Removal of Zinc from an Aqueous Solution Using Micellar-Enhanced Ultrafiltration (MEUF) with Surfactants

Abstract

In the present study, the optimum conditions have been investigated for the separation of Zn2+ ions from aqueous media by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF). For this purpose, optimum conditions for the concentration of surface active agent in the feed solution (sodium dodecyl sulfate, SDS), cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB), triton-X-100 (TX100)), filtering pressure, stirring rate and for the membrane porosity have been determined. It is shown that the filtering pressure has a significant effect on the permeate flux but a relatively insignificant impact on rejection of Zn2+. Permeate flux increased linearly with increasing pressure, ranging from 0.32 mLmin-1m-2 at 3 bar to 0.72 mLmin-1m-2 at 4 bar. The results showed that by adding SDS anionic surfactant, the permeate flux and the removal efficiency of zinc increased. Best results in terms of zinc rejection coefficient is 97.5 % at 5.0 x 10-4 M zinc concentration, 1.0 x 10-2 M SDS concentration (~x 8 cmc), stirring rate 500 rpm and transmembrane pressure 4 bar.

Keywords

• Micellar Enhanced Ultrafiltration,SDS,CTAB,TX100

References

1. 1. Goldfrank LR, Goldfrank’s Toxicologic Emergencies, 8th Edition, McGraw Hill, New York, 2006.
2. 2. Vega M, Augusto M, Talío MC, Fernández LP. Surfactant Enhanced Chemofiltration of Zinc Traces Previous to Their Determination by Solid Surphase Fluorescence American Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 2011 Dec; 2: 902-908.
3. 3. Lenntech, www.lenntech.com/periodic/ water/zinc/zinc-and-water.htm
4. 4. Trıvunac K, Sekulıc Z and Stevanovıc S. Zinc removal from wastewater by a complexation–microfiltration process. J. Serb. Chem. Soc. 2012; 77(11): 1661-1670.
5. 5. Fu F and Wang Q. Removal of heavy metal ions from wastewaters: A review. Journal of Environmental Management. 2011 Mar; 92(3):407-413.
6. 6. Rahmanian B, Pakizeh M and Maskooki A. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of zinc in synthetic wastewater using spiral-wound membrane Journal of hazardous materials. 2010 Dec; 184(1-3) : 261-267.
7. 7. Scamehorn J, Dunn Jr, Christian S. Simultaneous removal of dissolved organics and divalent metal cations from water using micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration. Colloids and Surfaces, 1989; 35(1): 49-56.
8. 8. Hankins N, Hilal NO, O Ogunbiyi, Azzopardi B. Inverted polarity micellar enhanced ultrafiltration for the treatment of heavy metal polluted wastewater. Desalination, 2005; 185(1-3):185–202.

9. 9. Landaburu-Aguirre J, García V, Pongrácz E, Keiski R. The removal of zinc from synthetic wastewaters by micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration: statistical design of experiments. Desalination. 2009 May; 240(1-3): 262-269.
10. 10. Landaburu-Aguirre J, Pongrácz E, Perämäki, Keiski R. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration for the removal of cadmium and zinc: Use of response surface methodology to improve understanding of process performance and optimisation. Journal of Hazardous Materials. 2010 Aug; 180(1): 524–534.
11. 11. Scamehorn, J.F., Ellington, R.T. and Christian, S.D. Removal of Multivalent Metal Cations from Water using Micellar-Enhanced Ultrafiltration, Recent Separation Techniques-Ill, AICE symposium Series 250, p. 48-58 (1986).
12. 12. Scamehom, J.F, Christian, S.D. and Ellington, R.T. Use of Micellar-Enhanced Ultrafiltration to Remove Multivalent Metal Ions from Aqueous Streams. In: Surfactant-Based Separation Process, edited by Scamehorn, J.F. and Harwell, J.H., Surfactant Science Series, Vol. 33, p. 29-51, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, NY (1989).
13. 13. Akita S, Takeuchi H, Yang L. Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of gold(III) with nonionic surfactant. J. Membr. Sci. 1997; 133(2): 189-194.
14. 14. Staszak K, Redutko B, Prochaska K. Removal of metal ions from aqueous solutions by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF). Polish Journal of Chemical Technology 2010; 12(3):62- 65.
15. 15. Shimoda K., In Colloidal Surfactants (Ed). K. Shinoda,T. Nakagava,B. Tamamushi, and T.Isemura, 1963 Chap I , Academic Press,N.Y.
16. 16. Karate VD, Marathe KV. Simultaneous Removal of Nickel and Cobalt From Aqueous Stream by Cross Flow Micellar Enhanced Ultrafiltration. J. Hazard. Mater. 2008; 157 (2-3):464-471.
17. 17. Bade R, Lee SH, Jo S, Lee HS, Lee SE. Micellar enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) and activated carbon fibre (ACF) hybrid processes for chromate removal from wastewater. Desalination. 2008; 229(1-3):264-273.
18. 18. Danis U, Keskinler B. Chromate removal from wastewater using micellar enhanced crossflow filtration. Desalination. 2009; 249(3):1356-136.
19. 19. Yenphan P, Chanachai A, Jiraratananon R. Experimental study on micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration (MEUF) of aqueous solution and wastewater containing lead ion with mixed surfactants. Desalination. 2010; 253:30-37.
20. 20. Roberts, R.T. and Jones, G.P. Mol. Cryst. Liq. Cryst. Liq. 17, 281 (1972); Lindman, B. and Brun, B.J. Colloid Interface Sci. 42, 388 (1973); BouaaH, K. and Ache. H.J. ibid. 85, 2444 (1981); Klason, T. NMR Studies of Solubilization, hydrocarbon chain motion and the state of water in amphiphile-water systems. The Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm. (1983).
21. 21. Kubota, Y., Kodama, M. and Miura, Second CMC [critical micelle concentration] of an aqueous solution of sodium dodecyl sulfate. IV. Fluorescence depolarization, M. Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn., 1973; 46: 100-103.
22. 22. Kale, K. M.; Cussler, E.L. and Evans, Characterization of micellar solutions using surfactant ion electrodes, D.F. J. Phys. Chem., 1980; 84: 593-598.
23. 23. Porte, G., Poggi, Y. Appell, J. and Moret, G. J. Phys. Chem, 1984; 88: 5703-5812.
24. 24. Mackay RA., Solubilization, in: Martin J. Schick (Ed.), Nonionic Surfactants: Physical Chemistry, Surfactant Science Series, M. Dekker Inc., New York, pp. 1987308-314.
25. 25. Mayers D, Surfactants in solution: micelle and related association phenomena, in: Surfactant Science and Technology, VCH Publishers Inc., 2008; 1988:104-106.
26. 26. Zeng GM. et al., Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of methylene blue from dye wastewater via a polysulfone hollow fiber membrane. J. Membr. Sci. 2010; 310(1-2):149-160.
27. 27. Park SJ, Yoon HH, Song SK. Solubilization and micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of o-cresol by sodium dodecyl micelles. Korean J. Chem. Engg. 1997; 14: 233-240.
28. 28. Purkait MK, Gupta SD, De S. Resistance in series model for micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration of eosin dye. J. Colloid Interface Sci. 2004; 270(2):496-506.
29. 29. Chhatre AJ, Marathe KV. Dinamic analysis and optimization of surfactant dosage in micellar enhanced ultrafiltration of nickel from aqueous streams. Sep. Sci. Technol. 2006; 41(12):2755-2770.
30. 30. Aguirre JL, Pongracz E, Keiski RL. Separation of cadmium and copper from phosphorous rich synthetic waters by micellar enhanced ultrafiltration. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2011; 81(1): 41-48.
31. 31. Scamehorn JF, Harwell JH. Surfactant-Based Separation Processes Eds. Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1988 p 46.