Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jece

Simultaneous rejection of chromium(VI) and fluoride [Cr(VI) and F] by

nanofiltration: Membranes characterizations and estimations of
membrane transport parameters by CFSK model
Mahendra S. Gaikwad* , Chandrajit Balomajumder
Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee, Roorkee-247667, Uttarakhand, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Article history:
Received 23 August 2016 The current work examines the performance of NF300 and PN40 nanofiltration (NF) membranes for
Received in revised form 11 November 2016 simultaneous rejection of Cr(VI) and F.
Accepted 15 November 2016 Experimental: results indicate that, Cr(VI) and F percentage of removal was improved with increasing
Available online 16 November 2016 operating pressure and declined with increasing feed concentration. Highest percent rejection of Cr(VI)
and F were found 97% and 92% with NF300 and 88% and 82% with PN40 membranes for 5 ppm feed
Keywords: respectively. Maximum removal was found at pH 8 and above with NF300 membrane compared to PN40
Membrane toxic ion removal membrane. Mass transfer coefficient (MTC) was found 6.88
104 cm/s and 5.74
104 cm/s and
Nanofiltration for Cr(VI) and F rejection
membrane transport parameters (MTPs) such as solute permeability was 4.03
105 cm/s and
NF membranes for water treatment
6.23
105 cm/s and reflection coefficient was 0.9688 and 0.9223 using CFSK model for 5 ppm feed of
CFSK model
pH effect on membrane roughness Cr(VI) and F respectively for NF300 membrane. A Good correlation was found in experimental results
(observed rejection for Cr(VI) and F was 0.97 and 0.92) and the model predicts results (true rejection for
Cr(VI) and F was 0.9731 and 0.9222) for 5 ppm feed of Cr(VI) and F respectively for NF300 membrane.
ã 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Water pollution is enhanced due to industrialization and
random discharge of one or more toxic metal ions from the
semiconductor industry, metallurgical, mining, chemical
manufacturing, tannery industries, etc., In semiconductor industry
various kinds of chemicals in wafers preparation are used [1,2].
Fluoride, toxic solvent, heavy metals, dyes and salts, suspended
solids and chelating agents may found in wastewater discharge of
semiconductor manufacturing industry [2]. In the wafer surface
etching process produce some waste like chromic acids, sulfuric,
phosphoric, hydrofluoric etc. Mainly HF/chromic acid are used in
Secco and Yang etching methods [3,4]. Thus the Cr(VI) and F like
toxic ions are found in semiconductor effluents [5,33]. Discharge
limit of hexavalent chromium and trivalent chromium are 0.05 mg/
L and 5 mg/L, respectively [7] and for fluoride is 15 mg/L [6].
Chromium is exist in two form Cr (III) and Cr(VI). Cr(VI) is highly
toxic compared to Cr(III) [8]. It is harmful for human, animals and
plants causing harmful effects on human like lung cancer, damage
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mahendra14g@gmail.com (M.S. Gaikwad),
chandfch@iitr.ernet.in (C. Balomajumder).
to liver, kidney and gastric system [9,10]. The smallest amount of
fluoride ingested in water is beneficial for conservation formation
of teeth mostly in children [11]. Excess intakes create various kinds
of diseases like cancer, arthritis, brain damage, Alzheimer
syndrome and others [12,13]. General sign of high fluoride
consumption is fluorosis, which is identified by mottling of teeth
in mild cases and embrittlement of bones and neurological damage
in severe cases [14]. Thus, it is essential to removal these toxic ions
from the streams of wastewaters before releasing into the
environment. Different techniques have been used over recent
years for individual removal of chromium and fluoride, such as
adsorption [15,16], electrochemical precipitation [17,18], liquid–
liquid extraction [19,20], and ion exchange [21,22], membrane
[23,24]. Many studies are reported on heavy metals and metals
ions removal by nanofiltration [34–37].
The NF membrane process is operated in a range between UF
and RO membranes. Thus separation achieved may be influenced
due to the effect of Sieving and Donnan effect [25]. NF is a capable
method for the rejection of heavy metal ions like arsenic [46],
nickel [25], chromium [44], cadmium [26], and copper [45] from
wastewater. Benefits behind NF process are operates easily, high
removal efficiency and reliable [47–49]. Various studies are
reported on polyamide NF as a promising membrane for removal
of metal ions like copper and cadmium [32], praseodymium (III)

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jece.2016.11.018
2213-3437/ã 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
46 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53

[36], nickel ions [39]. Thus polyamide membranes have been Table 1
Specifications of commercial NF membranes.
selected for the present study on simultaneous rejection of Cr(VI)
and F from binary feed solution. No literature is available on the No. Membrane MWCO (Da) Material pH range Max. temp ( C)
simultaneous rejection Cr(VI) and F by nanofiltration. The objective name
of the current work is to examine the simultaneous rejection of Cr 1 NF300 300 Polyamide 2–11 40
(VI) and F from binary aqueous feed solutions by NF300 and PN40 2 PN40 600 Polyamide 3–9 40
membranes with different parameter such as pressure, feed
concentration and pH of the feed. Study the characterization of
spectrophotometer (Hach DR-5000). F concentration was mea-
NF300 and PN40 nanofiltration membranes by FTIR, SEM and AFM.
sured by ion chromatography (Metrohm compact IC).
To estimate the MTPs and MTC by using CFSK model.
The percent rejection of the solute (Ro) was calculated from
Eq. (1)
2. Materials and method
Ro = [1  (Cp/Cf)]
100 (1)
2.1. Membranes and chemicals
Where; Cp and Cf represent the solute concentration in permeates
and feed respectively.
Synthetic Cr(VI) and F binary solutions was made by adding
The experimental setup was washed after each set of experi-
required amounts of potassium dichromate (K2Cr2O7) and sodium
ments for 25 min at 2 bar pressure with DI water and to ensure the
fluoride (NaF) into deionized (DI) water. All of the solutions were
pure water permeability was achieved or not to start the next
prepared using deionized (DI) water. Commercial Nanofiltration
experiments. Membranes characterizations were done with
NF300 and PN40 membranes (Permionics, Vadodara, India) used
various characterization techniques. The chemical composition
for experimentation. Citric acid was used to set up cleaning and
was investigated by FTIR (Perkin Elmer spectrum GX range
washing.
spectroscopy). The morphology study of membrane was achieved
with SEM (FE-SEM Quanta 200 FEG). The surface roughness of the
2.2. Experimental set up and process
membranes were obtained by using AFM (NT-MDT-INTEGRA).
Experiments were carried out on the Perma1 membrane
2.3. Application of combined film theory-Spiegler-Kedem (CFSK)
system (Permionics Membranes Pvt. Ltd., Vadodara, India). The
model
experimental setup is schematically presented in Fig. 1(a). A flat
sheet membrane module (Fig. 1(b)) consists with two stainless
The CFSK model was the combined equation of film theory and
steel plates was used for membrane housing cell out of that top
Spiegler-Kedem model [38]. CFSK model was used to evaluate the
having flow channel and at the bottom there was permeate route.
MTC and MTPs simultaneously for the RO system, which can also
Experiments were carried out in batch cross flow mode with
be used for NF [39–41].
commercial composite polyamide membranes namely NF300 and
The film theory equation can be written as
PN40 (Table 1) with effective area of 25 cm2. The feed concentra-
     
tion of a Cr(VI) and F binary solution was maintained constant by R0 R Jv
¼ exp ð2Þ
the continuous recycling of all outlets streams to tank. The 1  R0 1R k
experimental parameters are set as feed concentrations (5–
100 mg/L of Cr(VI) and F) and pressures (2–10 bar) and pH (3–9). Where Ro is observed rejection, R is true rejection, Jv is permeate
At the start of the experiment, setup was run for 1–2 h at 10 bar flux, k is mass transfer coefficient.
pressure with DI water for membrane conditioning. The Cr(VI) The nonlinear working equations of Spiegler-Kedem model are
concentrations were measured according to the standard diphe- as follows [38,39,42,43].
nylcarbazide method [31] using a double beam UV Jv ¼ Lp ðDp  sDpÞ ð3Þ

Fig. 1. Schematic of (a) experimental set up (b) flat sheet membrane module.
 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53 47

Where, s is reflection coefficient and Pm is solute permeability.

NF300 Eq. (2) can be rearranged in following form
PN40  
106 R
¼ a1 ½1  expðJ v a2 Þ ð6Þ
104 1R

102

100 s
a1 ¼ ð7Þ
1s
98
Now substituting Eq. (6) into Eq. (2), to give
%T

96     
R0 Jv
94 ¼ a1 ½1  expðJv a2 Þ exp ð8Þ
1  R0 k
92
Eq. (8) is CFSK model and it is used for simultaneous estimation
90 of the mass transfer coefficient k and membrane parameters s and
Pm by providing the data of Ro and Jv with the help of a nonlinear
88
parameter estimation method at different pressures and constant
86 feed rate by keeping constant feed concentration.
4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500
cm -1 3. Result and discussion

Fig. 2. FTIR image of NF300 and PN40 membranes.

3.1. Characterizations of membranes

Here Lp is a pure water permeability coefficient, DP means trans- FTIR analysis was done for NF300 and PN40 membranes. Fig. 2
membrane pressure and DB is osmotic pressure difference. shows the peak 3450 cm1 and 3447 cm1 which indicate that the
R ¼ s ½1  expðJv a2 Þ=½1  s ðexpðJv a2 ÞÞ ð4Þ weak amide NH stretch. The 1646 cm1 and 1640 cm1 shows the
strong amide carbonyl (C¼ O stretching). The presence of
polyamide group was confirmed by bending vibration of amine
ð1  s Þ group leading to NH2 at 1646.06 cm1. The peaks at 1310 cm1,
a2 ¼ ð5Þ 1307 cm1, 1244 cm1, 1156 cm1 and 1149 cm1 indicate the
Pm

Fig. 3. SEM image of commercial NF membrane (a) Top view of NF300 (b) Cross sectional view of NF300 (c) Top view of PN40 (d) Cross sectional view of PN40.
48 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53

Fig. 4. AFM image of commercial NF membranes (virgin and different pH): 2D view of NF300 [(a1) to (a6)] and PN40 [(c1) to (c6)] 3D view of NF300 [(b1) to (b6)] and PN40
[(d1) to (d6)].

Table 2
Root mean square and average roughness readings for commercial NF membranes.

No. Membrane NF Membranes Types

Conditions
NF300 PN40

RMS Average roughness(nm) RMS Average roughness(nm)

roughness(nm) roughness(nm)
1 Virgin 7.45 5.21 9.48 5.78
2 feed solution pH3 5.08 2.73 8.11 5.57
3 feed solution pH5 5.36 3.77 8.30 6.32
4 feed solution pH7 6.14 4.59 9.29 7.15
5 feed solution pH8 8.60 5.35 11.67 8.05
6 feed solution pH10 9.94 7.66 11.83 8.87
 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53 49

100 100

90 90

80 80

70 70
60 60
% Rejection

% R ejection
50 50
5 ppm Cr(VI)
40 40
10 ppm Cr(VI) 5 ppm Cr(VI)
50 ppm Cr(VI) 10 ppm Cr(VI)
30
100 ppm Cr(VI) 30 50 ppm Cr(VI)
5 ppm Fluoride 100 ppm Cr(VI)
20 10 ppm Fluoride 5 ppm Fluoride
20
50 ppm Fluoride 10 ppm Fluoride
10 100 ppm Fluoride 50 ppm Fluoride
10
100 ppm Fluoride
0
0
2 4 6 8 10
2 4 6 8 10
Pressure (Bar)
Pressure (Bar)

(a) (b)

100
160

80 140
Permeate Flux (L/m 2 h)

120
Permeate Flux (L/m 2h)

60
100

80
40
5 ppm 60 5 ppm
10 ppm 10 ppm
20
50 ppm 40 50 ppm
100 ppm 100 ppm
20

0
2 4 6 8 10
2 4 6 8 10
Pressure (Bar)
Pressure (Bar)

(c) (d)

Fig. 5. Pressure effect on percentage rejection of Cr(VI) and F at different feed concentration at pH 8 by using (a)NF300 membrane. (b) PN40 membrane. Pressure effect on
permeate flux of binary mixture of Cr(VI) and F at different feed concentration by using (c) NF300 membrane. (d) PN40 membrane.

sulfonic group with C O bonding and the peak 1580 cm1 is due
to aromatic ring C C stretching vibration and the being of strong
absorption peak at 870 cm1, 861 cm1,727 cm1,723 cm1 repre-
sent the polysulfone structure with aromatic C H bending. The
morphology of NF300 and PN40 membranes are presented in
Fig. 3. The images (Fig. 3(a) and (c)) shows a top view of NF300 and
PN40 membranes. Where, clearly seen that the asymmetric fiber
structure on the top surface and fiber like structure is the active
layer of polyamide of both membranes. Fig. 3(b and d) shows that,
the cross sectional view of NF300 and PN40 membranes and three
layers of this membranes are seen clearly. The first layer is
polyamide polymer and this is the active layer where actual
rejection of Cr(VI) and F was done. The second layer and the third
layer consist of polysulfone and polyester respectively. Atomic
force microscopy image provides the surface morphology and
roughness of polymeric membranes. AFM analysis has been done
for a 5 mm
5 mm projected surface area of NF300 and PN40
membrane. Two dimensional and three dimensional plots of virgin
and used NF300 and PN40 nanofiltration membranes are
mentioned in Fig. 4(a1–d6). Effect of feed solution pH on roughness
of NF300 and PN40 membrane surface are shown in Fig. 4(a1–d6)
and the average roughness and mean roughness values of virgin
and used NF-300 and PN-40 values are mentioned in Table 2. The
brighter area represents the peaks while the darker area indicates
the valleys or depressions on the surface. Virgin membrane
roughness value if higher it may projected to have comparatively
50 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53

100

100

80
80

60

% Rejection
% Rejection

60

40
40

5 ppm Cr(VI) 20 5 ppm Cr(VI)

20 100 ppm Cr(VI) 100 ppm Cr(VI)
5 ppm Fluoride
5 ppm Fluoride 100 ppm Fluoride
100 ppm Fluoride
0 0
2 4 6 8 10 2 4 6 8 10

pH pH

(a) (b)

Fig. 6. pH effect on percentage rejection of Cr(VI) and F for 5 ppm and 100 ppm feed concentration at 10 bar applied pressure using (a)NF300 membrane. (b) PN40 membrane.

Table 3
Parameter estimated using CFSK model for removal Cr(VI) and F by NF300.

Cr(VI and Fluoride feed concentration (ppm) Chromium (VI) Fluoride

s Pm
105 (cm/s) K
104 (cm/s) s Pm
105 (cm/s) k
104 (cm/s)

5 0.9688 4.03 6.88 0.9223 6.23 5.74
10 0.9433 4.63 6.81 0.8911 6.83 5.71
50 0.8644 5.43 6.77 0.8023 7.44 5.68
100 0.7874 5.61 6.72 0.7121 8.08 5.61

Table 4
Parameter estimated using CFSK model for removal Cr(VI) and F by PN40.

Cr(VI) and Fluoride feed concentration (ppm) Chromium (VI) Fluoride

s 5
Pm
10 (cm/s) K
10 (cm/s)4
s Pm
105 (cm/s) k
104 (cm/s)
5 0.8894 5.21 3.76 0.8324 7.31 2.84
10 0.8214 5.54 3.71 0.8114 7.94 2.81
50 0.7555 6.31 3.68 0.7046 8.54 2.78
100 0.6817 6.94 3.61 0.6178 9.12 2.71

high fouling on membrane surface due to particles could
accumulate in that valleys region of membrane because of high
local flux [50–53].
3.2. Pure water permeability (PWP) of membrane
PWP of NF300 and PN40 membranes was found out at room
temperature 30  2  C before the staring of experiments. PWP
coefficient (Lp) value was found by plotting PWP versus applied
pressure. Lp value was determined from the slope of that graph.
The PWP coefficients were found to be 8.14 L/m2hbar for NF300
and 14.8 L/m2hbar for PN40, which are in the range of nano-
filtration membranes [26,32].
3.3. Effect of applied pressure and feed concentration
In this experiment operating pressure was changed from 2 to
10 bar with a concentration range of 5–100 ppm of Cr(VI) and F.
Fig. 5(a) and Fig. 5(c) illustrate the effects on the percent rejection
and permeate flux of Cr(VI) and F with NF300 membrane and
similarly Fig. 5(b) and Fig. 5(d) for PN40 membrane. Highest
percent rejection of Cr(VI) and F were found 97% and 92% with
NF300 and 88% and 82% with PN40 membranes for 5 ppm feed
respectively. Fig. 5(c) and Fig. 5(d) indicate that as pressure
increase the permeate flux linearly increases as represented by Eq.
(3). This implies that on the surface of the membrane, there is
insignificant or no concentration polarization. Solvent flux was
enhanced without corresponding enhancement in solute flux at
increasing pressure are resulted due to solute and solvent flux
separation in solution–diffusion mechanism of NF membrane
transport mechanism [27]. The flux of pure water increases while
no any changes in the flux of solute (Cr(VI) and F) at increasing
pressure because of the permeate contains less concentration of Cr
(VI) and F. This suggests that rejection of Cr(VI) and F solutes
enhancement with increasing pressure (refer Fig. 5(a) and (b)). In
size exclusion mechanism pore size of the membrane and
dimension of solute has a significant part in finding degree of
separation. Negatively charge ions and negatively charge mem-
brane enhanced the Cr(VI) and F rejection from binary solution due
to the electrostatic charge repulsion mechanism.
 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53 51

1.00 0.90
0.95 0.85
0.90 0.80
0.75
0.85
0.70
0.80
0.65
0.75
5ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
0.60
0.70 5ppm Cr(VI) model 0.55
R e je c tio n

R e je c tio n
10ppm Cr(VI) Exp. 5ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
0.65 10ppm Cr(VI) model 0.50 5ppm Cr(VI) model
50ppm Cr(VI) Exp. 10ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
0.60 50ppm Cr(VI) model 0.45 10ppm Cr(VI) model
50ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
100ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
0.55 100ppm Cr(VI) model
0.40 50ppm Cr(VI) model
100ppm Cr(VI) Exp.
5ppm F Exp. 0.35 100ppm Cr(VI) model
0.50 5 ppm F model 5ppm F Exp.
10ppm F Exp. 0.30 5 ppm F model
0.45 10 ppm F model 10ppm F Exp.
50ppm F Exp. 0.25 10 ppm F model
0.40 50 ppm F model 50ppm F Exp.
100ppm F Exp. 0.20 50 ppm F model
100ppm F Exp.
0.35 100 ppm F model
0.15 100 ppm F model
0.30 0.10
3.0x10-4 6.0x10-4 9.0x10-4 1.2x10-3 1.5x10-3 1.8x10-3 2.1x10-3 6.0x10-4 1.2x10-3 1.8x10-3 2.4x10-3 3.0x10-3 3.6x10-3 4.2x10-3
Jv (cm/s) Jv (cm/s)

(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Experimental and predicted comparison for rejection of Cr(VI) and F as function of flux by CFSK model for (a)NF300 membrane (b) PN40 membrane.

3.4. pH effect on rejection
Feed solution of Cr(VI) were prepared form potassium
dichromate (K2Cr2O7). Cr(VI) compounds are usually highly
soluble, mobile and bioavailable compared to sparingly soluble
trivalent Cr species [58]. Similarly fluoride solution was prepared
from sodium fluoride (NaF) which is also soluble in water [59].
Fluoride is the earth's crust a common element and is highly
soluble in water [60]. Cr(VI) can be occurs in various ionic forms
(HCrO4, CrO42, Cr2O72) that depend on the pH and the
concentration of Cr(VI) solution. The Cr(VI) equilibrium reactions
and related equilibrium constants (pK) at 25  C are mention in Eqs.
(9)–(11) [54,55].
H2CrO4 ! H+ + HCrO4 pK = 0.08
HCrO4 ! H+ + CrO42 pK = 6.5
2HCrO4 ! CrO72 + H2O pK = 1.55
As per Eqs. (9)–(11) and their pK values, when pH was set below
6.5, HCrO4 monovalent species was dominant. When pH was set
higher than 6.5, the rejection of solute was enhanced due to that
50% of HCrO4 was converted to CrO42. When pH was adjusted up
to 8, all the chromium species converted to CrO42 [55]. Thus
maximum removal was obtained at pH 8 due to Donnan effect for
the negatively charged membrane and negatively charge ions.
Some studies reported that NF membranes have lower isoelectric
points (i.e. in the range of pH 3–4). At the high pH membrane gain,
the more negative charge and at low pH membrane surface charge
is positive [56,57]. When pH higher than isoelectric points, then
polyamide NF membrane net surface charge is negative (H2N –
polyamide – COO–) while when pH less than isoelectric point, then
polyamide NF membrane the net surface charge is positive (H3N+ –
polyamide – COOH). At nearer to isoelectric point the negative
surface charge becomes weak [57].
For pH effect on rejection of Cr(VI) and F, the experiments were
done with a pH (3–9) which is operating ranges of NF300 and PN40
membranes. Fig. 6(a) and (b) represents the effect of pH on
rejection of Cr(VI) and F and fluoride by NF300 and PN40
nanofiltration membranes respectively. It found that minimum
percent rejection (45% with NF300 and 34% with PN40) at pH 3
which was happening due to Donnan effect for the negatively
charged membrane to minor rejection to the monovalent anion
HCrO4. When pH was changed to 7 some of HCrO4 anions
converted in to CrO42 and removal was increased. When pH was
adjusted to 8 and above, maximum removal (97% with NF300 and
88% with PN40) was observed. The same kind of trend was
observed for fluoride, lower rejection (37% with NF300 and 28%
with PN40) was obtained at pH 3. Highest rejection (92% with
(9)
NF300 and 82% with PN40) was found when the pH was adjusted
to 8 and above. Similar effect of pH on rejection of fluoride by NF
membrane was found in previously reported literatures [28–30].
(10)
Therefore, it concludes that the NF300 and PN40 membranes can
be efficiently employed in the removal of Cr(VI) and F when pH was
adjusted above 8.0.
(11)
3.5. Estimation of MTPs and MTC
The CFSK model Eq. (8) was used for simultaneous estimation of
the membrane parameters s and Pm and the mass transfer
coefficient, k, with the help of a nonlinear parameter calculation
method by using known parameters Ro and Jv at various pressures.
MTPs and MTC for NF300 and PN40 membrane are shown in
Tables 3 and 4 respectively. It indicates that solute permeability Pm
and reflection coefficient s are dependent on the feed concentra-
tion. s slightly decreases due to low solute rejection and Pm
increases with increasing feed concentration due to more solute is
passing through the membrane. The same kind of trend was
observed for NF membranes by Murthy and his co-workers [39,40].
The values of k shown in Tables 3 and 4 are then used in Eq. (2)
along with the previous data Ro and Jv to determine true rejection
R. Simultaneous rejection of Cr(VI) and F by NF300 and PN40
52 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53
membranes are compared with true rejection estimated by CFSK
model are shown in Fig. 7(a) and (b) respectively. It indicates good
agreement for experimental rejection and true rejection for Cr(VI)
and F by NF300 and PN40 membranes respectively.
4. Conclusion
Simultaneous rejection of Cr(VI) and F ions from synthetic
binary solution by NF300 and PN40 membranes as a function of
feed concentration, applied pressure, feed pH was examined. The
rejection of Cr(VI) and F ions were enhanced by the rise in pressure
and declined with the rise in feed concentration. Simultaneous
rejection of Cr(VI) and F ions were significantly influenced by the
pH of feed solution. The CFSK model was used to estimate MTC (k)
and MTPs (Pm and s) and the k values were found to 6.88
104 cm/
s and 5.74
104 cm/s and Pm values were found to 4.03
105 cm/s
and 6.23
105 cm/s and s values were found to 0.9688 and 0.9223
for 5 ppm feed of Cr(VI) and F respectively with NF300 membrane.
Rejection of Cr(VI) and F from 5 ppm feed by NF300 were found
0.97 and 0.92 experimentally and 0.9731 and 0.9222 by model
shows the good agreement. NF300 was found more suitable for
treatment of Cr(VI) and F contaminated water compared to PN40
membrane.
Conflict of interest
None.
Acknowledgements
The authors acknowledge the Institute Instrumentation Centre
and Department of Chemical Engineering, Indian Institute of
Technology Roorkee, India, for providing facilities and technical
support for this work. The authors would also like to thanks to the
Ministry of Human Resource Development, Government of India
for providing financial support.
References
[1] C.Y. Hu, S.L. Lo, W.H. Kuan, Y.D. Lee, Removal of fluoride from semiconductor
wastewater by electrocoagulation–flotation, Water Res. 39 (2005) 895–901.
[2] M.D.G. de Luna, Warmadewanthi, J.C. Liu, Combined treatment of polishing
wastewater and fluoride-containing wastewater from a semiconductor
manufacturer, Colloids Surf. A: Physicochem. Eng. Aspects 347 (2009) 64–68.
[3] F. Secco d’Aragona, Dislocation etch for (100) planes in silicon, J. Electrochem.
Soc. 119 (1972) 948–951.
[4] K.H. Yang, An etch for delineation of defects in silicon, Electrochem. Soc. 131
(1984) 1140–1145.
[5] S. Aoudj, A. Khelifa, N. Drouiche, M. Hecini, HF wastewater remediation by
electrocoagulation process, Desalination Water Treat. 51 (2013) 1596–1602.
[6] N. Drouiche, S. Aoudj, M. Hecini, N. Ghaffour, H. Lounici, N. Mameri, Study on
the treatment of photovoltaic wastewater using electrocoagulation: fluoride
removal with aluminium electrodes characteristics of products, J. Hazard.
Mater. 169 (2009) 65–69.
[7] F.N. Acar, E. Malkoc, The removal of chromium(VI) from aqueous solutions by
Fagus orientalis L, Bioresour. Technol. 94 (2004) 13–15.
[8] Z. Kowalski, Treatment of chromic tannery wastes, J. Hazard. Mater 37 (1994)
137–144.
[9] US Department of Health and Human Services, Toxicological Profile for
Chromium. Public Health Services Agency for Toxic substances and Diseases
Registry, Washington, DC, 1991.
[10] M. Cieslak-Golonka, Toxic and mutagenic effects of chromium (VI), Polyhedron
15 (1995) 3667–3689.
[11] M. Mahramanlioglu, I. Kizilcikli, I.O. Bicer, Adsorption of fluoride from aqueous
solution by acid treated spent bleaching earth, J. Fluorine Chem. 115 (2002) 41–
47.
[12] N.J. Chinoy, Effects of fluoride on physiology of animals and human beings,
Indian J. Environ. Toxicol. 1 (1991) 17–32.
[13] P.T.C. Harrison, Fluoride in water: a UK perspective, J. Fluorine Chem. 126
(2005) 1448–1456.
[14] X. Fan, D.J. Parker, M.D. Smith, Adsorption kinetics of fluoride on low cost
materials, Water Res. 37 (2003) 4929–4937.
[15] K. Selvi, S. Pattabhi, K. Kadirvelu, Removal of Cr(VI) from aqueous solution by
adsorption on to activated carbon, Bioresour. Technol. 80 (2001) 87–89.
[16] Y.H. Li, S. Wang, X. Zhang, J. Wei, C. Xu, Z. Luan, D. Wu, Adsorption of fluoride
from water by aligned carbon nanotubes, Mater. Res. Bull. 38 (2003) 469–476.
[17] N. Kongsricharoern, C. Polprasert, Electrochemical precipitation of chromium
(Cr6+) from an electroplating wastewater, Water Sci. Technol. 31 (1995) 109–
117.
[18] F. Shen, X. Chen, P. Gao, G. Chen, Electrochemical removal of fluoride ions from
industrial wastewater, Chem. Eng. Sci. 58 (2003) 987–993.
[19] N.E. El-Hefny, Comparison of liquid–liquid extraction of Cr(VI) from acidic and
alkaline solutions by two different amine extractants, Sep. Purif. Technol. 67
(2009) 44–49.
[20] A.E. Visser, R.P. Swatloski, S.T. Griffin, D.H. Hartman, R.D. Rogers, Liquid–liquid
extraction of metal ions in room temperature ionic liquids, Sep. Sci. Technol. 36
(2001) 785–804.
[21] A.A. Atia, Synthesis of a quaternary amine anion exchange resin and study its
adsorption behaviour for chromate oxyanions, J. Hazard. Mater. B 137 (2006)
1049–1055.
[22] M.S. Onyango, Y. Kojima, O. Aoyi, E.C. Bernardo, H. Matsuda, Adsorption
equilibrium modeling and solution chemistry dependence of fluoride removal
from water by trivalent-cation-exchanged zeolite F-9, J. Colloid Interface Sci.
279 (2004) 341–350.
[23] K. Hu, J.M. Dickson, Nanofiltration membrane performance on fluoride
removal from water, J. Membr. Sci. 279 (2006) 528–529.
[24] C.A. Kozlowski, W. Walkowiak, Removal of chromium(VI) from aqueous
solutions by polymer inclusion membranes, Water Res. 36 (2002) 4870–4876.
[25] K.H. Ahn, K.G. Song, H.Y. Cha, I.T. Yeom, Removal of ions in nickel electroplating
rinse water using low-pressure nanofiltration, Desalination 122 (1999) 77–84.
[26] G.T. Ballet, L. Gzara, A. Hafiane, M. Dhahbi, Transport coefficients and cadmium
salt rejection in nanofiltration membrane, Desalination 167 (2004) 369–376.
[27] R. Kumar, P. Bhakta, S. Chakrabortty, P. Pal, Separating cyanide from coke
wastewater by cross flow nanofiltration, Sep. Sci. Technol. 46 (2011) 2119–
2127.
[28] M.A. Wei-fang, L. WEN-jun, C. Guo-wei, Factors influencing the removal of
fluoride from groundwater by nanofiltration, Proc. ICBBE'09. International
Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering, Beijing, 2009.
[29] L.A. Richards, M. Vuachere, A.I. Schafer, Impact on pH on the removal of
fluoride, nitrate and boron by nanofiltration/reverse osmosis, Desalination 261
(2010) 331–337.
[30] S. Chakrabortty, M. Roy, P. Pal, Removal of fluoride from contaminated
groundwater by cross flow nanofiltration: transport modeling and economic
evaluation, Desalination 313 (2013) 115–124.
[31] L.S. Clesceri, A.E. Greenberg, A.D. Eaton, Standard Methods for the Examination
of Water and Wastewater, American Public Health Association, Washington,
1998.
[32] K. Mehiguene, Y. Garba, S. Taha, N. Gondrexon, G. Dorange, Influence of
operating conditions on the retention of copper and cadmium in aqueous
solutions by nanofiltration: experimental results and modeling, Sep. Purif.
Technol. 15 (1999) 181–187.
[33] S. Aoudj, A. Khelifa, N. Drouiche, R. Belkada, D. Miroud, Simultaneous removal
of chromium(VI) and fluoride by electrocoagulation–electroflotation:
application of a hybrid Fe-Al anode, Chem. Eng. J. 267 (2015) 153–162.
[34] A. Wahab Mohammad, R. Othaman, N. Hilal, Potential use of nanofiltration
membranes in treatment of industrial wastewater from Ni-P electroless
plating, Desalination 168 (2004) 241–252.
[35] B. Al-Rashdi, C. Somerfield, N. Hilal, Heavy metals removal using adsorption
and nanofiltration techniques, Sep. Purif. Rev. 40 (2011) 209–259.
[36] Z.V.P. Murthy, M.S. Gaikwad, Separation of praseodymium(III) from aqueous
solutions by nanofiltration, Can. Metall. Q. 52 (2013) 18–22.
[37] Z.V.P. Murthy, M.S. Gaikwad, Preparation of chitosan-multiwalled carbon
nanotubes blended membranes: characterization and performance in the
separation of sodium and magnesium ions, Nanoscale Microscale
Thermophys. Eng. 17 (2013) 245–262.
[38] K. Spiegler, O. Kedem, Thermodynamics of hyperfiltration (reverse osmosis):
criteria for efficient membranes, Desalination 1 (1966) 311–326.
[39] Z.V.P. Murthy, L.B. Chaudhari, Application of nanofiltration for the rejection of
nickel ions from aqueous solutions and estimation of membrane transport
parameters, J. Hazard. Mater. 160 (2008) 70–77.
[40] Z.V.P. Murthy, S.K. Gupta, Thinfilm composite polyamide membrane
parameters estimation for the phenol-water system by reverse osmosis,
Sep. Sci. Technol 33 (1998) 2541–2557.
[41] S.Y. Vaidya, A.V. Simaria, Z.V.P. Murthy, Reverse osmosis transport models
evaluation: a new approach, Indian J. Chem. Technol. 8 (2001) 335–343.
[42] W. Pusch, Determination of transport parameters of synthetic membranes by
hyperfiltration experiments. Part I. Derivation of transport relationship from
linear relations of thermodynamics of irreversible processes, Ber. Bunsen.
Phys. Chem. 81 (1977) 269–276.
[43] Z.V.P. Murthy, S.K. Gupta, Estimation of mass transfer coefficient using a
combined nonlinear membrane transport and film theory model, Desalination
109 (1997) 39–49.
[44] M.T. Ahmed, S. Tahab, R. Maachi, G. Dorange, The influence of
physicochemistry on the retention of chromium ions during nanofiltration,
Desalination 145 (2002) 103–108.
[45] Y. Ku, S.W. Chen, W.Y. Wang, Effect of solution composition on the removal of
copper ions by nanofiltration, Sep. Purif. Technol. 43 (2005) 135–142.
[46] H. Saitua, M. Campderros, S. Cerutti, A.P. Padilla, Effect of operating conditions
in removal of arsenic from water by nanofiltration membrane, Desalination
172 (2005) 173–180.
 M.S. Gaikwad, C. Balomajumder / Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering 5 (2017) 45–53
[47] P. Banerjee, S. DasGupta, S. De, Removal of dye from aqueous solution using
acombination of advanced oxidation process and nanofiltration, J. Hazard.
Mater. 140 (2007) 95–103.
[48] A. Lhassani, M. Rumeau, D. Benjelloun, M. Pontie, Selective demineralization of
water by nanofiltration: application to the defluorination of brackish water,
Water Res. 35 (2001) 3260–3264.
[49] M. Pontie, C. Diawara, M. Rumeau, D. Aureau, P. Hemmery, Seawater
nanofiltration (NF): fiction or reality? Desalination 158 (2003) 277–280.
[50] N. Hilal, H. Al-Zoubi, N.A. Darwish, A.W. Mohammad, Characterisation of
nanofiltration membranes using atomic force microscopy, Desalination 177
(2005) 187–199.
[51] M.N. Abu Seman, M. Khayet, Z.I. Bin Ali, N. Hilal, Reduction of nanofiltration
membrane fouling by UV-initiated graft polymerization technique, J. Membr.
Sci. 355 (2010) 133–141.
[52] M. Elimelech, Z. Xiaohua, A.E. Childress, H. Seungkwan, Role of membrane
surface morphology in colloidal fouling of cellulose acetate and composite
aromatic polyamide reverse osmosis membranes, J. Membr. Sci. 127 (1997)
101–109.
[53] B.A.M. Al-Rashdi, D.J. Johnson, N. Hilal, Removal of heavy metal ions by
nanofiltration, Desalination 315 (2013) 2–17.
53
[54] L.K. Cabatingan, R.C. Agapay, J.L.L. Rakels, M. Ottens, L.A.M. van der Wielen,
Potential of biosorption for the recovery of chromate in industrial
wastewaters, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 40 (2001) 2302–2309.
[55] X. Ren, C. Zhao, S. Du, T. Wang, Z. Luan, J. Wang, D. Hou, Fabrication of
asymmetric poly (m-phenylene isophthalamide) nanofiltration membrane for
chromium(VI) removal, J. Environ. Sci. 22 (2010) 1335–1341.
[56] A.E. Childress, M. Elimelech, Effect of solution chemistry on the surface charge
of polymeric reverse osmosis and nanofiltration membranes, J. Membr. Sci. 119
(1996) 253–268.
[57] A.Y. Zahrim, N. Hilal, C. Tizaoui, Tubular nanofiltration of highly concentrated
C.I. Acid Black 210 dye, Water Sci. Technol. 67 (2013) 901–906.
[58] J. Kotas, Z. Stasicka, Chromium occurrence in the environment and methods of
its speciation, Environ. Pollut. 107 (2000) 263–283.
[59] W.M. Haynes, CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 91st ed., CRC Press,
Taylor & Francis Group, 2010–2011.
[60] Y. Yang, X. Lin, H. Huang, D. Feng, Y. Ba, X. Cheng, L. Cui, Sodium fluoride
induces apoptosis through reactive oxygen species-mediated endoplasmic
reticulum stress pathway in Sertoli cells, J. Environ. Sci. 30 (2015) 81–89.