Ijciet 10 01_050

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 535 editor@iaeme.com
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET)
Volume 10, Issue 1, January 2019, pp.535–547, Article ID: IJCIET_10_01_050
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1
ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316
©IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed
FORWARD OSMOSIS PROCESS FOR
REMOVAL OF Cd+2
IONS FROM SIMULATED
WASTEWATER BY USING CELLULOSE
ACETATE (CA) MEMBRANE
Tamara Kawther Hussein
Department of Environmental engineering, College of Engineering,
Mustansiriyah University, Baghdad, Iraq,
ABSTRACT
In present work forward osmosis (FO) process was used as a novel process for the
removal of Cd+2
ions from wastewater. Cellulose acetate (CA) membrane used as flat
sheet membrane for Cd+2
ions removal. MgSO4.7H2O with different concentration was
used as draw solution. Influence of different parameters was studied such as
concentration of draw solutions ranged (10-150 g/l), concentration of feed solutions
(10-200 mg/l), flow rate of draw solutions (30-100 l/hr), flow rate of feed solutions (30-
100 l/hr), and temperature of both feed and draw solution (10-40o
C) at constant
pressure 0.3 bar gauge. The results proved that when the draw solution concentration,
flow rate of feed solution, and temperature of both feed solution and draw solution
increased, the water flux increase. Water flux decreased by increasing cadmium ions
concentration in feed solution, operating time of experiment, and flow rate of draw
solution. Cadmium ions concentration in feed solution effluent increased when
concentration of feed solution increased, time of experimental work, draw solution
concentration, feed solution flow rate, and temperature of feed and draw solutions and
decreased with increasing draw solution flow rate. According to the results obtained,
forward osmosis process can be used to recover Cd+2
ions contaminated wastewater
with removal efficiency 78.87% after 3 hrs. Reverse salt flux of MgSO4.7H2O through
the CA membrane decreased with time which reached 23.34 g/m2
.h after 3 hrs.
Keywords: Forward osmosis; Cadmium Ions wastewater; MgSO4.7H2O draw solution;
CA membrane separations.
Cite this Article: Tamara Kawther Hussein, Forward Osmosis Process for Removal of
Cd+2 Ions from Simulated Wastewater by Using Cellulose Acetate (CA) Membrane,
International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET), 10 (1), 2018, pp.
535–547.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=10&IType=1

Forward Osmosis Process for Removal of Cd+2
Ions from Simulated Wastewater by Using Cellulose
Acetate (CA) Membrane
http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 536 editor@iaeme.com
1. INTRODUCTION
One of major environmental problem is water contaminate by toxic heavy metals through water
discharge by activity of industries. Heavy metals are toxic elements and their discharge into
streams cause harmful effects on human health and the environment [1, 2]. So, before reuse of
the water or its discharged to the environment heavy metals must be removed [3]. Cadmium
one of highly toxic heavy metals to the environment and human beings and there is some
evidence that it is carcinogenic. Cadmium used in many industries such as cadmium mining,
widely used in pigments, battery industries, and ceramic industries [4]. The conventional
processes have been used for removing of heavy metals are electrochemical treatment, ion
exchange, chemical precipitation, and filtration, but these processes have disadvantages such
as need high energy, huge quantity of toxic sludge production and recovery of heavy metals
contaminate wastewater incomplete [5]. Membrane processes consider one of important
method for removing heavy metals from wastewater. There are several membrane processes
have been used successfully to treat heavy metals contaminate wastewater including
microfiltration (MF), reverse osmosis (RO), ultrafiltration (UF), electrodialysis (ED),
nanofiltration (NF) [6]. Forward osmosis (FO) has drawn attention as a potential technology
alternative to reverse osmosis (RO) process. Forward osmosis operation generated by
difference in osmotic pressure between feed solution and draw solution. FO has a lower
tendency for irreversible fouling, low cost and higher cleaning efficiency [7, 8]. The choice of
draw solution usually depend on number of many factors such as high osmotic pressure, high
recovery, non-toxic, low cost, and chemically inert to the membrane [9].
This work review the efficiency of forward osmosis (FO) process for the removal of Cd+2
ions from wastewater. In this search using MgSO4.7H2O as draw solution, and the membrane
used in this work is cellulose acetate (CA) consist of active layer and support layer. The
influence of different parameters was studied such as concentration of draw and feed solutions,
experiment work time, temperature of both feed and draw solution, and feed and draw flow
rate on water flux. Feed solution outlet concentration and reverse salt flux through CA
membrane also was studied.
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Preparation of Feed Solution
Samples with cadmium Cd+2
ions concentration (10, 30, 50, 80, 200) mg/l were prepared by
dissolving the required amount of Cadmium nitrate tetrahydrate Cd(NO3)2.4H2O (Mwt =
308.42 gm/ml) allowed completely dissolved in deionized water (DI), of 3-8 µS/cm
conductivity. A stirrer at an agitation speed of 1000 rpm was used to mix the solution for 20
min. The total feed solution volume was 4 litters. Mass of cadmium metal added to water was
calculated according to equation (1)
W=V×Ci×
wtAt
wtM
.
. (1)
where: W: Weight of cadmium metal salt (mg), V: Volume of solution (1), Ci: Initial
concentration of cadmium metal ions in solution (mg/l), M.wt: Molecular weight of cadmium
metal salt (g/mole), At.wt: Atomic weight of cadmium metal ion (g/mole).
The removal efficiency (R %) of Cd+2
ions by CA membrane was calculated by using
Equation below
100*1% 





−=
F
P
C
C
R
(2)

where CF is the concentration of Cd+2
ions in the feed solution and CP is the permeate Cd+2
ions concentration.
2.2. Preparation of Draw Solution
For preparing magnesium sulfate hydrate (MgSO4.7H2O) solutions with concentration of 10,
30, 50 and 150 g/l it was supplied from scientific equipment offices in Bab Al-Moatham
markets, Baghdad, Iraq as powder, Deionized water of 3-8 µs/cm conductivity was used and to
mix the solution a stirrer at an agitation speed of 1000 rpm was used for 20 min. The total draw
solution volume was 4 liters. Table 1 shows the chemical specification of the salt
(MgSO4.7H2O).
Table 1 Chemical specifications of draw solutions
Component Properties
MgSO4.7H2O MW = 246.47
Assay 98% min.
Max. limits of impurities (%)
Chloride 0.04
Lead 0.0005
2.3. Membrane
The symmetric cellulose acetate (CA) membrane supplied by GE osmonics, England, RO was
used as flat sheet module. Cellulose acetate (CA) membrane consist of thick fabric backing
layer to provide mechanical support for membrane. The membrane maximum operating
temperature 45°C.
2.4. Experimental Work
Experiments were conducted using designed a bench membrane system. Forward osmosis
system consists of draw and feed solution reservoirs (7 liters in volume). Two diaphragm
booster pumps with inlet pressure 80 psia was used to pump draw and feed solution from
reservoir to direct osmosis element. To measure feed and draw volumetric flow rate two
calibrated flow meters were used each of range (30 - 100 l/h). The desired temperature for both
feed and draw solutions was controlled by submersible electrical coil and thermostat of range
from 0 to 80o
C. To indicate the feed solution pressure a pressure gauge (range of 0-2 bar gauge)
was used. FO osmosis cell consist of two symmetric channels on each side of the membrane,
the dimensions of the channels are 26.5×4×0.3 cm, the membrane provided an effective area of
106 cm2
. active side of CA membrane faced the feed solution Cd+2
ions and support layer faced
the draw solution MgSO4.7H2O. Both solutions flowing tangentially to both side of membrane
in the same direction (ie co-current flow). The effluent of draw and feed solutions were recycled
back to the main vessels. For all experiments pressure of 0.3 bar across the membrane sheets in
the feed side was applied. Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS) was used to determine the
feed solution (Cd+2
ions) concentration in outlet and permeate. To determine reverse salt of
MgSO4.7H2O concentration of the salt was measured by using conductivity meter. Scheme of
forward osmosis apparatus is shown in Figure 1. Operating time of experiment was 3 hours.
For checking water flux permeate was calculated by measuring the increasing in volume of DS
every 0.5 hour and compared with the reduction in the FS volume. Water flux measured by
dividing this transported water by the effective area of CA membrane and the time. When the
experiment was finished the remaining solution was drained and physical cleaning was done
by circulating deionized water on both side of membrane.

Figure 1 The schematic diagram of forward osmosis process used in all experiments.
Table 2 Testing and Measuring devices used in forward osmosis process
No. Testing and Measuring Devices
1 Atomic Absorption Spectrometry (AAS)
(Norwalk, Connecticut, U.S.A)
2 Digital laboratory conductivity meter (CRISON
Basic 30 EC-Meter, Spain) with range (0.01μS -
500mS/cm)
3 Stirrer at an agitation (Type Heidolph, model
RZR 2021, speed range: 40 - 2000 rpm)
4 submersible electrical coil (Model CK – 002)
and thermostat of range from 0 to 70 o
C
3. RESULT AND DISCUSION
3.1. Effect of Feed Solution Concentration
Figure 2 illustrates the effect of feed solution (Cd+2
ions) concentration on water flux at different
concentrations of draw solution (MgSO4.7H2O) when flow rate of feed and draw solutions 50
l/h and temperature 25o
C. Increasing initial feed solution concentration from 10-200 mg/l the
water flux decreased because of osmotic pressure of feed solution increase and driving force
(∆π= πMgSO4.7H2O – πCd+2 ions metal) decreased. This behavior is well agreed with [10]. Feed
solution outlet concentration increased due to increase the water transport from feed side
(cadmium metal solution) to draw side (magnesium sulfate hydrate solution) across the CA
membrane, which conforms what came to [11] as shown in Figure 3.

0
15
30
45
60
75
90
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Conc.of feed, mg/l
Conc.of draw=10g/l
Conc.of draw=30g/l
Conc.of draw=50g/l
Conc.of draw=150g/l
Figure 2 Effect of concentration of feed solution (Cd+2
ions) on water flux at different draw solution
concentration (MgSO4.7H2O).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Conc.of feed, mg/l
Conc.of draw=10g/l
Conc.of draw=30g/l
Conc.of draw=50g/l
Conc.of draw=150g/l
Figure 3 Effect of concentration of feed solution (Cd+2
ions) on feed solution outlet concentration
(Cd+2
ions) at different draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O).
3.2. Effect of Experimental Operating Time
Figure 4. illustrates the effect of time on water flux at different concentrations of draw solution
(MgSO4.7H2O) range from 10-150 g/l with constant concentration of Cd+2
ions solution 80
mg/l, flow rate of both feed and draw solutions was 50 l/h and temperature 25o
C. With the time,
the water flux decreased and after 2 hrs steady state was reached due to diminish concentration
of draw solution and formation of concentration polarization (CP) phenomenon on the CA
membrane. These conclusions are well agreed with the investigation of, [12]. Also with the
time, feed solution outlet concentration increased due to increasing pure water transport across
the CA membrane from feed side to draw side, which conforms what came to [2] as shown in
Figure 5.

0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Time, h
Conc. of draw=10 g/l
Figure 4 Effect of experimental operating time on water flux at different draw solution concentration
(MgSO4.7H2O).
75
85
95
105
115
125
135
145
155
165
175
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Time,h
Conc.of draw=10g/l
Conc.of draw=30g/l
Conc.of draw=60g/l
Conc.of draw=150g/l
Figure 5 Effect of experimental operating time on Feed solution outlet concentration (Cd+2
ions)
at different draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O).
3.3. Effect of Draw Solution Concentration
Increasing concentration of draw solution from 10-150 g/l, the water flux increased and this
attributed to increasing in driving force (∆π) and water transport through the membrane as
shown in Figure 6 when the flow rate of both feed and draw solutions was 50 l/h and
temperature 25o
C. These conclusions are well agreed with the investigation of [13]. Also feed
solution outlet concentration increased as shown in Figure 7 due to increase the volume of water
permeate from feed side (cadmium metal solution) to draw side (magnesium sulfate hydrate
solution) across the membrane, which conforms what came to [14].

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Conc. of draw, g/l
Conc. of feed=10 mg/l
Figure 6 Effect of draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O) on water flux at different feed solution
concentration (Cd+2
ions).
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Conc. of draw, g/l
Conc.of feed=10 mg/l
Figure 7 Effect of draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O) on Feed solution outlet concentration
(Cd+2
ions) at different feed solution concentration (Cd+2
ions).
3.4. Effect of Draw Solution Flow Rate
Figures 8, 9 illustrate the effect of draw solution flow rate (Qd) on water flux and feed solution
outlet concentration at different concentrations of draw solution (MgSO4.7H2O) when
concentration of Cd+2
ions solution was 80 mg/l, flow rate of feed solution 50 l/h and
temperature 25o
C. Decreasing the draw solution flow rate (Qd) increasing the concentration of
MgSO4.7H2O build at the vicinity of the membrane surface (support layer membrane), and lead
to increasing the driving force (∆π) which resulting in increasing water flux through the CA
membrane, this conclusion correspond with the investigation of [15]. Decreasing flow rate of
MgSO4.7H2O draw solution will increase water permeate and this will cause increasing of Cd+2
ions concentration in feed solution outlet. This conclusion is compatible what came to
investigation of [16].

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Draw solution flowrate (Qd), l/hr
Conc. of draw=10g/l
Conc. of draw=150g/l
Figure 8 Effect of draw solution flow rate (Qd) on water flux at different draw solution concentration.
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Draw solution flowrate (Qd), l/hr
Figure 9 Effect of draw solution flow rate (Qd) on Feed solution outlet concentration (Cd+2
ions) at
different draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O)
3.5. Effect of Feed Solution Flow Rate
The flux of water increased by increasing the flow rate of feed solution at different
concentrations of draw solution (MgSO4.7H2O) with constant Cd+2
ions concentration 80 mg/l,
flow rate of draw solution was 50 l/h and temperature 25o
C as shown in Figure 10. Increasing
the flow rate of feed solution from 30 to 100 l/hr caused low concentration of cadmium metal
salt build up near the active layer of membrane surface (i.e. reducing the concentrative external
concentration polarization (CECP)), and this cause decreasing in osmotic pressure in the feed
solution side and result in increasing the driving force (∆π). These observations are well agreed
with results of, [17]. Increasing feed solution flow rate lead to increasing Cd+2
ions
concentration in feed solution due to increasing the transmission of water from feed solution to
draw solution through CA membrane as shown in Figure 11. This conclusion correspond with
previous studies [18, 19].

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Feed solution flowrate (Qf), l/hr
Conc.of draw=10g/l
Conc.of draw=30g/l
Conc.of draw=50g/l
Conc.of draw=150g/l
Figure 10 Effect of feed solution flow rate (Qf) on water flux with at different draw solution
concentration.
90
110
130
150
170
190
210
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Feed solution flowrate (Qf), l/hr
Conc.of draw=10g/l
Conc.of draw=30g/l
Conc.of draw=50g/l
Conc.of draw=150g/l
Figure 11 Effect of feed solution flow rate (Qf) on Feed solution outlet concentration (Cd+2
ions) at
different draw solution concentration.
3.6. Effect of Temperature
The effect of temperature on water flux through CA membrane at different concentrations of
draw solution (MgSO4.7H2O) with constant Cd+2
ions concentration 80 mg/l, flow rate of both
feed and draw solutions was 50 l/h is shown in Figure 12. The increased in temperature of both
Cd+2
metal ions feed solution and MgSO4.7H2O draw solution from 10 to 40o
C lead to reduce
the viscosity of solutions and increasing the diffusion rate of water through the CA membrane
due to lower resistance against passage of flow and higher water flux, this consistence with
[20]. Increasing temperature of both feed and draw solutions will increase the water flux
through the membrane and lead to increase Cd+2
ions concentration in feed solution as shown
in Figure 13. This conclusion agrees with [21].

0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Waterflux,l/m2.h
Temperature,o C
Figure 12 Effect of temperature of feed and draw solution on water flux at different draw solution
concentration (MgSO4.7H2O).
90
120
150
180
210
240
0 10 20 30 40 50
Ccd+2outlet,mg/l
Temperature,o C
Figure 13 Effect of temperature of feed and draw solution on Feed solution outlet concentration
(Cd+2
) ions at different draw solution concentration (MgSO4.7H2O).
3.7. Removal efficiency (R %) of Cellulose Acetate (CA) Membrane and Reverse
Salts Flux of MgSO4.7H2O Through the Membrane
The constant operating conditions for all experiments such as concentration of Cd+2
ions was
80 mg/l, concentration of MgSO4.7H2O was 30 g/l, flow rate of feed and draw solutions was
50 l/h and temperature 25o
C. Figure 14 shows the concentration of Cd+2
ions permeation
through CA membrane and removal efficiency (R %) of membrane with time. When Cd+2
ions
feed solution concentration increased lead to formation of external concentration polarization
(ECP) and fouling of the CA membrane so the removal efficiency (R %) of membrane
decreased which reached 78.87% after 3 hrs, This conclusion correspond with the investigation
with the investigation of [22]. Figure 15 shows the reverse salt flux of MgSO4.7H2O through
CA membrane with time, it was observed that the reverse salts flux high in the beginning of the
operation which reached 31.57 g/m2
.h after 0.5 hr and then slightly decreased with proceed time
which reached 23.34 g/m2
.h after 3 hrs due to adverse effect of internal concentration
polarization (ICP) near the support layer membrane. These observations are well agreed with
investigation of [23, 24].

7
9
11
13
15
17
19
78
80
82
84
86
88
90
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Ccd+2inpermite,mg/l
RemovalEfficiency(R),%
Time,h
R%
Conc.Cd+2,mg/l
Figure 14 Effect of time on Cd+2
ions in permeation and Removal Efficiency (R %) of CA
membrane
0
10
20
30
40
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
ReverseSaltFlux,g/m2.h
Time, h
Figure 15 Effect of time on reverse salt flux through CA membrane
4. CONCLUSION
In this study, forward osmosis can be used to remove Cd+2
ions from contaminated wastewater
by using cellulose acetate (CA) membrane as flat sheet. Water flux permeate increased when
the concentration of MgSO4.7H2O draw solutions, temperature of both feed and draw solution
and flow rate of feed solution increased, and decreased by increasing Cd+2
ions concentration
in feed solution, operating time of experiment, and flow rate of draw solutions. Cd+2
ions
concentration in feed solution outlet increased by increasing concentration of feed and draw
solution, operating time of experiment, flow rate of feed solution, and temperature of feed and
draw solutions while decreased by increasing draw solution flow rate. Reverse salts flux of
MgSO4.7H2O through the CA membrane decreased with time. The removal efficiency (R %)
of CA membrane decreased with time which reached 78.87% after 3 hrs.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank the Mustansiriyah university (www.uomustansiriyah.edu.iq)
Baghdad - Iraq for its support in the present work.

REFERENCES
[1] Kumar, P. S. and Kirthika, K., Kinetics and Equilibrium Studies of Zn+2
Ions Removal from
Aqueous Solutions by Use of Natural Waste, Electronic Journal of Environmental,
Agricultural and Food Chemistry: EJEAFChe, 9, 2010, pp 264- 274.
[2] Alturki, A., McDonald, J., Khan, S., Price, W., Nghiem, L., Removal of trace organic
contaminants by the forward osmosis process, Separation and Purification Technology,
103, 2013, pp 258–266.
[3] Al-Ghouti, M. A., Khraiseh, M. A. M., and Tutuji, M., Flow injection potentio metric
stripping analysis for study of adsorption of n heavy metal ions onto modified diatomite,
Journal of Chemical Engineering., 104, 2004, pp 83 -91.
[4] Kula, I., Ug˘urlu, M., Karaog˘lu, H., Celik, A., Adsorption of Cd(II) ions from aqueous
solutions using activated carbon prepared from olive stone by ZnCl2 activation, Bioresour.
Technol. 99, 2008, pp 492–501.
[5] Pang, F. M., Teng, S. P., Teng, T., T., and Mohd Omar, A. K., Heavy Metals Removal by
Hydroxide Precipitation and Coagulation-Flocculation Methods from Aqueous Solutions,
Water Quality Research Journal of Canada, 44(22), 2009, pp44:1-9.
[6] Hsiang, T. C., Modeing and optimization of the forward osmosis process - parameters
selection, flux prediction and process application. Ph.D. National University of Singapore,
2011.
[7] Holloway, R. W., Childress, A. E., Dennett, K. E., and Cath T. Y., Forward osmosis for
concentration of anaerobic digester centrate, Water Resource, 41, 2007, pp 4005–4014.
[8] Mohammed, A. A., Al-Alawy, A. F., Hussein, T. K., Removal of lead, copper, and nickel
ions from wastewater by forward osmosis process, Second Engineering Scientific
Conference, College of Engineering-University of Diyala, Iraq, 2015, pp 893-908.
[9] Qasim, M., Performance of forward osmosis using various membranes. M.Sc, American
University of Sharjah, 2013.
[10] Nematzadeh, M., Samimi, A., Shokrollahzadeh, S., and Behzadmehr, A., Performance of
Potassium Bicarbonate and Calcium Chloride Draw Solutions for Desalination of Saline
Water Using Forward Osmosis, Trans. Phenom. Nano Micro Scales, .3(1), 2015, pp 29-36.
[11] Lee, S., Booa, C., Elimelech, M., Hong, S., Comparison of fouling behavior in forward
osmosis (FO) and reverse osmosis (RO), Journal of Membrane Science, 365, 2010, pp 34-
39.
[12] Hussein, T. K., Comparative study for removal of Zn+2 ions from aqueous solutions by
adsorption and forward osmosis, Iraqi Journal of Chemical and Petroleum Engineering, 18
(2), 2017, pp 125 - 138
[13] Wang, Y., Fang, Z., Zhao, S., Ng, D., Zhang, J., and Xie, Zongli Dopamine incorporating
forward osmosis membranes with enhanced selectivity and antifouling properties, Royal
Society of chemistry,.8, 2018, pp 22469–22481.
[14] Yong, J., S., Phillip, W. A., and Elimelech, M., Coupled reverse draw solute permeation
and water flux in forward osmosis with neutral draw solutes, Journal of Membrane Science,
392-393, 2012, 9-17.
[15] Erdem , N., Karapinar , N., and Donat, R., The Removal of Heavy Metals by Natural
Zeolites, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 280, 2004, pp 309 -314.
[16] Tan, C., H., and Ng, H., Y., Modified models to predict flux behavior in forward osmosis
in consideration of external and internal concentration polarizations, Journal of Membrane
Science, 324 (1-2), 2008, pp 209-219.
[17] Hickenbottom, K., L., Hancock, N. T., Hutchings, N., R., Appleton, E., W., Beaudry, E.,
G., Xu, P., and Cath, T. Y., Forward osmosis treatment of drilling mud and fracturing
wastewater from oil and gas operations, Desalination, 312, 2013, pp 60–66.

[18] Nayak, C., and Rastogi, N., K., Forward osmosis for the concentration of anthocyanin from
Garcinia indica choisy, Separation and Purification Technology, 71, 2010, pp 144-151.
[19] Tan, C. H., and Ng, H. Y., Modified models to predict flux behavior in forward osmosis
inconsideration of external and internal concentration polarization, Journal of Membrane
Science, 324 (1), 2008, pp 209-219.
[20] McCtcheon, J. R., and Elimelech, M., Influence of concentrative and dilutive internal
concentration polarization on flux behavior in forward osmosis. Journal of membrane
science, 284, 2006, pp 237-247.
[21] Alturki, A., Removal of trace organic contaminants by integrated membrane processes for
indirect potable water reuse applications, Ph. D. University of Wollongong, 2013.
[22] Liu, X., Wu, J., Liu, C., and Wang, J., Removal of cobalt ions from aqueous solution by
forward osmosis, Separation and Purification Technology, 177, 2017, pp 8–20.
[23] Ali, H., M., Gadallah, H., Ali, S., S., Sabry, R., and Gadallah, A. G., Pilot Scale
Investigation of Forward/Reverse Osmosis Hybrid System for Seawater Desalination Using
Impaired Water from Steel Industry, International Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2016,
pp 1-9.
[24] Ali, S., S., Sabry, R., Ali, H., M., and Gadallah, H., Enhancement of nonwoven cellulose
triacetate forward-osmosis membranes by surface coating modification, International
Journal of Engineering & Technology, 6 (4), 2017, pp 124-130.

Ijciet 10 01_050

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Ijciet 10 01_050

Similar to Ijciet 10 01_050 (20)

More from IAEME Publication

More from IAEME Publication (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Ijciet 10 01_050