SEPARATION OF OIL IN WATER EMULSION BY TANGENTIAL FLOW MICROFILTRATION PROCESS WAN THIAM TEIK (B. Eng. (Hons.), UTM, M.Eng., NTU ) A THESIS SUBMITTED FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY. DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING. NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE. 2014 DECLARATION I hereby declare that the thesis is my original work and it has been written by me in its entirety. I have duly acknowledged all the sources of information which have been used in the thesis. This thesis has also not been submitted for any degree in any university previously. _________________ Wan Thiam Teik 14 July 2014 ABSTRACT Management of produced water is a major issue offshore. The use of subsea pumps and flow regulating device is producing emulsions. The presence of surfactant film in the production stream also stabilizes the emulsions, prevent droplets coalescence and introduce challenges to current separation technologies. The existing subsea produced water separation system uses large and bulky conventional gravity separators which have managed to reduce the residual content to 100-200 mg/l only, insufficient to meet the regulatory requirement for direct disposal. In order to meet the regulations, additional equipment, e.g. hydro-cyclones, coalescers, flocculation module and/of filters must be used. Changes in conventional strategies and separation techniques may become necessary to handle such challenge. Microfiltration has emerged as a useful alternative for treating the oil-water emulsions to meet the requirements. In this work, tangential flow (cross flow) microfiltration of oilwater mixture was studied for better understanding of oil-water separation, membrane fouling, and factors determining the membrane performance. The tangential flow microfiltration was investigated using a ceramic 0.5 μm membrane. The experiments are limited to oily water solution with concentration of 500 ~ 1000 ppm residual oil. For safety reason, medium viscosity paraffin oil and heavier oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) were used as substitute to crude oil. At 500 ppm (0.05%) and 1000 ppm (0.1%) oil concentration, the ceramic 0.5 μm membrane was proven capable of producing a high purity filtrate lower than the threshold required for offshore produced water effluent, typically 29 mg/l residual oil in the Gulf of Mexico. At 500 ppm (0.05%) oil i concentration, higher purity filtrate containing lower than ppm residual oil in permeate was proven possible at a trans-membrane pressure not exceeding 2.5 bars. The results attained were useful for evaluating the potential of tangential flow microfiltration process in the produced water treatment, with respect to the suitability to fulfil the regulatory requirement for disposal. However, membrane has a major drawback in the form of fouling. For the objective of control the fouling, a novel idea of having in-situ cleaning using ultrasound cavitations allowing remediation of a polluted surface during filtration was being tested. The fouling control experiments indicate significant recovery of filter permeability by the assistance of ultrasound. At 500 ppm (0.05%) oil concentration, 15.07% recovery in permeability were recorded with mean filtration capacity to improve from 2749.6 L m−2 h−1 to 2389.4 L m−2 h−1. Significant decline in resistance of 18.93% indicates reduced fouling and the energy consumption required for maintaining the filtration flux, which may be used to supply the energy required for ultrasound cleaning. Encouraging results shows it is indeed possible to conduct in-situ cleaning while the filtration is still in operation. The combined mechanism the tangential flow microfiltration and ultrasound cavitations, may offers an option for future treatment of some previously difficult separation application at remote operation, such as underwater applications, which is currently having difficulty for access and maintenance. The ultrasound enhanced microfiltration process can also be customized into a small diameter compact solution that will help address issues related to produced-water management at subsea in the future. Operators can minimize water by reducing the volume of water brought to the land surface or the platform by separating oil and water remotely at subsea. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I take a great pleasure to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Associate Professor Loh Wai Lam, whose expertise, understanding, and patience, added considerably to my graduate experience. I would like to express my gratitude to Professor Lim Tee Tai for his permission to set up a test rig in the Fluid Mechanics Lab. Thanks also goes out to the officers and technicians for the assistance they provided at all levels of the research project. I would like to acknowledge Dr. Nguyen Dinh Tam and Dr. Valente Hernandez Perez for the contribution of their knowledge, time and the feedbacks to this work. Special thanks to my fellow colleagues, Vivek Kolladikkal Premanadhan, Ko Ko Naing and Zhao Yuqiao for their friendship and the technical assistance throughout my graduate program. Appreciation also goes out to Tang Yan and Wang Zheng for their participation in some of the works. I must acknowledge my dear wife, Ling Chih, for having encouraged me to complete this work and take the next important step in my life. Also thanks to my family for the support they provided me through my entire life. Finally, I recognize that this research would not have been possible without the financial assistance of National University of Singapore under research scholarship. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . iii TABLE OF CONTENTS . iv LIST OF TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES ix NOMENCLATURE xv CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION .1 1.1 Oil-In-Water Emulsions and Produced Water Management .1 1.2 Limitation of Conventional Separation Technologies 1.3 Objectives 1.4 Scope and Constraints .7 1.5 Thesis Outline .8 CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 11 2.1 Tangential Flow Microfiltration for Separation of Oil in Water Emulsion 11 2.2 Ultrasound Separation Techniques 16 2.3 Membrane Fouling 19 2.4 Emerging Techniques for the Prevention of Membrane Fouling .21 2.5 Importance of the Research .26 CHAPTER 3. MODELLING OF FLOWS THROUGH POROUS MEDIA FILTER 28 3.2 Momentum Equation for Flow through Porous Media .29 iv 3.3 Energy Equation for Flow through Porous Media 31 3.4 Deriving Porous Coefficient Based on Experimental Data .32 3.5 CFD Analysis 33 CHAPTER 4. METHODOLOGY .35 4.1 Experimental Facilities 35 4.2 Physical Properties of Paraffin Oil 39 4.3 Preparation of Oily Water Emulsion .41 4.4 Permeability and Flow Resistance 44 4.5 Ceramic Membrane and Hydrophilicity 48 4.6 Dead-end versus Tangential Flow Microfiltration 51 4.7 Experimental Results and Oil Rejection Efficiency 54 4.8 Residual Oil Measurements and TD-500D Oil in Water Meter 55 4.9 Calibration of TD-500D Oil in Water Meter 57 CHAPTER 5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS OF THE TANGENTIAL FLOW MICROFILTRATION EXPERIMENTS .62 5.1 Calibration of TD-500D Meter .62 5.2 Series Run versus Continuous Runs 64 5.3 Temperature Dependent Viscosity and Flow Permeability .65 5.4 Effects of Fouling on Membrane Permeability and Flux 66 5.5 Effects of Pressure on Filtration Capacity .76 5.6 Effects of Tangential Flow (Cross-flow) Velocity on Flow Permeability 77 5.7 Permeate Quality and Data Analysis .83 5.8 Effects of Pressure on Oil Rejection Efficiency 88 5.9 Effects of Feed Concentration on Oil Rejection Efficiency .93 5.10 Effects of Cleaning Strategies on the Membrane Permeability 94 5.11 SUMMARY 96 v CHAPTER 6. EXPERIMENTS FOR FOULING CONTROL 99 6.1 Fouling Control .99 6.2 Fouling Control Measures by Ultrasonic Cavitations .101 6.3 Fouling Control Experiments on 0.5 μm Dead-End Filtration Ceramic Filter .102 6.4 Fouling Control Experiments on 0.5 μm Tangential Flow Microfiltration Ceramic Filter 112 6.5 SUMMARY 130 CHAPTER 7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 134 7.1 Summary .134 7.2 Final Conclusions 136 CHAPTER 8. RECOMMENDATIONS .138 8.1 Challenges and Opportunity 138 8.2 Recommendations for Future Designs in Produced Water Management .140 8.3 Recommendations for Fouling Control Experiments 142 8.4 Recommendations for Alternative Membranes .145 8.5 Recommendations for Oil Contents Measurements 149 8.6 Recommendations for Future Works 152 REFERENCES .155 APPENDICES 162 APPENDIX A. CHARATERISTICS OF PRODUCED WATER .163 APPENDIX B. REGULATORY STANDARD FOR OVERBOARD DISPOSAL OF PRODUCED WATER 172 vi APPENDIX C. FLOW SAMPLING EFFICIENCY 173 APPENDIX D. RAW DATA FOR MICROFILTRATION EXPERIMENT .177 APPENDIX E. RAW DATA FOR SAMPLING MEASUREMENTS 182 APPENDIX F. RAW DATA FOR FOULING CONTROL EXPERIMENTS .186 APPENDIX G. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS ……………………………… 202 vii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.5-1 Subsea processing classification. Table 5.1-1 Fluorescence response for water samples with known oil concentration. Table 5.1-2 Calibrated results in ppm residual oil content for various water samples. Table 5.4-1 Tangential flow velocity versus rate of feed (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil-water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration). Table 5.4-2 Comparison of flow permeability, resistance and filtration capacity during the steady state resistance (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oilwater feed with 500 ppm and 1000 ppm oil concentration respectively, Experiment to 2, Appendix D.1 an D.2). Table 5.7-1 Physical properties of liquids used in the experiments. Table 5.7-2 Standard deviation for permeate water sample (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil-water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Appendix D.1). Table 5.7-3 Standard deviation feed water samples (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil-water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Appendix D.1). Table 5.8-1. Filtrate quality (in ppm oil) and oil rejection efficiency (%) versus transmembrane pressure (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil-water feed of 500 ppm oil concentration, Appendix E.2). Table 5.9-1 Oil rejection efficiencies (%) versus trans-membrane pressure and the feed concentration using a 0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane. Table 6.3-1 Fouling control experiment and summary of experimental data (Case 1: 0.5 μm BACFREE dead end ceramic membrane, 3% by vol. oil-water mixture, Appendix F.1). Table 6.3-2 Fouling control experiment and permeability history (Case 2: 0.5 μm BACFREE dead end ceramic membrane, 3% by vol. oil-water mixture, Appendix F.2). Table 6.4-1 Mean permeability and flow resistance values (Case to Case 7: 0.5 μm Doulton ceramic microfiltration membrane). viii F.2 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : March 20, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Tang Yan Experiment no. : FC-02 Filtration type : Dead End Filtration Description : 1. Forward Filtration for the first 20 mins; 2. Back-flushing with ultrasound ON for the last 25 mins; Feed : 3% vol. oily water (0-20 mins) , Water from tap (20-45 Type of oil : Paraffin Oil, viscosity 8.712 x 10-2 Pa.s or 87.12 cP at 20˚C Filter : BACFREE dead end ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 115 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01066 m2 (inner) mins) Mins TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.3 0.01262 0.0012 6.42E-10 1098.0 4262.3 1.44 0.00662 0.0006 3.04E-10 2316.7 2237.7 189 1.5 0.00505 0.0005 2.22E-10 3167.3 1704.9 1.51 0.00442 0.0004 1.93E-10 3643.9 1491.8 1.53 0.00410 0.0004 1.77E-10 3976.2 1385.2 1.54 0.00379 0.0004 1.63E-10 4335.7 1278.7 1.54 0.00347 0.0003 1.49E-10 4729.9 1172.1 1.55 0.00347 0.0003 1.48E-10 4760.6 1172.1 1.55 0.00347 0.0003 1.48E-10 4760.6 1172.1 1.55 0.00347 0.0003 1.48E-10 4760.6 1172.1 10 1.55 0.00347 0.0003 1.48E-10 4760.6 1172.1 11 1.55 0.00379 0.0004 1.61E-10 4363.9 1278.7 12 1.56 0.00379 0.0004 1.60E-10 4392.0 1278.7 13 1.56 0.00397 0.0004 1.68E-10 4182.9 1342.6 14 1.56 0.00410 0.0004 1.74E-10 4054.2 1385.2 15 1.56 0.00429 0.0004 1.82E-10 3875.3 1449.2 16 1.56 0.00442 0.0004 1.87E-10 3764.6 1491.8 17 1.56 0.00442 0.0004 1.87E-10 3764.6 1491.8 18 1.56 0.00442 0.0004 1.87E-10 3764.6 1491.8 19 1.55 0.00454 0.0004 1.94E-10 3636.6 1534.4 20 1.55 0.00454 0.0004 1.94E-10 3636.6 1534.4 21 1.5 0.00315 0.0003 1.39E-10 5067.7 1065.6 22 1.5 0.00347 0.0003 1.53E-10 4607.0 1172.1 23 1.5 0.00379 0.0004 1.67E-10 4223.1 1278.7 24 1.5 0.00410 0.0004 1.81E-10 3898.2 1385.2 25 1.5 0.00442 0.0004 1.95E-10 3619.8 1491.8 26 1.5 0.00505 0.0005 2.22E-10 3167.3 1704.9 190 27 1.46 0.00631 0.0006 2.86E-10 2466.3 2131.1 28 1.42 0.00757 0.0007 3.53E-10 1998.9 2557.4 29 1.41 0.00833 0.0008 3.91E-10 1804.4 2813.1 30 1.4 0.00915 0.0009 4.32E-10 1631.0 3090.1 31 1.39 0.00946 0.0009 4.50E-10 1565.4 3196.7 32 1.38 0.00959 0.0009 4.59E-10 1533.7 3239.3 33 1.38 0.00978 0.0009 4.69E-10 1504.0 3303.3 34 1.38 0.01009 0.0009 4.84E-10 1457.0 3409.8 35 1.37 0.01009 0.0009 4.87E-10 1446.4 3409.8 36 1.37 0.01009 0.0009 4.87E-10 1446.4 3409.8 37 1.37 0.01009 0.0009 4.87E-10 1446.4 3409.8 38 1.37 0.01022 0.0010 4.93E-10 1428.6 3452.4 39 1.37 0.01022 0.0010 4.93E-10 1428.6 3452.4 40 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 41 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 42 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 43 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 44 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 45 1.36 0.01028 0.0010 5.00E-10 1409.4 3473.8 191 F.3 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : September 12, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Wang Zheng Experiment no. : FC-03-1A Filtration type : Microfiltration Description : 1. Microfiltration without ultrasound for the first 10 runs; 2. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 11th run; 3. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 12th run; 4. Each run with interval of 10 mins. Feed : 1000 ppm oily water (All runs) , Water from tap (back- Type of oil : Hydraulic Oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) Oil viscosity : 0.326 Pa.s or 325.665 cP at 25 degree Celsius Filter : Doulton microfiltration ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 100 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01005 m2 (inner) flushing) 192 Run TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.5 0.0089 0.000245 1.153E-10 6107.3 3183.1 1.5 0.0075 0.000207 9.735E-11 7238.2 2685.7 1.5 0.0069 0.000190 8.942E-11 7880.3 2466.9 1.5 0.0063 0.000173 8.148E-11 8647.4 2248.1 1.5 0.0056 0.000155 7.301E-11 9651.0 2014.3 1.5 0.0053 0.000147 6.922E-11 10178.8 1909.9 1.5 0.0051 0.000141 6.652E-11 10592.5 1835.3 1.5 0.0044 0.000120 5.678E-11 12408.4 1566.7 1.5 0.0040 0.000109 5.138E-11 13714.5 1417.5 10 1.5 0.0035 0.000096 4.543E-11 15510.5 1253.3 11 1.5 0.0080 0.000221 1.038E-10 6785.8 2864.8 12 1.5 0.0078 0.000214 1.005E-10 7004.7 2775.3 7.920E-11 9643.3 2185.1 Avg. 193 F.4 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : September 12, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Wang Zheng Experiment no. : FC-04-2A Filtration type : Microfiltration Description : 1. Microfiltration with ultrasound ON for the first 10 runs; 2. Back-flushing with ultrasound ON for 10 mins, 11th run; 3. Back-flushing with ultrasound ON for 10 mins, 12th run; 4. Each run with interval of 10 mins. 5. Ultrasound tank : x 50 w x 38 kHz ultrasonic transducers Feed : 1000 ppm oily water (All runs) , Water from tap Type of oil : Hydraulic Oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) Oil viscosity : 0.326 Pa.s or 325.665 cP at 25 degree Celsius Filter : Doulton microfiltration ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 100 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01005 m2 (inner) (backflushing) 194 Run TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.5 0.0090 0.000249 1.168E-10 6031.9 3222.9 1.5 0.0078 0.000215 1.010E-10 6979.7 2785.2 1.5 0.0072 0.000198 9.303E-11 7574.9 2566.4 1.5 0.0068 0.000187 8.762E-11 8042.5 2417.2 1.5 0.0070 0.000193 9.086E-11 7755.2 2506.7 1.5 0.0066 0.000183 8.592E-11 8201.6 2370.3 1.5 0.0060 0.000167 7.842E-11 8985.4 2163.5 1.5 0.0057 0.000157 7.356E-11 9580.0 2029.2 1.5 0.0055 0.000152 7.163E-11 9837.2 1976.2 10 1.5 0.0048 0.000134 6.274E-11 11231.7 1730.8 11 1.5 0.0083 0.000230 1.082E-10 6514.4 2984.2 12 1.5 0.0067 0.000184 8.654E-11 8143.0 2387.3 8.802E-11 8239.8 2428.3 Avg. 195 F.5 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : October 4, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Wang Zheng Experiment no. : FC-05-1B Filtration type : Microfiltration Description : 1. Microfiltration without ultrasound for the first 10 runs; 2. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 11th run; 3. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 12th run; 4. Each run with interval of 10 minutes. Feed : 500 ppm oily water (All runs) , Water from tap (back- Type of oil : Hydraulic Oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) Oil viscosity : 0.326 Pa.s or 325.665 cP at 25 degree Celsius Filter : Doulton microfiltration ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 100 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01005 m2 (inner) flushing) 196 Run TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.5 0.0104 0.000287 1.346E-10 5234.8 3713.6 1.5 0.0085 0.000235 1.106E-10 6372.8 3050.5 1.5 0.0075 0.000207 9.735E-11 7238.2 2685.7 1.5 0.0064 0.000178 8.365E-11 8423.8 2307.7 1.5 0.0063 0.000173 8.149E-11 8647.4 2248.1 1.5 0.0055 0.000151 7.085E-11 9945.7 1954.6 1.5 0.0052 0.000143 6.707E-11 10507.1 1850.2 1.5 0.0050 0.000137 6.436E-11 10948.6 1775.6 1.5 0.0046 0.000127 5.949E-11 11844.4 1641.3 10 1.5 0.0042 0.000116 5.463E-11 12899.8 1507.0 11 1.5 0.0086 0.000237 1.114E-10 6324.7 3073.7 12 1.5 0.0080 0.000221 1.038E-10 6785.8 2864.8 8.661E-11 8764.4 2389.4 Avg. 197 F.6 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : September 26, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Wang Zheng Experiment no. : FC-06-2B Filtration type : Microfiltration Description : 1. Microfiltration with ultrasound ON for the first 10 runs; 2. Back-flushing with ultrasound ON for 10 mins, 11th run; 3. Back-flushing with ultrasound ON for 10 mins, 12th run; 4. Each run with interval of 10 mins. 5. Ultrasound tank : x 50 w x 38 kHz ultrasonic transducers Feed : 500 ppm oily water (All runs) , Water from tap (back- Type of oil : Hydraulic Oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) Oil viscosity : 0.326 Pa.s or 325.665 cP at 25 degree Celsius Filter : Doulton microfiltration ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 100 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01005 m2 (inner) flushing) 198 Run TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.5 0.0100 0.000307 1.442E-10 4885.8 3978.9 1.5 0.0079 0.000242 1.138E-10 6193.3 3138.9 1.5 0.0069 0.000211 9.936E-11 7092.3 2741.0 1.5 0.0062 0.000191 8.949E-11 7873.8 2468.9 1.5 0.0061 0.000188 8.814E-11 7995.0 2431.5 1.5 0.0063 0.000192 9.014E-11 7817.3 2486.8 1.5 0.0060 0.000185 8.714E-11 8086.8 2403.9 1.5 0.0057 0.000174 8.173E-11 8622.0 2254.7 1.5 0.0054 0.000165 7.752E-11 9089.9 2138.6 10 1.5 0.0052 0.000159 7.452E-11 9456.4 2055.8 11 1.5 0.0092 0.000281 1.322E-10 5330.0 3647.3 12 1.5 0.0082 0.000251 1.178E-10 5982.6 3249.4 9.967E-11 7368.8 2749.6 Avg. 199 F.7 Fouling Control Experimental data sheet Experiment date : October 4, 2013 Venue : Fluid Mechanics Lab II, EWS2, NUS. Investigator : Wan Thiam Teik, Wang Zheng Experiment no. : FC-07-3 Filtration type : Microfiltration Description : 1. Microfiltration without ultrasound for the first 10 runs; 2. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 11th run; 3. Backflushing without ultrasound for 10 mins, 12th run; 4. Each run with interval of 10 mins. Feed : Clean water from tap (All runs incl. backflushing) Type of oil : Hydraulic Oil (Mobil Exxon DTE10 Excel 150) Oil viscosity : 0.326 Pa.s or 325.665 cP at 25 degree Celsius Filter : Doulton microfiltration ceramic filter, 0.5 μm (pore size) Dimension : 47 mm (OD), 32 mm (ID), 100 mm (L), mm (THK) Surface area : 0.01005 m2 (inner) 200 Run TMP Filtration Flux rate Permeability (barg) flow rate J = Q/A К = Jμ∆x/∆P (L/s) (m/s) (cm ) Flow resistance Filtration Capacity R = ∆P/J (L water/ m2.hr) (bars.s/m) 1.5 0.0101 0.000278 1.306E-10 5396.9 3602.1 1.5 0.0086 0.000238 1.118E-10 6304.3 3083.6 1.5 0.0077 0.000213 1.002E-10 7029.9 2765.3 1.5 0.0071 0.000196 9.194E-11 7664.0 2536.5 1.5 0.0067 0.000185 8.708E-11 8092.4 2402.2 1.5 0.0063 0.000174 8.167E-11 8628.4 2253.0 1.5 0.0058 0.000159 7.464E-11 9441.2 2059.1 1.5 0.0060 0.000167 7.842E-11 8985.4 2163.5 1.5 0.0057 0.000158 7.404E-11 9517.8 2042.5 10 1.5 0.0052 0.000143 6.707E-11 10507.1 1850.2 11 1.5 0.0085 0.000235 1.103E-10 6386.7 3043.8 12 1.5 0.0083 0.000228 1.071E-10 6580.2 2954.3 9.290E-11 7877.9 2563.0 Avg. 201 APPENDIX G. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS. This appendix provides technical specifications of the facility components used during the microfiltration and fouling control experiments. 1. Specifications for feed pump in the microfiltration experiments: 2. 1. Type Centrifugal Pump 2. Model Pedrollo CPm 190 3. Power Single Phase 240v/50 Hz, 1.6 kW 4. Flow rate 30-140 l/min 5. Max. Head 50 m Specification of feed pump in the fouling control experiments: 1. Type Transfer Pump 2. Model Davey XF221 3. Power Single Phase 240v/50 Hz, 0.78 kW 4. Flow rate 225 lpm (max.) 5. Max. Head 20 m 202 3. Specification of ultrasonic tank: 1. Model Bring New GB-10LB 2. Ultrasonic Power 220 W 3. Ultrasonic Frequency 40 kHz 4. Tank Size 300 mm x 240 mm x 150 mm 5. Capacity 10000 ml 4. Specifications of Motor and speed controller for Mixer: 1. Type DC Motor c/w Speed controller 2. Power 180 watt 3. Ratio 1:6 4. Output speed 300 rpm (max.) 5. Speed controller DC 0-180v 5. Flow Meters: 1. Meter type votex 2. Manufacturer Invensys Foxboro 3. Line size inch 203 4. Output mA (0.00 m3/min) 20 mA (0.20 m3/min) 5. Speed controller DC 0-180v 6. Specifications of Pressure Sensors: 1. Type Winters pressure transmitter 2. Model LE3 general purpose transmitter 3. Pressure 0-10 bar 4. Output signal wire 4-20 mA 5. Response time wire < 10 msec 6. Permissible temperature -13˚F to 257˚F 204 [...]... for separation of oil- in- water emulsions, for potential applications in future produced water management The objectives include: 6 • Setting up test facility to investigate separation performance and characteristics of tangential flow microfiltration of oil- in- water emulsions • Conducting extensive fundamental investigation and understanding the mechanism of oily water separation via tangential flow microfiltration. .. the oil and gas industry, especially in the produced water management, and then the research problem and objectives were defined In this thesis report, the application of tangential flow microfiltration process in the separation of oil in water emulsions is studied Experiments were set up for conducting extensive investigation for better understanding the performance of oil water separation via tangential. .. permeate water sample with 1000 ppm oil concentration (middle); Permeation water sample from the tangential microfiltration of a feed of 1000 ppm of oil in water (right) Figure 5.8-1 Filtrate quality in ppm residual oil content for tangential flow microfiltration experiments with (a) tap water; (b) oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane) xi Figure 5.8-2 Oil. .. mechanics of the separation mechanism is still not well understood Therefore, it is the aims of this thesis work to study the tangential flow (cross flow) microfiltration of oil in water mixture for the better understanding of oil- water separation, membrane fouling, membrane cleaning, and factors determining the membrane performance 1.3 Objectives This research is aimed to develop a tangential flow microfiltration. .. ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Appendix D.1) Figure 5.6-2 Effects of tangential flow velocity on flow resistance (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Appendix D.1) Figure 5.6-3 Reynolds numbers versus tangential flow velocity (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration,... technologies in subsea processing and separation, proposed a solution using tangential flow microfiltration in produced water management, accompanied by a proposed fouling control measure using ultrasound, and proof of concept by the conducting the experiments for the supply of evidences The information attained and knowledge gain is applicable to the design and development of future devices for the produced water. .. (cross flow) microfiltration process with an oily water, containing various concentrations (2501000 ppm) of heavy crude oil with droplets range of 1-10 μm In all cases of experiments, they have reported to produce a very high quality permeate, containing lower than 6 ppm of total hydrocarbons in the permeate sample Chen also tested the performance of ceramic tangential flow (cross -flow) microfiltration in. .. ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Experiment 1, Appendix D.1) Figure 5.4-2 The effects of fouling on permeability (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration, Experiment 1, Appendix D.1) Figure 5.4-3 The effects of fouling on flow resistance (0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane, oil- water feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration,... 5.7-1 Water samples collected at filtration end for experiments in different pressure ranges from 1 barg (left) to 3.5 barg (right) for an oil- water- feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration using 0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane Figure 5.7-2 Water samples collected during tangential flow microfiltration of a feed of 1000 ppm oil in water using 0.5 μm ceramic membrane at trans-membrane pressure of 2.0... membrane in separating oil in water emulsion is tested and presented This study evaluates the ability of ceramic microfiltration membrane in filtering oil from the oil in water mixture The primary objective of the experiment was to answer a research question whether tangential flow microfiltration is able to address the issue in produced water management, which is to reduce the residual content of the effluent . requirements. In this work, tangential flow (cross flow) microfiltration of oil- water mixture was studied for better understanding of oil- water separation, membrane fouling, and factors determining the. oil- water- feed of 1000 ppm oil concentration using 0.5 μm ceramic microfiltration membrane. Figure 5.7-2 Water samples collected during tangential flow microfiltration of a feed of 1000 ppm oil in water. microfiltration of a feed of 1000 ppm of oil in water (right). Figure 5.8-1 Filtrate quality in ppm residual oil content for tangential flow microfiltration experiments with (a) tap water; (b) oil- water