Open Access Research Article

The Clogging Effect in the Process of Protein Separation by Ultrafiltration

GHEORGHE BATRINESCU, ROXANA-ELENA SCUTARIU, NICOLAE-IONUT CRISTEA, IOANA-ALEXANDRA IONESCU, GHEORGHE NECHIFOR
Published 30 Sep 2020
Pages 224–237

Abstract

In this study, five ultrafiltration membranes (polysulfone, cellulose acetate and polyethe-rsulfone) were tested in the treatment of aqueous protein solutions similar to wastewater from fermentation industries. The experiments were made in tangential flow filtration. The permeate flux for the five membranes tested at the optimum pressure of 3 bar decreased due to the effect of clogging the pores by the macromolecular protein solutions. Cellulose acetate membranes showed the lowest permeate flux (Ac-Cel1=152.4 L/m2.h and Ac-Cel2=40.3 L/m2.h) which doesn’t recommend them for the ultrafiltration process of bovine serum albumin. When a polysulfone membrane was used in several cycles of protein-containing wastewater ultrafiltration, the permeate flow decreased progressively from one cycle to another due to the internal clogging of the membrane (501.6 L/m2.h up to 444.0 L/m2.h). Regarding the ultrafiltration of protein solutions with a suspended yeast content, the clogging was predominant on the membrane’s surface, which results in a decrease of the permeate flux by over 50%.

Keywords: bovine serum albumin; membrane clogging; protein; ultrafiltration; yeast

How to Cite this Article

BATRINESCU, G., SCUTARIU, R., CRISTEA, N., IONESCU, I., & NECHIFOR, G. (2020). The Clogging Effect in the Process of Protein Separation by Ultrafiltration. Materiale Plastice, 57(3), 224–237. https://doi.org/10.37358/MP.20.3.5395
BATRINESCU G, SCUTARIU R, CRISTEA N, IONESCU I, NECHIFOR G. The Clogging Effect in the Process of Protein Separation by Ultrafiltration. Materiale Plastice. 2020;57(3):224–237. doi: 10.37358/MP.20.3.5395
G. BATRINESCU, R. SCUTARIU, N. CRISTEA, I. IONESCU, and G. NECHIFOR, "The Clogging Effect in the Process of Protein Separation by Ultrafiltration,” Materiale Plastice, vol. 57, no. 3, pp. 224–237, 2020. doi: 10.37358/MP.20.3.5395
✓ Copied to clipboard