Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://doi.org/10.15480/882.1597
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorRamaswami, Sreenivasan-
dc.contributor.authorBehrendt, Joachim-
dc.contributor.authorOtterpohl, Ralf-
dc.date.accessioned2018-03-23T07:57:29Z-
dc.date.available2018-03-23T07:57:29Z-
dc.date.issued2018-03-21-
dc.identifier.citationMembranes 8 (2): 17 (2018)de_DE
dc.identifier.issn2077-0375de_DE
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11420/1600-
dc.description.abstractReverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) are among the state-of-the-art technologies for treating landfill leachates. Due to the complexity and variance in the composition of leachates, numerous combinations of multiple technologies are used for their treatment. One process chain for the treatment of raw leachate is RO followed by further concentration of RO-retentate using NF (RO-NF scheme). The aptness of this process train used by some landfill sites around the world (usually with the aim of volume reduction so as to re-inject the concentrate into the landfill) is questionable. This study investigated two schemes RO-NF and NF-RO (nanofiltration of raw leachate followed by reverse osmosis of NF permeate) to identify their merits/demerits. Experiments were conducted in bench scale using commercial membranes: DOW Filmtec NF270 and SW30HR. Filtration trials were performed at different pressures to compare the water and solute transports in the individual stages of the two schemes. Based on the water fluxes and compositions of retentates and permeates; osmotic pressures, energy demands, and other possible operational advantages were discussed. NF-RO offers some advantages and flexibility for leachate treatment besides being energy efficient compared to RO-NF, wherein osmotic pressure steadily increases during operation in turn increasing operation and maintenance costs.-
dc.description.abstractReverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) are among the state-of-the-art technologies for treating landfill leachates. Due to the complexity and variance in the composition of leachates, numerous combinations of multiple technologies are used for their treatment. One process chain for the treatment of raw leachate is RO followed by further concentration of RO-retentate using NF (RO-NF scheme). The aptness of this process train used by some landfill sites around the world (usually with the aim of volume reduction so as to re-inject the concentrate into the landfill) is questionable. This study investigated two schemes RO-NF and NF-RO (nanofiltration of raw leachate followed by reverse osmosis of NF permeate) to identify their merits/demerits. Experiments were conducted in bench scale using commercial membranes: DOW Filmtec NF270 and SW30HR. Filtration trials were performed at different pressures to compare the water and solute transports in the individual stages of the two schemes. Based on the water fluxes and compositions of retentates and permeates; osmotic pressures, energy demands, and other possible operational advantages were discussed. NF-RO offers some advantages and flexibility for leachate treatment besides being energy efficient compared to RO-NF, wherein osmotic pressure steadily increases during operation in turn increasing operation and maintenance costs.en
dc.language.isoende_DE
dc.publisherMultidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institutede_DE
dc.relation.ispartofMembranesde_DE
dc.rightsCC BY 4.0de_DE
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/de_DE
dc.subjectlandfill leachatede_DE
dc.subjectmonovalent ionsde_DE
dc.subjectnanofiltrationde_DE
dc.subjectorganicsde_DE
dc.subjectreverse osmosisde_DE
dc.subject.ddc620: Ingenieurwissenschaftende_DE
dc.titleComparison of NF-RO and RO-NF for the treatment of mature landfill leachates: a guide for landfill operatorsde_DE
dc.typeArticlede_DE
dc.date.updated2018-03-22T12:46:15Z-
dc.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-882.04376-
dc.identifier.doi10.15480/882.1597-
dc.type.diniarticle-
dc.subject.ddccode620-
dcterms.DCMITypeText-
tuhh.identifier.urnurn:nbn:de:gbv:830-882.04376de_DE
tuhh.oai.showtruede_DE
dc.identifier.hdl11420/1600-
tuhh.abstract.englishReverse osmosis (RO) and nanofiltration (NF) are among the state-of-the-art technologies for treating landfill leachates. Due to the complexity and variance in the composition of leachates, numerous combinations of multiple technologies are used for their treatment. One process chain for the treatment of raw leachate is RO followed by further concentration of RO-retentate using NF (RO-NF scheme). The aptness of this process train used by some landfill sites around the world (usually with the aim of volume reduction so as to re-inject the concentrate into the landfill) is questionable. This study investigated two schemes RO-NF and NF-RO (nanofiltration of raw leachate followed by reverse osmosis of NF permeate) to identify their merits/demerits. Experiments were conducted in bench scale using commercial membranes: DOW Filmtec NF270 and SW30HR. Filtration trials were performed at different pressures to compare the water and solute transports in the individual stages of the two schemes. Based on the water fluxes and compositions of retentates and permeates; osmotic pressures, energy demands, and other possible operational advantages were discussed. NF-RO offers some advantages and flexibility for leachate treatment besides being energy efficient compared to RO-NF, wherein osmotic pressure steadily increases during operation in turn increasing operation and maintenance costs.de_DE
tuhh.publisher.doi10.3390/membranes8020017-
tuhh.publication.instituteAbwasserwirtschaft und Gewässerschutz B-2de_DE
tuhh.identifier.doi10.15480/882.1597-
tuhh.type.opus(wissenschaftlicher) Artikel-
tuhh.institute.germanAbwasserwirtschaft und Gewässerschutz B-2de
tuhh.institute.englishAbwasserwirtschaft und Gewässerschutz B-2de_DE
tuhh.gvk.hasppnfalse-
tuhh.hasurnfalse-
openaire.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessde_DE
dc.type.driverarticle-
dc.type.casraiJournal Article-
tuhh.container.issue2de_DE
tuhh.container.volume8de_DE
tuhh.container.startpage17de_DE
dc.relation.projectOpen Access Publizieren 2018 - 2019 / TU Hamburgde_DE
dc.rights.nationallicensefalsede_DE
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85046437494-
local.status.inpressfalsede_DE
local.type.versionpublishedVersionde_DE
datacite.resourceTypeJournal Article-
datacite.resourceTypeGeneralText-
item.openairetypeArticle-
item.creatorOrcidRamaswami, Sreenivasan-
item.creatorOrcidBehrendt, Joachim-
item.creatorOrcidOtterpohl, Ralf-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.creatorGNDRamaswami, Sreenivasan-
item.creatorGNDBehrendt, Joachim-
item.creatorGNDOtterpohl, Ralf-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501-
item.mappedtypeArticle-
crisitem.author.deptWasserressourcen und Wasserversorgung B-11-
crisitem.author.deptAbwasserwirtschaft und Gewässerschutz B-2-
crisitem.author.deptAbwasserwirtschaft und Gewässerschutz B-2-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-3806-4571-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0001-5306-2123-
crisitem.author.parentorgStudiendekanat Bauwesen (B)-
crisitem.author.parentorgStudiendekanat Bauwesen (B)-
crisitem.author.parentorgStudiendekanat Bauwesen (B)-
crisitem.project.funderDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)-
crisitem.project.funderid501100001659-
crisitem.project.funderrorid018mejw64-
crisitem.project.grantnoFE 1045/1-1-
Appears in Collections:Publications with fulltext
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
membranes-08-00017.pdf1,19 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Thumbnail
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

526
Last Week
3
Last month
15
checked on Mar 30, 2023

Download(s)

410
checked on Mar 30, 2023

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

11
Last Week
0
Last month
0
checked on Jun 30, 2022

Google ScholarTM

Check

Note about this record

Cite this record

Export

This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons