membrane, the permeate conductivity was 20,000 s/cm and rose after cleaning
to about 42,500 s/cm, which compares to its value (42,450 s/cm) at the start of operation
of the new NF-70 membrane (see Fig. 9). The conductivity, however, was 38,500, 44,200
and 47,000 s/cm in permeate from the three consecutive vessels, respectively, for the
average conductivity of 42,466 s/cm, which corresponds to a TDS value of 28,000 ppm.
Thus, the TDS rejection after cleaning were 36%, which again is equal to the original rejection
value for the new NF70 (see Fig. 9). Extended operation after cleaning of the membrane,
however, showed a decline in permeate flow, presumably by catching on the surface of this
particular membrane of very fine particulates, which were not removed by the feed
pretreatment.


6. CONCLUSIONS

(1) The study covers two main areas of investigation: the optimization of NF pretreatment of
feed to 4 or 8 inch seawater plants and the construction and evaluation of an NF-
SWRO Demonstration Plant, utilizing large size 8x40 or 9x40 NF and SWRO
membranes.
(2) Both the 4 and 8 inch pilot plants were modified to allow for the performance evaluation
(permeate flow, recovery and ionic rejection) of each of the various NF and SWRO
membranes.
I ?
(3) Part of the work was concerned with providing make-up to MSF pilot plant, consisted
of NF permeate or seawater reject from a hybrid NF-SWRO. The part will be
reported separately under Part III of the NF work.
(4) A total of 13 NF membranes, size 4x40 and/or 8x40 were investigated: Filmtec
NF90, NF70 and NF45; Osmonics HL, DK and DL; Toray SU610 and SU 620F ;
Trisep TS40 and TS80 ; Fluid Systems 8921S and 4921SR as well as Hydraunatics
ESNA.
(5) In general, for all the NF membranes, the permeate flow and recovery ratio increased as
the feed temperature or applied pressure was increased.
(6) The SO
=
4
rejection of all NF membranes examined here is considered to be excellent.
For the one module case, the SO
=
4
rejection by any of the NF membrane is better than
98%.
(7) The rejection of the hardness cation of Ca
++
differs from one membrane to another and,
in general, is less than the rejection of SO
=
4
.
(8) The Mg
++
ion rejection by the various NF membranes tends to follow the same order as
that Ca
++
rejection.
(9) The observed variation in NF permeate scaling potential, as measured by the threshold
effect (Figure 7) follows their Ca
++
content.
(10) At the same applied pressure, NF membranes with high rejection of Ca
++
and Mg
++

tend to have low flow and recovery, while the reverse is true, i.e., membranes with low
rejection of Ca
++
and Mg
++
tend to have high flow and high permeate recovery.
(11) From their permeate flow and ion rejection characteristics the various membranes
examined were grouped into:
n Group A characterized by high ion rejection (more than 45%) and low permeate flow.
n Group B characterized by balanced properties of good ion rejection (25 to 45%) and
good permeate flow,
??
n Group C characterized by high permeate flow but moderate ion rejection (20 to
25%).
(12) At feed SDI <4 nearly all membranes maintained a steady permeate flow with operation
time, with exception of one NF membrane. A membrane cleaning study was undertaken
and membrane performance was restored by cleaning at pH of 11 with special Cl
2

and/or Cl
2
with H
2
O
2
solution. However, a decline in permeate flow was noticed on an
extended operation.
(13) This report serves as a detailed documentation for all the R&D work done under this
part of the project.


7. RECOMMENDATIONS

(1) Initially, Group B of NF membranes can be recommended for use in an NF-SWRO
commercial plants. However, because of their high flow and other characteristics, there
are great merits in considering membranes in Group C for the same purpose.
Preference of using of either membranes of Group B or C in an NF-SWRO plant,
however, can be established through a recommended technoechonomic study, which
should be added to the list of the 8 projects already recommended in Reference 1, and
thus it shall constitute Project Part IX.
(2) There could be a room for the development by the RO membrane industry of an NF
seawater membrane combining some of excellent ionic and hardness rejection
properties of the A type membranes with good permeate flow and permeation
characteristic of B or C type membranes. Joint work on this idea by the maker and
users of NF membrane, is recommended and is encouraged.
(3) Work is to be continued on evaluation of new NF, also on hollow fiber NF membranes
under Part IX of this NF project.
?I
Table 1 : Media thickness and particle size before and after media replacement
Media Thickness (mm)
Media Type Particle size (mm) Filter #1 Filter #2
Before media After media Before media After media
replacement replacement replacement replacement
(a) Pilot Plant
Anthracite 1.2-3 203 320 - -
Coarse sand 0.7-1.3 152 - 152 -
Fine sand #1 0.6-0.8 406 - - -
Fine sand #2 0.55 - 460 - 460
Very fine sand 0.3-0.5 - - 533 -
(b) Demonstration Plant
Anthracite 0.8 400 300 400 -
Fine sand 0.55 400 300 400 -
Very fine sand 0.25-0425 - 200 - 800


?I

Table 2 : Comparison of 4 Nanofiltration ( NF) Membrane
2
Performance at Feed Pressure of 17.2 bar (250 psi) (Two modules in series, each pressure vessels contains two
elements) (Membranes are arranged serially according to their ability to lower TDS in permeate)

Membran
e
Seawater NF-90
*
TFS
8921S
ESNA ANM
TS80
NF-70
**
DK
4040F
SU -
620F
***

NF - 45 SU - 610 HL 4040
F I 550
DL
4040F
ANM
TS40
NF-
4721SR
Date
17/02/99 29/07/98 30/08/98 23/05/99 28/06/97 23/05/99 12/07/99 28/07/98 29/07/98 21/09/98 12/07/99 21/09/98 15/06/99
Temp.
o
C
23.0 37 38 28.7 34 28.7 34.8 37.2 37 33.5 34.0 33.5 33.8
Flow Rates (l/min)
Feed
14.1 18.27 20.4 28.5 30.52 31.03 117 33.7 35.95 39.31 63.6 37.69 40
Product
2.17 0.56 2.85 8.52 13.19 11.03 45 16.73 21.57 25.39 32.2 22.25 29.6
Reject
11.9 17.7 17.53 20 17.23 20 72 16.96 14.38 14.92 31.4 15.44 10.4
Recovery
%
15.4 3.01 14 29.9 43.2 35.6 38.6 49.6 60.01 64.6 50.6 59 74
Conductivit
y (s/cm)
60000 21900 32600 36900 39900 43200 46300 46600 48600 48800 49200 51000 49900 52600
TDS (ppm)
44000 12900 21700 24026 25400 28270 29640 30460 32420 33080 33680 34250 35680 35920
pH
6.6 8.2 6.17 6.52 6.21 6.35 7.65 6.48 6.61 6.59 6.43 6.89 6.76 7.06 6.64
Hardness

Total
Hardness
7800 185 840 946 553 930 241 800 680 1600 1580 1318 3500 1810
SO
4
=
(ppm)
3240 3200 41 99 107 20 52 ND <2 31 33 33 33 112 70
HCO
3
-

(ppm)
101 176 19 56 37 35 54 46 50 68 71 67 68 73 87
M.
Alkalinity
83 128 15 46 30 28 44 38 41 56 58 55 56 60 71
Ca
++
(ppm)
480 19 92 82 79 88 44 112 108 164 204 163 300 174
Mg
++
(ppm)
1610 32 150 180 86 173 32 126 112 245 260 222 425 334
Cl
-
(ppm)
22780 8250 13490 14503 15290 17140 17770 18192 19500 20280 19446 20090 20074 20860
Group
A B C
* At feed pressure of 24.1 kg/cm
2
** From 10 elements at feed pressure 19.3 kg/cm
2
*** Deduced from 8 inch membrane element data

2
NF 90, NF 70 and NF 45 FilmTec ; DK 4040, DL 4040 and HL 4040 Osmonics ; TS 80 and TS 40 Trisep ; TFS 8921S and NF 4721 SR Fluid System ; SU 610 and SU 620F Toray
and ESNA Hydranautics
??


Table 3 : Comparison of 4 Nanofiltration ( NF) Membrane
3
Performance at Feed Pressure of 17.2 bar (250 psi) (Two modules in series, each pressure vessels contains two
elements) (Membranes are arranged serially according to Ca
++
concentration in their permeate)

Membran
e
Seawater NF-90
*
DK
4040F
ANM
TS80
ESNA NF-70
**
TFS
8921S
NF - 45 SU -
620F
***

DL
4040F
SU - 610 NF-
4721SR
HL 4040
F I 550
ANM
TS40
Date
17/02/99 23/05/99 23/05/99 30/08/98 28/06/97 29/07/98 28/07/98 12/07/99 12/07/99 29/07/98 15/06/99 21/09/98 21/09/98
Temp.
o
C
23.0 28.7 28.7 38 34 37 37.2 34.8 34.0 37 33.8 33.5 33.5
Flow Rates (l/min)
Feed
14.1 31.03 28.5 20.4 30.52 18.27 33.7 117 63.6 35.95 40 39.31 37.69
Product
2.17 11.03 8.52 2.85 13.19 0.56 16.73 45 32.2 21.57 29.6 25.39 22.25
Reject
11.9 20 20 17.53 17.23 17.7 16.96 72 31.4 14.38 10.4 14.92 15.44
Recovery
%
15.4 35.6 29.9 14 43.2 3.01 49.6 38.6 50.6 60.01 74 64.6 59
Conductivit
y (s/cm)
60000 21900 46300 39900 36900 43200 32600 48600 46600 51000 48800 52600 49200 49900
TDS (ppm)
44000 12900 29640 25400 24026 28270 21700 32420 30460 34250 33080 35920 33680 35680
pH
6.6 8.2 6.17 6.48 6.35 6.21 7.65 6.52 6.59 6.61 6.76 6.43 6.64 6.89 7.06
Hardness

Total
Hardness
7800 185 241 553 946 930 840 680 800 1318 1600 1810 1580 3500
SO
4
=
(ppm)
3240 3200 41 ND 20 107 52 99 31 <2 33 33 70 33 112
HCO
3
-

(ppm)
101 176 19 46 35 37 54 56 68 50 68 71 87 67 73
M.
Alkalinity
83 128 15 38 28 30 44 46 56 41 56 58 71 55 60
Ca
++
(ppm)
480 19 44 79 82 88 92 108 112 163 164 174 204 300
Mg
++
(ppm)
1610 32 32 86 180 173 150 112 126 222 245 334 260 425
Cl
-
(ppm)
22780 8250 17770 15290 14503 17140 13490 19500 18192 20090 20280 20860 19446 20074
* At feed pressure of 24.1 kg/cm
2
** From 10 elements at feed pressure 19.3 kg/cm
2
*** Deduced from 8 inch membrane element data

3
NF 90, NF 70 and NF 45 FilmTec ; DK 4040, DL 4040 and HL 4040 Osmonics ; TS 80 and TS 40 Trisep ; TFS 8921S and NF 4721 SR Fluid System ; SU 610 and SU 620F Toray
and ESNA Hydranautics
??


Table 4 : Comparison of 4 Nanofiltration ( NF) Membrane
4
Performance at Feed Pressure of 17.2 bar (250 psi) (Two modules in series, each pressure vessels contains two
elements) (Membranes are arranged serially according to total hardness concentration in their permeate)

Membrane
Seawater NF-90
*
DK
4040F
ANM
TS80
NF - 45 SU -
620F
***

TFS
8921S
NF-70
**
ESNA DL
4040F
HL 4040
F I 550
SU - 610 NF-
4721SR
ANM
TS40
Date
17/02/99 23/05/99 23/05/99 28/07/98 12/07/99 29/07/98 28/06/97 30/08/98 12/07/99 21/09/98 29/07/98 15/06/99 21/09/98
Temp.
o
C
23.0 28.7 28.7 37.2 34.8 37 34 38 34.0 33.5 37 33.8 33.5
Flow Rates (l/min)
Feed
14.1 31.03 28.5 33.7 117 18.27 30.52 20.4 63.6 39.31 35.95 40 37.69
Product
2.17 11.03 8.52 16.73 45 0.56 13.19 2.85 32.2 25.39 21.57 29.6 22.25
Reject
11.9 20 20 16.96 72 17.7 17.23 17.53 31.4 14.92 14.38 10.4 15.44
Recovery %
15.4 35.6 29.9 49.6 38.6 3.01 43.2 14 50.6 64.6 60.01 74 59
Conductivity
(s/cm)
60000 21900 46300 39900 48600 46600 32600 43200 36900 51000 49200 48800 52600 49900
TDS (ppm)
44000 12900 29640 25400 32420 30460 21700 28270 24026 34250 33680 33080 35920 35680
pH
6.6 8.2 6.17 6.48 6.35 6.59 6.61 6.52 7.65 6.21 6.76 6.89 6.43 6.64 7.06
Hardness

Total
Hardness
7800 185 241 553 680 800 840 930 946 1318 1580 1600 1810 3500
SO
4
=
(ppm)
3240 3200 41 ND 20 31 <2 99 52 107 33 33 33 70 112
HCO
3
-
(ppm)
101 176 19 46 35 68 50 56 54 37 68 67 71 87 73
M.
Alkalinity
83 128 15 38 28 56 41 46 44 30 56 55 58 71 60
Ca
++
(ppm)
480 19 44 79 108 112 92 88 82 163 204 164 174 300
Mg
++
(ppm)
1610 32 32 86 112 126 150 173 180 222 260 245 334 425
Cl
-
(ppm)
22780 8250 17770 15290 19500 18192 13490 17140 14503 20090 19446 20280 20860 20074
* At feed pressure of 24.1 kg/cm
2
** From 10 elements at feed pressure 19.3 kg/cm
2

4
NF 90, NF 70 and NF 45 FilmTec ; DK 4040, DL 4040 and HL 4040 Osmonics ; TS 80 and TS 40 Trisep ; TFS 8921S and NF 4721 SR Fluid System ; SU 610 and SU 620F Toray
and ESNA Hydranautics
??
*** Deduced from 8 inch membrane element data
??
Table 5: Composition of NF permeate and seawater (Scaling potential and threshold effect)

Parameter Unit Filmtec Trisep TSA 4040 Osmonics Seawater
NF-70 4" 2 elements HL8040F
2 element

Ca
++
mg/L 32 280 176 480
Mg
++
mg/L 75 511 195 1610
SO
4
=

mg/L 125 48 39 3200
M.Alkalinity-
as
CaCO
3

mg/L 22 49 50 128
Total
Hardness
mg/L 390 2800 1240 7800
Cl
-
mg/L 7070 18670 19293 22500
Conductivity-

mS/cm 18000 39900 41500 60000
TDS mg/L 11000 32360 33120 44000
pH 6.23 6.74 6.86 8.2



Table 6 : Composition of NF permeates and results of scaling potential measurement using evaporation
method

Parameter Unit FilmTec Osmonics Toray Seawater
NF-70 (8") #1 NF-70 (8") #2 NF-45 (4") HL4040F (8") SU610 (4")
Ca
++
mg/L 40 104 72 160 361 480
Mg
++
mg/L 117 175 68 209 579 1610
SO
4
=

mg/L 196 189 10 180 20 3200
M.Alkalini
ty-
as
CaCO
3

mg/L 18 33 39 50 44 128
Total
Hardness
mg/L 580 980 460 1260 3280 7800
Cl
-
mg/L 6400 13160 16360 18490 17600 22500
Conductivi
ty-

mS/cm 16300 32800 40400 44800 42800 60000
TDS mg/L 10250 21960 27300 31380 30560 44000
pH 6.3 6.3 6.4 6.34 6.46 8.2
Percentage
of evapo-
ration at
which
turbidity
appeared


%


> 92


> 94


92


> 90


92


20

??
Table 7: Seawater composition and ion rejection of FilmTec NF-70 8040 membrane (Pressure 28 bar).

Parameter Unit Seawater Permeate from single* module Combined permeate from three modules
Ionic concentration Ion Rejection(%) Ionic concentration Ion Rejection(%)
A. Hardness
Calcium mg/L 481 30 94 64 87
Magnesium mg/L 1608 7 99.6 54 96.6
Total hardness mg/L 7800 202 97.4 283 96.4
Sulfate mg/L 3200 50 98.4 85 97.4
M.Alkalinity as CaCO
3
mg/L 128 16 87.5 18 85.9
B. Other Ions
Chloride mg/L 22780 7111 68.8 8846 61.2
Sodium mg/L (12860) (4014) 68.8 (5022) 61.2
Total dissolved solids mg/L 44046 11798 73.2 15031 65.9
pH mg/L 8.2 6.1 - 6.1
Conductivity mS/cm 60000 16900 72.0 21100
*Results obtained at 28 bar




?O


Fig. 1. Schematic Flow Diagram of NF-SWRO Desalination Pilot Plant Utilizing Existing SWRO Mini moduleTest Unit ( 4" x 40" NF
and 2.5" x 40" SWRO membrane elements)
??


Fig. 2. Schematic Flow Diagram of Demonstration NF-SWRO Desalination Plant Utilizing Existing Facilities with Commercial
(8x40 inch) NF and SWRO Membrane Elements.
??
Seawater
CF FEED
TANK
Duel Media Fine Sand Media
HIGH PRESSURE
PUMP
Reject to MSF
PERMEATE
SWRO UNIT
A/A
MSF UNIT
4 H.R.C Stages
Brine heater
BOOSTER PUMP
FEED TANK
H. RJ
SW
D
B.B
B.R
NF Unit
PRODUCT
NF REJECT
Pump
Seawater from MSF Heat Rejection Section
SWRO Unit


Figure 3. Schematic Flow Diagram of NF, SWRO and MSF Pilot Plant


??

B
D
M
F
A
D
M
F
A
M
C
F
N
F
B
N
F
P
MAY
JUN.
JUL.
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
Nov
DEC
1.00E+01
5.01E+03
1.00E+04
1.50E+04
2.00E+04
Fig.4: Monthly AVG Bacteria Count in Colony Forming Unit /ml (CFU) from Different Sampling Points in NF
Pilot Plant at 0 hrs (BDMF& ADMF, Before and After Dual Media Filter,AMCF After Micron Cartridge Filter,
NFB& NFP, Nanofiltration Brine and Permeate)
Mon BDMF ADMF AMCF NFB NFP
MAY 1.0E+3 2.8E+3 2.8E+3 6.2E+ 3 6.2E+1
JUN 2.6E+3 2.4E+3 2.1E+3 4.3E+3 2.1E+2
JUL 2.9E+3 8.5E+3 1.4E+3 2.4E+3 2.1E+2
AUG 1.2E+4 7.9E+3 7.9E+3 1.06E+4 3.1E+2
SEP 1.7E+4 3.2E+3 7.2E+3 1.9E+3 1.5E+2
OCT 1.1E+2 1.9E+2 6.0E+1 6.0E+2 3.0E+1
NOV 1.2E+3 9.5E+1 1.0E+2 8.5E+2 7.1E+1
DEC 2.7E+3 9.5E+1 7.5E+1 1.2E+3 5.7E+1
?I

480
44
79
88
108
164
204
300
1610
32
86
173
112
245
206
425
3200
0
20
178
31
33
33
112
128
38
28
44
56
58
55
60
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
P
P
M
)
Ca++ Mg++ SO4= M-Alk.
seawater
Osmonics DK4040F
TriSep TS 80-TSA
FilmTec(NF70)
FilmTec(NF45)
Toray NF SU610
Osmonics HL4040F
TriSep TS 40-TSA

7800
241
553 680
930
1580
1600
3500
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
C
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
P
P
M
)
TH

2 2 . 5
1 5 . 3
1 7 . 1
1 7 . 7
1 9 . 5
2 0 . 3
1 9 . 4
2 0
4 4
2 5 . 4
2 8 . 3
2 9 . 6
3 2 . 4
3 3 . 1
3 3 . 7
3 5 . 7
0
5
1 0
1 5
2 0
2 5
3 0
3 5
4 0
4 5
C
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n

(
P
P
M
)
Cl - T D S


Figure 5. Ionic Concentration of : a. Hardness Ions, b. Total Hardness and c. Cl
-
& TDS in Seawater and NF Permeates of Seven Different NF Membranes (Feed
to NF Membranes, Seawater, TDS 44,000 ppm)
a. Hardness ions (ppm)
b. Total Hardness (ppm)
c. Cl
-
concentration and TDS (ppm)
?I

Conductivity
( ms/cm)
17.84 18.99 19.50 21.90 32.60 36.70 36.90 38.80 39.90 43.20 44.60 45.70 45.90 46.00 46.30 48.60 48.80 49.20 49.90 50.10 51.00 51.80 52.20 52.60 53.00 54.00 58.10
TDS (ppm) 10860 10300 11680 12900 21700 23130 24026 25110 25400 28270 28560 30420 30280 30340 29640 32420 33080 33680 35680 33060 34260 35580 35380 35920 36420 36240 41220
Calculated
TDS (ppm)
10292 11059 11402 13032 20602 23612 23761 25174 25998 28488 29554 30394 30547 30624 30854 32625 32780 33089 33632 33787 34487 35110 35422 35735 36048 36832 40070
% Deviation -5.2 7.4 -2.4 1 -5.1 2.1 -1.1 0.3 2.4 0.8 3.5 -0.1 0.9 0.9 4.1 0.6 -0.9 -1.8 -5.7 2.2 0.7 -1.3 0.1 -0.5 -1 1.6 -2.8
Figure 6. TDS vs Conductivity of NF Permeate
y = 373.16x
1.1512
R
2
= 0.9947
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000
11000
12000
13000
14000
15000
16000
17000
18000
19000
20000
21000
22000
23000
24000
25000
26000
27000
28000
29000
30000
31000
32000
33000
34000
35000
36000
37000
38000
39000
40000
41000
42000
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59
Conductivity (mS/cm)
T
D
S

(
p
p
m
)

??
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time, min.
M
.

A
l
k
.

a
s

p
p
m

(
C
a
C
O



3
)
NF-70 Brine + antiscalant PPN
NF-Osmonics HL8040 NF-Trisep TS40
Seawater Brine
52
720
136
481
264
720
Ca
++
(ppm)


Figure 7 : The Scaling Threshold of NF Membrane Permeates ( as ppm of Calcium
Carbonate) without Scale Control Additives at 95
o
C for all Samples except for Brine where
it was measured with and without Polyphosphonate (PPN) Antiscalant addition.

??


0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Raw
Seawater
Treated
Seawater
Toray SU
610
NF 45
(Filmtech)
Osmonics
HL8040F
NF 70
(Filmtech)
P
e
r
c
e
n
t

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

&

I
t
s

R
e
l
a
t
i
o
n

t
o

S
c
a
l
e

F
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
No Scaling Range Critical Range Scaling Range
Figure 8. Scaling Potenial of Various Types of Brine Solutions
??
a.Operation Conditions
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
P

(
b
a
r
)
,

T
(
0
C
)
,
S
D
I
&

F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w
temperature(oC) pressure (bar) SDI Feed flow
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
permeate flow (l/min)
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
Recovery
d.Permeate Conductivity
32000
34000
36000
38000
40000
42000
44000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Time(hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

s
/
c
m
)
Product conductivity
Figure 9. Performance of 4"x40" Filmtec NF- 70 Membranes (10 elements) a.
Operation Conditions, b. Permeate Flow Rates, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity vs
Operation Time

??
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
P
(
b
a
r
)
,
T
(
o
C
)
&

S
D
I
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pressure (bar) Temp.(0C) SDI Feed Flow (l/min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1 + V-2)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1 + V-2)
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
55000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(
s
/
c
m
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1+ V-2)
Figure 10: Performance of 4"x40" Filmtec NF- 45 membranes a. Operation
Conditions, b.Permeate Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operation
Time {Each Vessel(v) Contains 2 NF Elements}
a.Operation Conditions
b.Permeate Flow Rates
c.Permeate Recovery
d.Permeate Conductivity
Time (hrs)

?O

0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w
(
l
/
m
i
n
)
,
T
e
m
p
.

(
o
C
)
&

P
.
(
b
a
r
)
Flow(l/min) Temp.(oC) Pressure(bar)
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
F
l
o
w
(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 (V1+V2)
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
V1 V2 (V1+V2)
d. Permeate Conductivity
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
0 100 200 300 400 500
Time(hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(
m
s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 (V1+V2)
a. Operation Conditions
b. Permeate Flow Rates
c.Permeate Recovery
Figure 11. Performance of 4" NF-90 Filmtec a. Operation Conditions, b. Permeate Flow
Rates, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity vs Operation Time
??
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
P

(
b
a
r
)
,

T
(
o
C
)

&

S
D
I
50
60
70
80
90
100
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pressure (bar) Temp.(0C) SDI Feed Flow (l/min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1 + V-2)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1 + V-2)
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
55000
60000
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V-1 V-2 (V-1 + V-2)
Figure 12. Performance of 4"x40" Toray NF-SU 610 membranes a. Operation Conditions,
b.Permeate Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operation Time
a.Operation Condition
b.Permeate Flow Rates
c.Permeate Recovery
d.Permeate Conductivity

??
a.Operation Conditions
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)

,

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)

&

S
D
I
SDI Pressure (bar) Temp (oC)
Figure 13. Performance of 4" NF HL4040F Osmonics Membranes a.Operation
Conditions, b.Permeate Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d. Conductivity vs.Operation
Time
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
d.Permeate Conductivity
44000
46000
48000
50000
52000
54000
56000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)

??
a.Operation Conditions
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
T
e
m
p
.
(

o
C
)

&

P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w
(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pres.(bar) Temp.(0C) F.Flow (l/min)
b.Permeate Flow Rate
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-5 V- 7 (V-5 + V-7)
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
R
e
c
o
v
r
y

(
%
)
V-5 V-7 (V-5+ V-7)
t
d.Permeate Conductivity
42000
43000
44000
45000
46000
47000
48000
49000
50000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(

s
/
c
m
)
V-5 V-7 (V-5 + V-7)
Figure 14. Performance of NF Osmonics-DK membrane a.Operation Conditions b.
Permeate flow rates, c. Recovry and d. Conductivity vs. Operation time

?I
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
F
.

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
.
)
,

T
e
m
p
.
(
0
C
)
&

P
(
b
a
r
)
Pressure Feed Flow Temp.(0C)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-5 V-7 (V-5 + V-7)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
V-5 V-7 (V-5+ V-7)
47000
48000
49000
50000
51000
52000
53000
54000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(

s
/
c
m
)
V-5 V-7 (V-5 + V-7)
Figure 15. Performance of NF 4" Osmonics-DL a.Operation Conditions b. Permeate
Flow Rates c.Permeate Recovery d. Permeate Conductivity vs. Operation Time
a. Operation Conditions
b. Permeate Flow Rates
c. Permeate Recovery (%)
d. Permeate Conductivity
Time (hrs)

?I
a.Operation Conditions
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
P

(
b
a
r
)
,
T
e
m
p
.

(
o
C
)

&
S
D
I
SDI Pressure (bar) Temp (oC)
Figure 16. Performance of 4" NF TS4040 TSA Trisep Membranes a.Operation
Conditions, b.Permeate Flow Rates, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity vs.Operation
Time
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
d.Permeate Conductivity
44000
46000
48000
50000
52000
54000
56000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)

??
a. Operation Conditions
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
T
e
m
p
.
(

o
C
)

&

P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w
(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pres.(bar) Temp.(0C) F.Flow (l/min)
b. Permeate Flow Rate
0
5
10
15
20
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6 + V-8)
c. Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6 + V-8)
d. Permeate Conductivity
30000
34000
38000
42000
46000
50000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
t
y
(

s
/
c
m
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6+ V-8)
Figure 17. Performance of 4" NF TS-80 Trisep membrane a. Permeate flow rates, b.
Recovery and c. Conductivity vs. Operation time

??

a.Operation Conditions
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)

&

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
S
D
I
Pressure (bar) Temp (oC) SDI
Figure 18. Performance of 4" ESNA Hydranautics Membranes .OperationConditions,
b.Permeate Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operation Time.
(V = Pressure Vessel)
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
1
2
3
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
c.Permeate Recovery
0
5
10
15
20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-1 V-2 (V1 + V-2)
d.Permeate Conductivity
32000
34000
36000
38000
40000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V-1 V-2 (V1+ V-2)
??
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
P

(
b
a
r
)
,

T
e
m
p
.

(

o
C
)
&
F
e
e
d

F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
.
)
Feed Flow Pressure Temp.(0C)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6 + V-8)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6 + V-8)
48000
49000
50000
51000
52000
53000
54000
55000
56000
57000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

s
/
c
m
)
V-6 V-8 (V-6+ V-8)
Figure 19. Performance of 4" NF-4721SR Fluid System membranes a.Operation
Conditions b. Permeate Flow Rates c.Permeate Recovery d. Permeate Conductivity
vs. Operation Time
d. Permeate Conductivity
c. Permeate Recovery
b. Permeate Flow Rates
a.Operation Conditions
Time (hrs)
Flushing

??
c. Avg. Permeate Conductivity
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
55000
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(
s
/
c
m
)
HL-OS Toray Dk-OS
Tisep-TS-80 NF-45 Trisep-TS40
NF-70 Fluid4721SR OS-DL
b. Total Permeate Recovery
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
Toray Dk-OS Tisep-TS-80
NF-45 Trisep-TS40 NF70
Fluid 4721SR OS-DL OS-Hl
a. Total Permeate Flow Rates
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
F
l
o
w
(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Dk-OS Tisep-TS-80 NF-45
Trisep-TS40 NF-70 OS-DL
Fluid 4721SR HL-OS Toray
Figure 20 : Performance of Filmtec NF- 45, NF70; NF-Trisep TS40,TS80;NF-
Osmonics-HL, DK, DL; NF-Toray SU 610 and NF-Fluid 4721SR; a. Total Permeate
Flow Rates b. Total Recovery and c. Avg. Conductivity vs. Operatition Time

?O
-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
SWRO Toray Osmonics-HL NF-45 Osmonics-DK Trisep-TS80 NF-70
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y
(
%
)
SWRO Toray Osmonics-HL NF-45 Osmonics-DK Trisep-TS80 NF-70
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y
(

s
/
c
m
)
SWRO Toray Osmonics-HL NF-45 Osmonics-DK Trisep-TS80 NF-70
a. Permeate Flow Rates
b. Permeate Recovery
c. Permeate Conductivity
Figure 21. SWRO Permeate a. Flow, b. Recovery, c. Conductivity From the NF-SWRO Process and
the Conventional SWRO vs Applied Pressure in Pilot Plant (Feed to SWRO is : Permeate From NF
Membranes or Seawater)
Feed Pressure (bar)

??






NF (4 elements)
SWRO Permeate
NF
Permeate
Seawater Feed
NF Reject
SWRO (6
Figure 22. SWRO Feed TDS vs SWRO Permeate Flow at Different Pressures (SWRO Feed
Consists of Permeate from 4 Elements of Different NF Membranes or Seawater)
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000
SWRO FEED TDS (ppm)
S
W
R
O

P
e
r
m
e
a
t
e

F
l
o
w

(
L
/
m
i
n
)
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
Pressure (bar)
NF-Osmonics DK 4040
Trisep TS80
Filmtec NF- 45
NF-Toray SU 610
NF-Osmonics-HL 4040
Seawater
??
a.Product Flow (m
3
/h)
0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2
25 30 35 40
b. Recovery (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
25 30 35 40
Module #1
Module #2
Module #3
Total
c. Conductivity ( S/cm)
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
25 30 35 40
Feed Pressure (bar)
Fig. 23 : Performance of 8" x 40" NF-A membrane as measured by permeate (a)
Flow, (b) Recovery, and ( c) Conductivity for NF-SWRO Demonstration Plant vs.
Applied Pressure (Feed Flow Rate = 4 m
3
/h, Temperature = 33
o
C)


??
a. Flow (m
3
/h)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
0 10 20 30 40 50
b. Recovery (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 10 20 30 40 50
5.0 m3/h
5.5 m3/h
6.5 m3/h
7.5 m3/h
c. Conductivity (S/cm)
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Feed Pressure (bar)
Figure 24. Performance of NF-70 as Measured by Permeate a. Flow, b. Recovery and
c. Conductivity vs Applied Pressure at Different Feed Flow rates (Demonstration
Unit)

?I

4
6
8
10
12
14
16
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
a. Flow (L/m)
22
24
28
31 bar
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
b. Recovery (%)
22
24
28
31 bar
Fig. 25. Filmtec NF-70 (4" x 40") permeate (a) Flow, (b) Recovery and
(c) Conductivity Vs Feed Temperature at Different Applied Pressures
(bar)
20000
24000
28000
32000
36000
40000
20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Feed Temperature (
o
C)
c. Conductivity ( S/cm)
22 bar
24
28
31
?I
b. Permeate flow rates
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
F
l
o
w

(
m
3
/
h
r
)
V1+V2+V3 V1 V2 V3
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1+V2+V3 V1 V2 V3
c. Permeate recovery
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Time (hours)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

S
/
c
m
)
Ave. Con. V1 V2
Figure. 26 : Performance of 8" NF-70 membranes a. operation conditions, b.
permeate flow, c. recovery and d. conductivity vs. operation time ( v = pressure
vessel, contains 2 elements)
a. Operation conditions
0
10
20
30
40
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
b
a
r
)
,

T
e
m
p
.

(
o
C
)
Pressure (bar) Temp (oC) Feed flow (m3/hr)
d. Permeate Conductivity

??
a.Operating Conditions
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
k
g
/
c
m
2
)

&

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)
Pressure (kg/cm2) Temp (oC) Feed (l/min)
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d.Permeate Conductivity
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
55000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Figure 27. Performance of NF-8" Osmonics membrane in V1 and NF-70 in V2, V3 ,
a.Operating Conditions, b.Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operating
Time.

??
a.Operating Conditions
15
20
25
30
35
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
k
g
/
c
m
2
)
15
25
35
45
55
65
75
85
95
105
115
125
135
F
.
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)

&

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)
Pressure (kg/cm2) Temp (oC) Feed (l/min)
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 Total Product
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d.Permeate Conductivity
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 Average Conductivity
Figure 28. Performance of NF-8" Osmonics (HL8040FL) in V3 and NF-70 in V2,V3
a.Operating Conditions, b.Flow Rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operating
Time.

??
a)Operating Conditions
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e

(
k
g
/
c
m
2
)

&

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)
Pressure (kg/cm2) Temp (oC) Feed (l/min)
b)Permeate Flow Rates
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 Total
c)Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 Total
d)Permeate Conductivity
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
55000
60000
65000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Fig. 29: Performance of NF- 8" Toray SU 620F in V1, Filmtec NF- 70 in V2and
Osmonics HL8040 in V3 a.Operating Conditions, b. Flow Rates, c. Recovery and
d.Conductivity vs. Operating Time.
Cleaning of NF-70 membranes
only

??
a. Flow (m
3
/h)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
20 30 40 50 60 70
Module #1
Module #2
Module #3
Total flow
b. Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
20 30 40 50 60 70
Module #1
Module #2
Module #3
Total recovery
c. Conductivity
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
20 30 40 50 60 70
Feed Pressure (bar)
Module #1 Module #2 Average conductivity
Figure 30 : SWRO permeate (from Toyobo HM 8255 HFF) (a) flow, (b) recovery
and (c) conductivity for the new NF-SWRO ( 8") process vs applied pressure (feed
flow rate of 3 m
3
/h of NF- 70 permeate)

?O
a. Flow (m
3
/h)
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
20 30 40 50 60 70
SWRO - 3 m3/h
2 m3/h
3 m3/h
3.5 m3/h
4 m3/h
NF-SWRO
SWR
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
20 30 40 50 60 70
NF-SWRO
SWRO
b. Recovery
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
20 30 40 50 60 70
Feed Pressure (bar)
c. Conductivity (S/cm)
Figure 31. SWRO permeate (From Toyobo HM 8255 HFF) a. Flow, b. Recovery
and c. Conductivity for the New NF-SWRO Process at Different Flow Rates of
Permeate Filmtec NF- 70 and the Conventional SWRO vs. Applied Pressure-
Demonstration Plant.
SWRO
NF-SWRO
Feed Flow

??
a. Operation conditions
20
25
30
35
40
45
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
(
b
a
r
)
,

T
e
m
p
.

(
o
C
)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

S
/
c
m
)
Temp (oC)
Pressure (bar)
Conductivity
b. Permeate flow rates (l/min)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d. Permeate conductivity ( S/cm)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Operation time (hrs.)
V1 V2 Average conductivity
c. Permeate recovery (%)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Fig. 32 : Performance of HFF Toyobo HM 8255 SWRO membranes a. Operation
conditions, b. Permeate flow, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity Vs Operation Time
(V = Pressure vessel, Feed is product of NF- 70 Membranes, Feed Flow 3m
3
/h)

??
O?
a.Operating Conditions
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
P
.
(
b
a
r
)
,


T
e
m
p
.
( o
C
)

&

F
.
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pressure (bar) Temp (oC) Feed Flow (l/min)
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d.Permeate Conductivity
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Figure 33. Performance of Toyobo HM 9255 HFF SWRO Membrane a. Operation
Condition, b. Permeate Flow Rates, c. Recovery and d. Conductivity vs Operation
Time (First 900 hrs Feed is Permeate of Filemtec NF- 45 and Toray SU610 in the Ratio of 50:50 . Feed for
the Last 800 hrs is Permeate of Filmtec NF- 70 in V1 and V2 and Osmonics HL8040 in V3 in the Ratio of
30:70 )
Time (hrs)

OI
a.Operating Conditions
30
35
40
45
50
55
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
P
r
e
s
.
(
k
g
/
c
m
2
)
,

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)

&

F
.
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pressure (kg/cm2) Temp (oC) Flow (l/min)
b.Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
c.Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d.Permeate Conductivity
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(

S
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Figure 34. Performance of Toyobo HM 9255 Membranes a.Operating Conditions,
b.Permeate flow rates, c.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operating Time. (Feed from NF- 8"
Unit: Toray SU620F in V1, Filmtec NF70 in V2 and Osmonics HL8040F in V3) .

OI
b. Permeate Flow Rates
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
c. Permeate Recovery
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
R
e
c
o
v
e
r
y

(
%
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
d. Permeate Conductivity
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
Time (hrs)
C
o
n
d
u
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

(
s
/
c
m
)
V1 V2 V3 V1+V2+V3
Figure 35. Performance of Toyobo HM 9255" Membranes a.Operating Conditions,
b.Permeate flow rates, C.Recovery and d.Conductivity vs. Operation time. (Feed is from
Both NF- 8" Unit NF- 70 in V1 & V2, Osmonics HL8040 inV3 and NF- 4" Unit
Osmonics DK4040 F inV- 5&V7, Trisep TS 80 TSA in V- 6&V- 8 )
a. Operating Conditions
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
P
r
e
s
s
u
r
e
(
k
g
/
c
m
2
)
,

T
e
m
p
.
(
o
C
)
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
F
.
F
l
o
w

(
l
/
m
i
n
)
Pressure (bar) Temp (oC) Feed Flow (l/min)

O?
REFERENCES

1. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi M.Ak., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Dalvi, A.G.I, Kither,N.M.,
Mustafa, G. and Al-Tissan, A.R, (1997), A Nanofiltration (NF) Membrane Pretratment of
SWRO Feed and MSF Make-up, Paper presented at IDA, Madrid Oct.6-9.

2. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi M.Ak., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Dalvi, A.G.I, Kither,N.M.,
Mustafa, G. and Al-Tissan, (1998), A two parts article, one published in Desalination and
Water Reuse Quarterly, May-June Issue (1998), Vol. 8/1, 54-59, and Second part published in
September-October issue, , Vol. 8/2, 35-45.

3. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi M.AK., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Farooque A. M., Rowaili
A., Dalvi, A.G.I, Kither,N.M., Mustafa, G. and Al-Tissan, A.R. (1998), A New Approach to
Membrane and Thermal seawater Desalination Process Using Nanofiltration Membranes, Part
1. Paper presented at EDS Conference, Amesterdam, Netherland, Sept. 21-26 and published
in Desalination, 118, 35-51.

4. Al-Sofi M. AK., Hassan, A. M., Mustafa, G.M., Dalvi, A.G.I., and Kither, M.N.M., (1998),
Paper presented at EDS Conference, Amesterdam, Netherland, Sept. 21-26 and published in
Desalination, 118, 35-51. Nanofiltration as means of Achieving Higher TBT of 120
o
C,
Desalination, 118, 123-129.

5. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi M.AK., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Farooque A. M., Rowaili
A., Dalvi, A.G.I, Kither,N.M., Mustafa, G. and Al-Tissan, (1999), A New Approach to
Membrane and Thermal seawater Desalination Process Using Nanofiltration Membranes, Part
2, Paper published in Water Science and Technology Association (WSTA) proceedings,
WSTA Conference, Bahrain, Feb., Vol. II, 577-594.

6. Hassan, A.M., Al-Sofi M.Ak., Al-Amodi, A.S., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Kither,N.M., Mustafa, G.
and Al-Tissan, A.R, (1999), A nanofiltration(NF) membrane pretreatment of SWRO feed and
MSF make-up (Part-1), Report No. (TR 3807/APP 96008).

7. Hashim, Murbati, W. and Frickson, B. (1999), Process Investigation at the Addur SWRO
Desalination plant- the Cru to Pretreatment System Rehabititation, WSTA 4
th
Gulf Water
Conference Proceeding Vol. 2 Feb. 13-17, State of Bahrain, Also provide visit to Al-Addur
plant, 619 to 644.

8 Dalvi, A.G.I, Kither, M.N, Al-Sulami, S., Sahul, K. and Al-Rasheed, R., (1999), Effect of
various forms of Iron in Recycle Brine on Performance of Scale Control Additives in MSF
Desalination, WSTA 4
th
Gulf Water Conference Proceeding Vol. 2, Feb. 13-17, State of
Bahrain, p 663 to 677.

9 Hassan, A.M., Farooque A. M., Jamaluddin, A.T.M., Al-Amodi, A.S., Rowaili A., Al-Sofi
M.AK., Kither,N.M. and Al-Tisan, I.A.R., A Demonstration Plant Based on the New NF-
SWRO, Process, Paper submitted for presentation at 1999-IDA World Congress in
Desalination and Water Reuse in San Diego, California, U.S.A., 29/8 to 3/9, 1999 .

10 Hassan, A.M., Farooque A. M. and Al-Amodi, A.S., Autopsy and Characterization of NF
Membranes After Long Term Operation in an NF-SWRO Pilot plant, Paper submitted for
presentation at 1999-IDA World Congress in Desalination and Water Reuse in San Diego,
California, U.S.A., 29/8 to 3/9, 1999.
O?