Journal Menu
By: Keka Rana.
Department of Chemical Engineering, Haldia Institute of Technology, Haldia, West Bengal, India
Membrane-based separation has become an integral part of the separation industry due to its diverse applications across various fields. However, this progress is often hindered by two major challenges: fouling and concentration polarization. Many membrane modules have made significant efforts to overcome these obstacles, yet a satisfactory solution to mitigate these issues and facilitate membrane-based processes in the separation industries is still needed. These issues are successfully handled using Dynamic Shear Enhanced Membrane Filtration Pilots (DSEMFPs). The development of DSEMFPs began in 1985 with the introduction of a Couette flow membrane module, which played a vital role in healthcare by efficiently collecting plasma from donors. Since then, many additional DSEMFPs have been designed to enhance the membrane filtration process. The simplicity and low cost of the primary Couette flow membrane module encourage further investigation to optimize its performance. Two concentric cylinders make up this module; the outer cylinder stays fixed while the inner cylinder rotates. The inner cylinder’’s surface has a membrane affixed to it. As the inner cylinder rotates at high speed, the annular space between the cylinders generates Taylor vortices. These vortices create intense shear on the membrane surface, helping to maintain permeate flux and preventing its decline. The module’’s simplicity and low operational costs make it particularly appealing, warranting a thorough analysis of its applications across various domains. Additionally, the size of the annular space significantly influences shear stress control at the membrane surface. I examine the ideal annular space between the two concentric cylinders in this study. To determine the ideal spacing, I conducted a comprehensive hydrodynamic study on the surface of the inner cylinder, examining factors, such as dynamic pressure, wall shear stress, turbulent kinetic energy, and dissipation rate. Our findings indicate that the optimal annular space is 0.11 cm, and this result has been corroborated through graphical analysis.
Citation:
Refrences:
- Sarkar D, Bhattacharya A, Bhattacharjee C. Modeling the performance of a standard single stirred ultrafiltration cell using variable velocity back transport flux. Desalination. 2010;261(1–2):89–
- Wu H, Chen H, Shao X, Yue X, Sun J, Zhang T, et al. All-wood-based hybrid membrane derived from waste sawdust for efficient emulsion separation. Food Bioprod Process. 2025;149:92–9
- Magne A, Carretier E, Ruiz LU, Clair T, Le Hir M, Cartozo Y, et al. Membrane separation between homogeneous palladium-based catalysts and industrial active pharmaceutical ingredients from a complex organic solvent matrix: First approach using ceramic membranes. Sep Purif Technol. 2025;359:130442.
- El Moustansiri H, El Abbadi S, Douma M, Bouazizi A, Idrissi DE, Bechelany M, et al. Development of low-cost wollastonite based-membrane from clay for efficient microfiltration of textile and tannery wastewaters. Sep Purif Technol. 2025;359:130770.
- Sonawane AV, Murthy ZV. Dairy industry wastewater treatment by MOF and 2D nanomaterial engineered PVDF membranes based aerobic MBR: Membrane fouling mitigation and stability study. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2023;171:680–6
- Bruin S, Kikkert A, Weldring JA, Hiddink J. Overview of concentration polarization in ultrafiltration. Desalination. 1980;35:223–2
- Mollee TR, Anissimov YG, Roberts MS. Periodic electric field enhanced transport through membranes. J Membr Sci. 2006;278(1-2):290–
- Cui Z, Taha T. Enhancement of ultrafiltration using gas sparging: a comparison of different membrane modules. J Chem Technol Biotechnol. 2003;78(2-3):249–2
- Dong P, Parmentier D, Picavet E, D’Haese A, Wu Y, Zhu H, et al. Optimized removal of silica during manure treatment by electrocoagulation-flotation (EC-F) in view of fouling prevention of reverse osmosis membranes. Desalination. 2024;591:118031.
- Rock G, Tittley P, McCombie N. Plasma collection using an automated membrane device. Transfusion. 1986;26(3):269–2
- Jaffrin MY. Hydrodynamic techniques to enhance membrane filtration. Annu Rev Fluid Mech. 2012;44(1):77–
- Cai JJ, Hawboldt K, Abdi MA. Analysis of the effect of module design on gas absorption in cross flow hollow membrane contactors via computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis. J Membr Sci. 2016;520:415–4
- Salama A. Investigation of the onset of the breakup of a permeating oil droplet at a membrane surface in crossflow filtration: A new model and CFD verification. Int J Multiph Flow. 2020;126:103255.
- Sarkar D, Sarkar A, Roy A, Bhattacharjee C. Performance characterization and design evaluation of spinning basket membrane (SBM) module using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Sep Purif Technol. 2012;94:23–
- Kaya R, Deveci G, Turken T, Sengur R, Guclu S, Koseoglu-Imer DY, et al. Analysis of wall shear stress on the outside-in type hollow fiber membrane modules by CFD simulation. Desalination. 2014;351:109–1
- Benzi M, Olshanskii MA, Rebholz LG, Wang Z. Assessment of a vorticity based solver for the Navier–Stokes equations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng. 2012;247:216–2
- He T. A strongly-coupled cell-based smoothed finite element solver for unsteady viscoelastic fluid–structure interaction. Comput Struct. 2020;235:106264.
- Naskar M, Rana K, Chatterjee D, Dhara T, Sultana R, Sarkar D. Design, performance characterization and hydrodynamic modeling of intermeshed spinning basket membrane (ISBM) module. Chem Eng Sci. 2019;206:446–4
- Sun SK, Zhao B, Jia XH, Peng XY. Three-dimensional numerical simulation and experimental validation of flows in working chambers and inlet/outlet pockets of Roots pump. Vacuum. 2017;137:195–
- Wang G, Yang F, Wu K, Ma Y, Peng C, Liu T, et al. Estimation of the dissipation rate of turbulent kinetic energy: A review. Chem Eng Sci. 2021;229:116133.
- Shih TH, Liou WW, Shabbir A, Yang Z, Zhu J. A new k-ϵ eddy viscosity model for high Reynolds number turbulent flows. Comput Fluids. 1995;24(3):227–238.