See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/266211937

Ultrafiltration of sugarcane juice: studies on membrane fouling

Article

CITATION READS
1 92

2 authors, including:

Nirmal Kumar Saha

Central Salt and Marine Chemicals Research Institute
15 PUBLICATIONS   402 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nirmal Kumar Saha on 20 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Ultrafiltration of sugarcane juice: studies on membrane fouling

N.K. Saha, M. Balakrishnan*#

TERI School of Advanced Studies, Darbari Seth Block, India Habitat Centre, Lodhi Road
New Delhi, India 110 003
Tel: ++91 11 24682100 / 24682111; Fax: ++91 11 24682144 / 24682145
email: [email protected]

*#The Energy & Resources Institute (TERI), Darbari Seth Block, India Habitat Centre,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi, India 110 003
Tel: ++91 11 24682100 / 24682111; fax:++91 11 24682144 / 24682145
email: [email protected]

Introduction
Membrane filtration of sugarcane juice has attracted considerable attention in the last decade [1-
6]. This is a multi-component feed stream that presents a hostile environment to the membrane
[7]. Apart from variations in the juice composition influenced by cane variety, growing
conditions, climactic and seasonal changes, process disturbances etc., the juice is unstable and
susceptible to microbial attack, sucrose loss due to inversion and color formation with storage.
Further, full-scale operation in a mill typically entails handling large juice volumes in the range
of 100-400m3/h at temperatures above 90°C.

Previous studies indicate that membrane fouling in sugarcane juice purification continues to be a
serious operational concern [8-10]. This paper investigates the effect of feed properties and
membrane molecular weight cutoff on the fouling of polysulphone (PS) & polyethersulphone
(PES) membranes in the ultrafiltration of sugarcane juice.

Experimental
Material
Table 1 lists the membranes used in this study. The feed samples viz. mixed juice after cane
crushing and clarified juice from the liming-sulphitation process [11] were collected from a local
sugar mill. The juice samples were frozen and the required volumes brought to room temperature
prior to membrane filtration. Samples once used were discarded and a fresh lot used for the
subsequent experiment.

Method
Juice ultrafiltration was carried out in a stainless steel SEPA ST cell (Osmonics, U.S.A.) with a
filtration area of 16.9 cm2. The experiments were performed at ambient temperature, at a
constant pressure of 1 bar in a dead-end filtration mode and a concentration factor of 1.7. A fresh
membrane was used for each experiment and the membrane washing and water permeability
measurements were performed using RO water.
 The clarified juice was centrifuged at 6000 rpm for 18 min. and the mixed juice at 9000
rpm for 15 min. to remove suspended solids prior to UF. Limited experiments were also
conducted without any suspended solids removal.
The used membranes were preserved in 1% formalin solution at ambient temperature.
The contact angle was measured by the captive bubble method [12].

Table 1: Membrane details

Membrane Material NMWCO Supplier Water permeability
(kD) (LMH/bar)*
HFUF15 M-PES 15 Permionics, India 16.63
PES20 PES 20 Permionics, India 102.22
HFUF30 M-PES 30 Permionics, India 26.60
PES50 PES 50 Permionics, India 294.78
P010F PH-PES 10 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 69.84
P020F PH-PES 20 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 88.79
UF-PES-030H PH-PES 30 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 37.79
UF-PES-050H PH-PES 50 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 134.29
UF-PS-100H PH-PS 100 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 165.95
P150F PH-PES 150 Microdyn-Nadir, Germany 482.10
NMWCO as specified by the supplier; M: Modified; SM: Surface modified; PH: Permanently
hydrophilic
*Experimental values, measured at ambient temperature (25-28°C)

Results
Effect of suspended solids (SS) removal
Figure 1 shows the effect of suspended solids removal on clarified juice flux. Clarified juice
contains an average of 0.02 % suspended solids in the form of fine bagasse particles and
precipitated non-sugar impurities [8]. These deposit on the membrane surface forming a
secondary filtration layer that offers additional resistance to permeate flow. The initial flux is
higher with the particle free juice; however, the same steady state value is approached by both
the feeds. The fouling appears to be predominantly due to the dissolved components.

Effect of membrane NMWCO rating

The effect of varying NMWCO cutoff for clarified juice and mixed juice is shown in Figure 2 &
Figure 3 respectively. For a given feed, the average flux was higher at higher NMWCO of the
membrane. However, the mixed juice displayed significantly lower flux as compared to clarified
juice; this was further accompanied by high fouling. A comparison of the contact angle of clean
& fouled membranes showed a consistent decrease in contact angle with fouling implying
increased hydrophilization of the membrane surface by the deposited foulants (Figure 4). Further
studies on characterization of the foulants is currently underway.

Acknowledgement: This work was supported by grant I/78374 from VolkswagenStiftung,

Germany.
References
1. S. Cartier, M. Theoleyre, X. Lancrenon and M. Decloux, Proceedings of the Sugar
Processing Research Institute workshop on Separation Processes in the Sugar Industry, New
Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A (1996) 55-68.
2. R. J. Kwok, International Sugar Journal, 98(1173) (1996) 490.
3. C.C. Willet, International Sugar Journal, 99(1177E) (1997) 7.
4. M. Saska, J. McArdle and A. Eringis, Proceedings International Society of Sugarcane
Technologists, 23 (1999) 17-25.
5. M. Balakrishnan, M. Dua and J.J. Bhagat, International Sugar Journal, 1213 (2000) 21-24.
6. A. Eringis and I. Jaferey, Proceedings International Society of Sugarcane Technologists, 24
(2001) 17-25.
7. V. Kochergin, Proceedings Sugar Processing Research Institute Conf. New Orleans, LA,
U.S.A., 9-10 September 1999.
8. A.M. Ghosh and M. Balakrishnan, Journal of Food Engineering, 58 (2003) 143.
9. J.R. Vercellotti, M.A. Clarke, R.S. Blanco, W.S. Patout & R.A. Florence, Proceedings SIT,
57 (1998) 49-78.
10. J.R. Vercellotti, M.A. Clarke, M.A. Godshall, Proceedings International Society of
Sugarcane Technologists, 23 (1999) 26-42.
11. P. Honig, Principles of Sugar Technology, Amsterdam: Elsevier (1963).
12. W. Zhang and B. Hallström, Desalination, 79 (1990) 1-12.
 Figure1: Effect of SS removal on juice flux
(PES20 membrane; clarified juice)
60

50
Before centrifugation
After centrifugation
40
Flux (LMH)

30

20

10

0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
Permeate volume (ml)

Figure 2(a): Effect of NMWCO rating on clarified juice flux

45

40

35

30
Flux(LMH)

25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
Permeate volume(ml)

Permionics HFUF 30 Nadir UF-PES-050H Nadir P020F

Nadir UF-PS-100H Nadir UF-PES-030H Nadir P010F
Nadir P150F Permionics HFUF15 Permionics PES 50
 Figure 2(b): Effect of membrane NMWCO rating on fouling
with clarified juice

90
80
70
60
Fouling (%)

50

40
30

20
10
0
Membranes

Permionics HFUF30 Nadir UF-PES-050H Nadir P020F

Nadir UF-PS-100H Nadir UF-PES-030H Nadir P010F
Permionics HFUF15 Nadir P150F Permionics PES 50

Figure 3(a): Effect of membrane NMWCO rating on mixed

juice flux
12

10

8
Flux(LMH)

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Permeate Volume (ml)

Nadir UF-PES-050H Nadir P150F

Nadir UF-PS-100H Permionics PES 50
 Figure 3(b): Effect of membrane NMWCO on mixed juice
fouling

100
90
80
70
Fouling (%)

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Membranes

Nadir UF-PES-050H Nadir P150F

Nadir UF-PS-100H Permionics PES 50

Figure 4 Comparison of contact angle of clean and fouled membranes

60

50
clean
40 fouled
Contact angle

30

20

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6
Membrane

1. Nadir P010F 4. Nadir P150F

2. Nadir UF-PES-030H 5. Permionics HFUF 30
3. Nadir UF-PES-100H 6. Permionics PES 50

View publication stats