不同超滤组合工艺净水及膜污染的中试研究  

PILOT STUDY ON DIFFERENT INTEGRATED ULTRAFILTRATION PROCESSES ON WATER PURIFICATION AND MEMBRANE FOULING

作　　者：陈益清[1] 王燕藏 孙昕[2] 李文龙[1] 

机构地区：[1]深圳职业技术学院建筑与环境工程学院,广东深圳518055 [2]西安建筑科技大学环境与市政工程学院,陕西西安710055

出　　处：《水处理技术》2014年第7期76-79,共4页Technology of Water Treatment

基　　金：广东省科技计划项目(2012B010500031);深圳市科技研发资金基础研究计划项目(JC201105201234A)

摘　　要：采用超滤中试系统处理深圳某水库原水,对比研究了粉末活性炭和混凝2种预处理工艺对超滤净水效果及对超滤膜污染的影响。结果表明,混凝/超滤工艺和粉末活性炭/超滤工艺对浊度、CODMn、UV254、DOC的平均去除率分别为99.6%、34.8%、31.3%、24.9%和99.4%、35.0%、32.4%、29.5%。粉末活性炭/超滤工艺对以CODMn、UV254、DOC表征的有机物的去除效果优于混凝/超滤工艺,而混凝/超滤工艺对有机物的去除效果受原水水质的影响较小,并且出水浊度效果稍好。在原水水质和运行条件相同的情况下,混凝/超滤工艺的跨膜压差的增长速度明显高于粉末活性炭/超滤工艺;但对超滤膜进行化学清洗后,粉末活性炭/超滤工艺膜表面仍有明显的污染物残留。A pilot ultrafiltration system was used to purify the raw water from a reservoir in Shenzhen. Two pretreatment processes, namely coagulation and powdered activated carbon （PAC）, were evaluated and compared on the water purification by ultrafiltration and membrane fouling. The results showed that the average removal rates of turbidity, CODMn, UV254 and DOC by coagulation/ultrafiltration were about 99.6%, 34.8%, 31.3% and 24.9%, respectively, while those of PAC/ultrafiltration were about 99.4%, 35.0%, 32.4% and 29.5%, respectively. PAC/ultrafiltration was more effective in removing organic matters indexed by UV254, DOC and CODMn while coagulation/ultrafiltration worked slightly better on turbidity removal and had a stable efficiency of removing organic matters. On the same conditions of raw water quality and operational parameters, the trans-membrane pressure in the coagulation case increased significantly faster than that of PAC case. The membrane surface in the PAC/ultrafiltration system had remarkable contamination after Chemical cleaning.

关 键 词：浸没式超滤膜 混凝 粉末活性炭 净水 膜污染 

分 类 号：TU991.22[建筑科学—市政工程]