Organic Removal Efficiency of the Nanofiltration and Adsorption Hybrid System in High Strength Wastewater

Document Type : Research Paper


1 Asist. Prof. of Environment and Energy Faculty, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch,Tehran, Iran

2 M.Sc. Student of Environmental Eng., Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran

3 Prof., Dept. of Chemistry and Petrolium Eng., Sharif University of Tech., Tehran

4 M.Sc. of Environmental Eng., Sewage and Wastewater , Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch , Tehran


Surface and groundwater resources are increasingly jeopardized by discharges from pharmaceutical, chemical, and detergent plants. The high pollutant load of the effluents from these industries requires specific treatments. The objective of this research was to study and compare the nanofiltration and adsorption hybrid system with the plain nanofiltration system in wastewater treatment.For this purpose, a pilot nanofiltration system with a capacity of 7.6 m3/d using 1 and 5 micron filters and a FILMTEC NF90-4040 membrane was used in the first phase of the study. In the second phase, granular activated carbon cartridges were used. Inluent and effluent discharges as well as the COD removal were measured in both systems under variable times and organic load conditions. The results showed that COD removal efficiency was higher in the hybrid system than in the plain naonofiltration one. In the hybrid system, the Maximum in the hybrid system, the COD removal efficiencies achieved for organic loads of 1000, 2000, and 3000 mg/L were 99%, 95.86%, and 92.93%, respectively. The same values for the plain nanofiltration system were 87.34%, 50%, and 29.41%, respectively. It was found that polarization and membrane fouling decreased both the effluent flow and the COD removal efficiency with time. Fouling of the membrane was, however, lower in the hybrid system compared to the plain nanofiltration; thus, the hybrid system was associated with higher values of COD removal and delayed membrane fouling.


1- Torabian, A., Shokuhi, M., and Ghadimkhani, A. (2006). “An investigation on nitrate removal mechanism from drinking water by nanofilteration in different operational pressure and water ionic combination.” Nine National Public Health Conf., Isfahan, Iran. (In Persian)
2- Mesdaghinia, A., Farokhi, M., Naseri, S., and Yazdan Bakhsh, A. (2004). “Improvement of 2-4-6 trichlorophenol biodegradation by fenton process.” J. of Hakim, 7, 33-40. (In Persian)
3- Rashidi Mehrabadi, A., Akbari, H., and Torabian, A. (2006). “A study of nanofilteration in Arsenic removal from drinking water.” First Professional Environmental Eng. Conf., Tehran, Iran. (In Persian)
4- Madaeni, S. (2002). Membranes and membrane process., 1st Ed., Taghbostan Pub., Razi University, Kermanshah. (In Persian)
5- Torabian, A., Shokuhi Harandi, M., Nabi Bidhendi, Gh., Ghadimkhani, A., and Safaifar, M. (2006). “Nitrate removal from drinking water by nanofilteration in different operational situation.” J. of Water and Wastewater, 61, 51-61. (In Persian)
6- Torabian, A., Nabi Bidhendi, Gh., Ghadimkhani, A., and Etemadi, M. (2008). “Peroxidation effects on total organic carbon removal by nanofiltration.” J. of Water and Wastewater, 68, 19-24. (In Persian)
7- Cristiane, N.L. , Carlos, C., and Humberto, G. (2005). “Color and COD retention by nanofiltration membranes.” Desalination, 172, 77-83.
8- APHA., AWWA., and WPCF. (1995). Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater,18th Ed., American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Pollution Control Federation, Washington D.C.
9- Chakraborty, S., Basu, J. K., and DasGupta, S. (2005). “Treatment of a textile effluent: Application of a combination method involving adsorption and nanofiltration.” Desalination, 174, 73-85.
10- Johannes, M., Thomas, M., and Ludger, H. (2002). “Nanofiltration and adsorption on powdered adsorbent as process combination for the treatment of severely contaminated wastewater.” Desalination, 147, 361-366.