The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Gypsum Scaling and Cleaning in Forward Osmosis: Measurements and Mechanisms
Abstract
This study investigates gypsum scaling and cleaning behavior in forward osmosis (FO). The results show that gypsum scaling in FO is almost fully reversible, with more than 96% recovery of permeate water flux following a water rinse without addition of chemical cleaning reagents. Parallel comparisons of fouling and cleaning were made between FO (without hydraulic pressure) and RO (under high hydraulic pressure) modes. The shape of the water flux decline curves during gypsum scaling is similar in the two modes, but the flux recovery in FO mode is higher than that in RO mode by about 10%. This behavior suggests that operating in FO mode may reduce the need for chemical cleaning. The role of membrane materials in controlling gypsum scaling and cleaning was investigated using cellulose acetate (CA) and polyamide (PA) membranes. Gypsum scaling of PA membranes causes more severe flux decline and is harder to clean than that of CA membranes. AFM force measurements were performed between a gypsum particle probe and the membrane surfaces to elucidate gypsum scaling mechanisms. Analysis of adhesion force data indicates that gypsum scaling of the PA membrane is dominated by heterogeneous/surface crystallization, while gypsum scaling of the CA membrane is dominated by bulk crystallization and subsequent particle deposition.This finding implies that membrane surface modification and new material development can be an effective strategy to mitigate membrane scaling.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A review of polymeric membranes and processes for potable water reuse
Warsinger, D. M., Chakraborty, S., Tow, E. W., Plumlee, M. H., Bellona, C., Loutatidou, S., Karimi, L., Mikelonis, A. M., Achilli, A., Ghassemi, A., et al. (2018) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2018.01.004 · Cited by 747
Materials and membrane technologies for water and energy sustainability
Le, N. L., & Nunes, S. P. (2016) · Sustainable Materials and Technologies · doi:10.1016/j.susmat.2016.02.001 · Cited by 432
Treatment technologies for reverse osmosis concentrate volume minimization: A review
Subramani, A., & Jacangelo, J. G. (2014) · Separation and Purification Technology · doi:10.1016/j.seppur.2013.12.004 · Cited by 329
Chen, L., Gu, Y., Cao, C., Zhang, J., Ng, J.-W., & Tang, C. (2014) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2013.12.009 · Cited by 262
Novel forward osmosis process to effectively remove heavy metal ions
Cui, Y., Ge, Q., Liu, X.-Y., & Chung, T.-S. (2014) · Journal of Membrane Science · doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2014.05.034 · Cited by 224
Metadata
- Authors
- Mi, B., & Elimelech, M.
- Venue
- Environmental Science & Technology
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2010-02-12
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2022-2028
- ISSN
- 0013-936X (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5851
- OpenAlex
- W2032202204
- Cited by
- 383
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 18.77
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Gypsum Scaling and Cleaning in Forward Osmosis: Measurements and Mechanisms. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1021/es903623r
- The paper
- Mi, B., & Elimelech, M. (2010). Gypsum Scaling and Cleaning in Forward Osmosis: Measurements and Mechanisms. Environmental Science & Technology. https://doi.org/10.1021/es903623r
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.