Ultrasonic-intensified chemical cleaning of a nano filtration membrane in an oilfield sewage purification system was studied in detail. The most extreme conditions of chemical dissolving of scalants evaluated in this study were dissolving agent SSA-I concentration of 60 g/L, temperature of 75oC, and reaction time of 6 h respectively. With a lower solution concentration of SSA-I (45 g/L), a temperature of 50oC, and a time of 4 h, ultrasonic-intensified chemical cleaning of nano filtration membrane achieved higher efficiency. Specifically, the measured percentage of scalant dissolved rose from 91.0% to 99.1%, the speed of scale- dissolving rose from 1.896 g/(L·h) to 2.478 g/(L·h) and the amount of scalant dissolved rose from 0.152 g/g to 0.220 g/g in comparison to pure chemical dissolving. The industrial application results also indicated that the membrane-flux recovery rate had been improved to 95.6% by the way of ultrasonic-intensified chemical cleaning, much higher than the original 49.1% of high-strength chemical cleaning. Hence, ultrasound effectively strengthens the chemical cleaning effect of nano filtration membranes.
HanY G, “Discussion on the issue of viscosity of polymer solution prepared by oilfield sewage”, Petroleum Geology and Recovery Efficiency, 15, 6, 2008, 68–70.
2.
WangZ, “Influencing Factors and Mechanism Discussed on the Viscosity of Polymer Solution Preprated by Oilfield Produced Water”, Shandong: College of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, China University of Petroleum (East China), 2009.
3.
CaulfieldM J, QiaoG, SolomonD H, “Some Aspects of the Properties and degradation of Polyacrylamides”, Chem. Rev, 102, 9, 2002, 13067–13084.
4.
LiuQ Y, DaiY, YangZ D“The application of membrane filtration technology in polymer profile control and flooding”, Membrane science and Technology, 32, 3, 2012, 70–74.
5.
ElmiraK, KeithC, AlanR.G.“Use of Ultrasonic Sensors for Characterization of Membrane Fouling and Cleaning”, Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, SPECIAL ISSUE 2008–FILTRATION, 35–44.
6.
Al-AmoudiA, WilliamsP, MandaleS“Cleaning results of new and fouled nanofiltration membrane characterized by zeta potential and permeability”, Sep. Purif. Technol, 54, 2, 2007, 234–240.
7.
ChestersStephen P, “Innovations in the inhibition and cleaning of reverse osmosis membrane scaling and fouling”, Deaslination, 238, 1–3, 2009, 22–29.
8.
HouariA, HabarouH, DjaferM, “Effect of storage of NF membranes on fouling deposits and cleaning efficiency”, Desalination and Water Treatment, 1, 1–3, 2009, 307–311.
9.
PorcelliN, JuddS, “Chemical cleaning of potable water membranes: A review”, Sep. Purif. Technol., 71, 2, 2010, 137–143.
10.
PervovAlexei G, AndrianovAlexei P, “Application of membranes to treat wastewater for its recycling and reuse: new considerations to reduce fouling and increase recovery up to 99 percent. 3rd Oxford Water and Membranes Research Event, Univ Oxford, 2010”, Oxford, England: Desalination and Water Treatment, 35, 1–30, 2011, 2–9.
11.
ArkhangelskyE, WicaksanaF, ChouS“Effects of scaling and cleaning on the performance of forward osmosis hollow fiber membranes”, J. Memb. Sci., 415–416, 2012, 101–108.
12.
GahleitnerB, LodererC, FuchsW, “Chemical foam cleaning as an alternative for flux recovery in dynamic filtration processes”, J. Memb. Sci., 431, 2013, 19–27.
13.
RiinaL, JukkaY-K, RistoL, “Efficiency of various chemical cleanings for nanofiltration membrane fouled by conventionally-treated surface water”, J. Memb. Sci., 195, 2, 2002, 265–276.
14.
Al-AmoudiALovitt R W, “Fouling strategies and the cleaning system of NF membranes and factors affecting cleaning efficiency”, J. Memb. Sci., 303, 1-2, 2007, 6–28.
15.
MuthukumaransYangk, Seurena“The Use of Ultrasonic Cleaning for Ultrafiltration Membranes in the Dairy Industry”, Sep. Purif. Technol., 39, 2004, 99–107.
16.
MuthukumaransKentiss, Lalchandanis“The Optimization of Ultrasonic Cleaning Procedures for Dairy Foued Ultrafiltration Membranes”, Ultrasonic Sonochmistry, 12, 2005, 29–35.
17.
KobayashiT, KobayashT“Ultrasound-enhanced Membrane Cleaning Process Applied Water Treatments”, Ultrasonics, 41, 2003, 185–190.
ChaiGY, CaoB, ZhaoGY“Effects of concentration polarization, temperature and pressure on ultrasound detection of inorganic fouling and cleaning in a spiral-wound membrane module”, Desal. Water Treat, 50, 2012, 411–422.
20.
GuJ; ZhangH; ZhongZ, “Conditions Optimization and Kinetics for the Cleaning of Ceramic Membranes Fouled by BaSO4 Crystals in Brine Purification Using a DTPA Complex Solution”, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 50, 19, 2011, 11245–11251.
21.
DalasE, “The Effect of Ultrasonic Field on Calcium Carbonate Scale Formation’, J. Cryst. Growth, 222, 1–2, 2001, 287–292.
22.
LiuQ, LiJ, ZhengG“Oil Production with Ultrasonic and Chemical Antiscale Technology Research and Application”, Journal of Qingdao University (Engineering and Technology Edition), 25, 4, 2010, 83–86.
23.
LiDJ, LiM, WangY“Optimization of the operating parameters for online ultrasonic on controlling membrane fouling in SMBR”, Desal. Water Treat, 51, 2013, 3832–3839.
24.
ZhuY, YuJ, WangY“Experimental Study on Sound Field Parameters in Ultrasonic Scale Control”, J. Oil Gas Technol., 27, 2, 2005, 245–248.
25.
ShelimovkbEsenalievro“Purification of Single-wall Carbon Nanotubes by Ultra-sonically Assisted Filtration”, Chemical Physics Letters, 282, 1998, 429–434.
26.
ShiJ, YuanQ, “Membrane Technology Handbook”, Beijing: Chemical Industry Press, 2001, 336–337.
