Phased-inline coagulation for low-pressure membranes in water and wastewater treatment: a review of fouling mitigation, process control, and water quality

References

• Xu X, Yang Y, Liu T, et al. Cost-effective polymer-based membranes for drinking water purification. Giant. 2022;10:100099. doi: 10.1016/j.giant.2022.100099
   Google Scholar
• Anis SF, Hashaikeh R, Hilal N. Microfiltration membrane processes: a review of research trends over the past decade. J Water Process Eng. 2019;32:100941. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2019.100941
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li K, Wen G, Li S, et al. Effect of pre-oxidation on low pressure membrane (LPM) for water and wastewater treatment: a review. Chemosphere. 2019;231:287–300. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2019.05.081
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearce GK. UF/MF membrane water treatment: principles and design. 1st ed. Bangkok, Thailand: Water Treatment Academy; 2011. p. 387.
   Google Scholar
• Crittenden JC, Trussell RR, Hand DW, et al. Water treatment: principles and design. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Fox KR, Lytle DA. Milwaukee’s crypto outbreak: investigation and recommendations. J Am Water Works Assoc. 1996;88(9):87–94. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1996.tb06615.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Regli S, Odom R, Cromwell J, et al. Benefits and costs of the IESWTR. J Am Water Works Assoc. 1999;91:148–158. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1999.tb08621.x
   Google Scholar
• Emelko MB, Huck PM, Coffey BM. A review of Cryptosporidium removal by granular media filtration. J Am Water Works Assoc. 2005;97:101–115. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.2005.tb07544.x
   Google Scholar
• American Water Works Association. Manual of water supply practices – M53, Microfiltration and ultrafiltration membranes for drinking water. 2nd ed. Denver (CO): American Water Works Association; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Edzwald JK, editor. Water quality & treatment: a handbook on drinking water. 6th ed. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Jacangelo JG, Laine JM, Mallevialle J, et al. Low-pressure membrane filtration for removing giardia and microbial indicators. J Am Water Works Assoc. 1991;83:97–106. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1991.tb07219.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mecha AC, Chollom MN, Babatunde BF, et al. Versatile silver-nanoparticle-impregnated membranes for water treatment: a review. Membranes. 2023;13(4):432. doi: 10.3390/membranes13040432
   Google Scholar
• Xue W, Jian M, Lin T, et al. A novel strategy to alleviate ultrafiltration membrane fouling by rotating membrane module. Chemosphere. 2020;260:127535. doi: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2020.127535
   Google Scholar
• Wray HE, Andrews RC. Optimization of coagulant dose for biopolymer removal: impact on ultrafiltration fouling and retention of organic micropollutants. J Water Process Eng. 2014;1:74–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2014.03.007
   Google Scholar
• Álvarez-Arroyo R, Pérez JI, Ruiz LM, et al. Analysis of the evolution of ultra-filtered water quality in a drinking water distribution system by particle size distribution: Influence of pre-ozonation. Water Environ Res. 2023;95(2). doi: 10.1002/wer.10840
   Google Scholar
• Boretti A, Rosa L. Reassessing the projections of the world water development report. Npj Clean Water. 2019;2:15. doi: 10.1038/s41545-019-0039-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patwardhan S, Palekar S, Wagh NS, et al. Extended investigation processes in advanced wastewater treatment for water reuse. In: Shah MP, editor. Membrane and membrane-based processes for wastewater treatment. 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2023. p. 129–152.
   Google Scholar
• Amjad H, Khan Z, Tarabara VV. Fractal structure and permeability of membrane cake layers: effect of coagulation–flocculation and settling as pretreatment steps. Sep Purif Technol. 2015;143:40–51. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2015.01.020
   Google Scholar
• Tang CY, Yang Z, Guo H, et al. Potable water reuse through advanced membrane technology. Environ Sci Technol. 2018;52(18):10215–10223. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b00562
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tow EW, Rad B, Kostecki R. Biofouling of filtration membranes in wastewater reuse: in situ visualization with confocal laser scanning microscopy. J Membr Sci. 2022;644:120019. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2021.120019
   Google Scholar
• Pearce GK. Is the water membrane market in a state of Flux? Water World [Internet]. 2018 May 1. Available from: https://www.waterworld.com/drinking-water/treatment/article/16201283/is-the-water-membrane-market-in-a-state-of-flux.
   Google Scholar
• Kimura K, Kume K. Irreversible fouling in hollow-fiber PVDF MF/UF membranes filtering surface water: effects of precoagulation and identification of the foulant. J Membr Sci. 2020;602:117975–117975. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2020.117975
   Google Scholar
• Hao Y, Moriya A, Maruyama T, et al. Effect of metal ions on humic acid fouling of hollow fiber ultrafiltration membrane. J Membr Sci. 2011;376:247–253. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2011.04.035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen M, Nan J, Ji X, et al. Effect of adsorption and coagulation pretreatment sequence on ultrafiltration membrane fouling: process study and targeted prediction. Desalination. 2022;540:115967. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2022.115967
   Google Scholar
• Koros WJ, Ma YH, Shimidzu T. Terminology for membranes and membrane processes (IUPAC Recommendations 1996). Pure Appl Chem. 1996;68(7):1479–1489. doi: 10.1351/pac199668071479
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guo W, Ngo H-H, Li J. A mini-review on membrane fouling. Bioresour Technol. 2012;122:27–34. doi: 10.1016/j.biortech.2012.04.089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AlSawaftah N, Abuwatfa W, Darwish N, et al. A comprehensive review on membrane fouling: mathematical modelling, prediction, diagnosis, and mitigation. Water (Basel). 2021;13(9):1327. doi: 10.3390/w13091327
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer AI, Andritsos N, Karabelas AJ, et al. Fouling in nanofiltration. In: Schäefer AI, Fane AG, editors. Nanofiltration: Principles, applications, and new materials. 1st ed. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH; p. 273–379.
   Google Scholar
• Shi X, Tal G, Hankins NP, et al. Fouling and cleaning of ultrafiltration membranes: a review. J Water Process Eng. 2014;1:121–138. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2014.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamamura H, Kimura K, Watanabe Y. Mechanism involved in the evolution of physically irreversible fouling in microfiltration and ultrafiltration membranes used for drinking water treatment. Environ Sci Technol. 2007;41(19):6789–6794. doi: 10.1021/es0629054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gao W, Liang H, Ma J, et al. Membrane fouling control in ultrafiltration technology for drinking water production: a review. Desalination. 2011;272:1–8. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2011.01.051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu L, Luo X-B, Ding L, et al.. Application of nanotechnology in the removal of heavy metals from water. In: Luo X , Deng F, editors. Nanomaterials for the Removal of Pollutants and Resource Reutilization. Cambridge (USA): Elsevier; 2019. p. 83–147.
   Google Scholar
• Cui X, Choo KH. Natural organic matter removal and fouling control in low-pressure membrane filtration for water treatment. Environ Eng Res. 2014;19(1):1–8. doi: 10.4491/eer.2014.19.1.001
   Google Scholar
• Hilal N, Ogunbiyi OO, Miles NJ, et al. Methods employed for control of fouling in MF and UF membranes: a comprehensive review. Sep Sci Technol. 2005;40(10):1957–2005. doi: 10.1081/SS-200068409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz M, Soltani A, Zheng X, et al. Effect of inorganic colloidal water constituents on combined low-pressure membrane fouling with natural organic matter (NOM). J Membr Sci. 2016;507:154–164. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2016.02.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jermann D, Pronk W, Ka R, et al. Influence of interactions between NOM and particles on UF fouling mechanisms. Water Res. 2008;42(14):3870–3878. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2008.05.013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jermann D, Pronk W, Boller M. Mutual influences between natural organic matter and inorganic particles and their combined effect on ultrafiltration membrane fouling. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(24):9129–9136. doi: 10.1021/es800654p
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian J, Ernst M, Cui F, et al. Effect of particle size and concentration on the synergistic UF membrane fouling by particles and NOM fractions. J Membr Sci. 2013;446:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.06.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zularisam AW, Ismail AF, Salim MR, et al. The effects of natural organic matter (NOM) fractions on fouling characteristics and flux recovery of ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination. 2007;212:191–208. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2006.10.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zularisam AW, Ahmad A, Sakinah M, et al. Role of natural organic matter (NOM), colloidal particles, and solution chemistry on ultrafiltration performance. Sep Purif Technol. 2011;78:189–200. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2011.02.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim H-C, Hong J-H, Lee S. Fouling of microfiltration membranes by natural organic matter after coagulation treatment: a comparison of different initial mixing conditions. J Membr Sci. 2006;283:266–272. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2006.06.041
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee EK, Chen V, Fane AG. Natural organic matter (NOM) fouling in low pressure membrane filtration — effect of membranes and operation modes. Desalination. 2008;218(1-3):257–270. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2007.02.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AWWA. Committee Report: recent advances and research needs in membrane fouling. J Am Water Works Assoc. 2005;97(8):79–89. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.2005.tb07452.x
   Google Scholar
• Porcelli N, Judd S. Chemical cleaning of potable water membranes: a review. Sep Purif Technol. 2010;71:137–143. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2009.12.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peters CD, Rantissi T, Gitis V, et al. Retention of natural organic matter by ultrafiltration and the mitigation of membrane fouling through pre-treatment, membrane enhancement, and cleaning - A review. J Water Process Eng. 2021;44:102374. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102374
   Google Scholar
• Bogati R, Goodwin C, Marshall K, et al. Optimization of chemical cleaning for improvement of membrane performance and fouling control in drinking water treatment. Sep Sci Technol Phila. 2015;50(12):1835–1845. doi: 10.1080/01496395.2015.1009116
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnal JM, Garcia-Fayos B, Sancho M, et al. Ultrafiltration membrane cleaning with different chemical solutions after treating surface water. Desalination Water Treat. 2009;7(1-3):198–205. doi: 10.5004/dwt.2009.709
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ding Q, Ochiai K, Yamamura H. In situ and online monitoring of the chemical cleaning efficiency by solid-phase fluorescence excitation–emission matrix spectroscopy (SPF-EEM). J Membr Sci. 2020;611:118296. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2020.118296
   Google Scholar
• Liang H, Gong W, Li G. Performance evaluation of water treatment ultrafiltration pilot plants treating algae-rich reservoir water. Desalination. 2008;221(1-3):345–350. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2007.01.093
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lin CF, Huang YJ, Hao OJ. Ultrafiltration processes for removing humic substances: effect of molecular weight fractions and PAC treatment. Water Res. 1999;33(5):1252–1264. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(98)00322-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang W, Lv W, Zhou W, et al. Investigation of the fouling behaviors correlating to water characteristics during the ultrafiltration with ozone treatment. Sci Total Environ. 2019;676:53–61. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.04.271
   Google Scholar
• Cheng X, Liang H, Ding A, et al. Effects of pre-ozonation on the ultrafiltration of different natural organic matter (NOM) fractions: membrane fouling mitigation, prediction and mechanism. J Membr Sci. 2016;505:15–25. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2016.01.022
   Google Scholar
• Xie Y, Ma B, Zhang X, et al. Modification of ultrafiltration membrane with iron/aluminum mixed hydrolyzed precipitate layer for humic acid fouling reduction. Desalination Water Treat. 2016;57:26022–26030. doi: 10.1080/19443994.2016.1159991
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rana D, Matsuura T. Surface modifications for antifouling membranes. Chem Rev. 2010;110(4):2448–2471. doi: 10.1021/cr800208y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen AH, Narbaitz RM, Matsuura T. Impacts of hydrophilic membrane additives on the ultrafiltration of river water. J Environ Eng. 2007;133(5):515–522. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(2007)133:5(515)
   Google Scholar
• Mosqueda-Jimenez DB, Narbaitz RM, Matsuura T. Manufacturing conditions of surface-modified membranes: effects on ultrafiltration performance. Sep Purif Technol. 2004;37(1):51–67. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2003.07.003
   Google Scholar
• Pezeshk N, Narbaitz RM. More fouling resistant modified PVDF ultrafiltration membranes for water treatment. Desalination. 2012;287:247–254. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2011.11.048
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baghbanzadeh M, Rana D, Lan CQ, et al. Effects of inorganic nano-additives on properties and performance of polymeric membranes in water treatment. Sep Purif Rev. 2016;45(2):141–167. doi: 10.1080/15422119.2015.1068806
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li L, Wray HE, Andrews RC, et al. Ultrafiltration fouling: impact of backwash frequency and air sparging. Sep Sci Technol. 2014;49(18):2814–2823. doi: 10.1080/01496395.2014.948964
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crozes GF, Jacangelo JG, Anselme C, et al. Impact of ultrafiltration operating conditions on membrane irreversible fouling. J Membr Sci. 1997;124(1):63–76. doi: 10.1016/S0376-7388(96)00244-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim Y-J, Jung J-W, Lee S. Comparison of fouling rates for pressurized and submerged ultrafiltration membranes. Desalination Water Treat. 2015;54(13):3610–3615. doi: 10.1080/19443994.2014.923208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Souza NPD, Basu OD. Comparative analysis of physical cleaning operations for fouling control of hollow fiber membranes in drinking water treatment. J Membr Sci. 2013;436:28–35. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2013.02.014
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Alresheedi MT, Kenari SLD, Barbeau B, et al. Flux modulation: a novel approach for ultrafiltration fouling control. J Water Process Eng. 2022;46:102551. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2021.102551
   Google Scholar
• Huang H, Schwab K, Jacangelo JG. Pretreatment for low pressure membranes in water treatment: a review. Environ Sci Technol. 2009;43(9):3011–3019. doi: 10.1021/es802473r
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiesner BMR, Clark MM, Members A, et al. Membrane filtration of coagulated suspensions. J Environ Eng US. 1989;115(1):20–40. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372(1989)115:1(20)
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu T, Chen Z, Yu W, et al. Effect of two-stage coagulant addition on coagulation-ultrafiltration process for treatment of humic-rich water. Water Res. 2011;45(14):4260–4268. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.05.037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park J, Kim H-Y, Park P-K. Split injection of coagulant to enhance the water permeability of a cake layer in a coagulation–microfiltration process. J Ind Eng Chem. 2015;21:363–368. doi: 10.1016/j.jiec.2014.02.046
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yoo RS, Brown DR, Pardini RJ, et al. Microfiltration: a case study. J - Am Water Works Assoc. 1995;87:38–49.
   Google Scholar
• Naim R, Epsztein R, Felder A, et al. Rethinking the role of in-line coagulation in tertiary membrane filtration of municipal effluents. Sep Purif Technol. 2014;125:11–20. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2014.01.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braghetta A, Jacangelo JG, Chellam S, et al. DAF pretreatment: its effect on MF performance. J - Am Water Works Assoc. 1997;89(10):90–101. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1997.tb08308.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiessinger F, Mallevialle J, Leprince A, et al. Megatrends in water treatment technologies. Water Res Quart of Am Water Works Assoc. 1985;4:9–12.
   Google Scholar
• Edzwald JK, Haarhoff J. Dissolved air flotation for water clarification. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2012.
   Google Scholar
• Lebeau T, Lelièvre C, Buisson H, et al. Immersed membrane filtration for the production of drinking water: combination with PAC for NOM and SOCs removal. Desalination. 1998;117:219–231. doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(98)00101-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koyuncu I, Sengur R, Turken T, et al.. Advances in water treatment by microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration. In: Basile A , Cassano A, Rastogi NK, editors. Advances in membrane technologies for water treatment: Materials, processes and applications. Cambridge (UK): Woodhead Publishing; 2015. p. 83–128.
   Google Scholar
• Choi KYJ, Dempsey BA. In-line coagulation with low-pressure membrane filtration. Water Res. 2004;38(19):4271–4281. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.08.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aly SA, Anderson WB, Huck PM. In-line coagulation assessment for ultrafiltration fouling reduction to treat secondary effluent for water reuse. Water Sci Technol. 2021;83(2):284–296. doi: 10.2166/wst.2020.571
   Google Scholar
• Kamińska G, Pronk W, Traber J. Effect of coagulant dose and backflush pressure on NOM membrane fouling in inline coagulation-ultrafiltration. Desalination Water Treat. 2020;199:188–197. doi: 10.5004/dwt.2020.25657
   Google Scholar
• Sillanpaa M. Natural organic matter in water. 1st ed Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann; 2015.
   Google Scholar
• Konieczny K, Sąkol D, Płonka J, et al. Coagulation—ultrafiltration system for river water treatment. Desalination. 2009;240(1-3):151–159. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2007.11.072
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keucken A, Heinicke G, Persson KM, et al. Combined coagulation and ultrafiltration process to counteract increasing NOM in brown surface water. Water (Basel). 2017;9(9):697. doi: 10.3390/w9090697
   Google Scholar
• Malkoske TA, Bérubé PR, Andrews RC. Coagulation/flocculation prior to low pressure membranes in drinking water treatment: a review. Environ Sci Water Res Technol. 2020;6:2993–3023. doi: 10.1039/D0EW00461H
   Google Scholar
• Lok A, Wray H, Bérubé P, et al. Optimization of air sparging and in-line coagulation for ultrafiltration fouling control. Sep Purif Technol. 2017;188:60–66. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2017.06.064
   Google Scholar
• Arhin SG, Banadda N, Komakech AJ, et al. Membrane fouling control in low pressure membranes: a review on pretreatment techniques for fouling abatement. Environ Eng Res. 2016;21(2):109–120. doi: 10.4491/eer.2016.017
   Google Scholar
• Farahbakhsh K, Svrcek C, Guest RK, et al. A review of the impact of chemical pretreatment on low-pressure water treatment membranes. J Environ Eng Sci. 2004;3(4):237–253. doi: 10.1139/s03-078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Buchta P, Berg P, Schweiger A, et al. In-line coagulation upstream ultrafiltration – comparison of continuous vs. intermittent addition. Proceedings of the AMTA/AWWA membrane technology conference & exposition; 2019 Feb 26-28; New Orleans (LA). Denver (CO): American Water Works Association; 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Park PK, Lee CH, Choi SJ, et al. Effect of the removal of DOMs on the performance of a coagulation-UF membrane system for drinking water production. Desalination. 2002;145(1-3):237–245. doi: 10.1016/S0011-9164(02)00418-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Formato G, Romano R, Formato A, et al. Fluid–structure interaction modeling applied to peristaltic pump flow simulations. Machines. 2019;7(3):50. doi: 10.3390/machines7030050
   Google Scholar
• Palmada N, Cater JE, Cheng LK, et al. Experimental and computational studies of peristaltic flow in a duodenal model. Fluids. 2022;7:40. doi: 10.3390/fluids7010040
   Google Scholar
• Judd SJ, Hillis P. Optimisation of combined coagulation and microfiltration for water treatment. Water Res. 2001;35:2895–2904. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00586-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galjaard G, van Paassen J, Buijs P, et al. Enhanced pre-coat engineering (EPCE) for micro- and ultrafiltration: the solution for fouling? Water Supply. 2001;1:151–156.
   Google Scholar
• Wang J, Wang X. Ultrafiltration with in-line coagulation for the removal of natural humic acid and membrane fouling mechanism. J Environ Sci. 2006;18(5):880–884. doi: 10.1016/S1001-0742(06)60008-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nan J, Yao M, Li Q, et al. The role of shear conditions on floc characteristics and membrane fouling in coagulation/ultrafiltration hybrid process – the effect of flocculation duration and slow shear force. RSC Adv. 2016;6(1):163–173. doi: 10.1039/C5RA18328F
   Google Scholar
• Schweiger A, Starke C, Vial D, et al. Coating - a dramatic change in ultrafiltration treatment of secondary effluent. Proceedings of the IDA international water reuse and recycling conference; 2018 Jun 24-27; Valencia, Spain. Danvers (MA): International Desalination Association; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Jarusutthirak C, Amy G. Understanding soluble microbial products (SMP) as a component of effluent organic matter (EfOM). Water Res. 2007;41(12):2787–2793. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2007.03.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Filella M, Buffle J, Parthasarathy N.. Humic and fulvic compounds. In: Worsfold P, Poole C, Townshend A, editors. Encyclopedia of Analytical Science. 6th ed. Cambridge (USA): Elsevier; 2005. p. 288–298.
   Google Scholar
• Pronk W, Traber J, Kamińska G. Optimization of process parameters of the coagulation/ultrafiltration process for the reduction of membrane fouling. Proceedings of advances in particle science and separation: meeting tomorrow’s challenges conference; 2017 Jun 20-24; Oslo, Norway. London (UK): International Water Association; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• Hatt JW, Germain E, Judd SJ. Precoagulation-microfiltration for wastewater reuse. Water Res. 2011;45(19):6471–6478. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2011.09.039
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Angelis L, de Cortalezzi MMF. Ceramic membrane filtration of organic compounds: effect of concentration, pH, and mixtures interactions on fouling. Sep Purif Technol. 2013;118:762–775. doi: 10.1016/j.seppur.2013.08.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong B, Chen Y, Gao N, et al. Effect of coagulation pretreatment on the fouling of ultrafiltration membrane. J Environ Sci. 2007;19(3):278–283. doi: 10.1016/S1001-0742(07)60045-X
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Y, Chen V, Le-Clech P. Evolution of fouling deposition and removal on hollow fibre membrane during filtration with periodical backwash. Desalination. 2011;283:198–205. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2011.03.087
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gu H, Rahardianto A, Gao LX, et al. Fouling indicators for field monitoring the effectiveness of operational strategies of ultrafiltration as pretreatment for seawater desalination. Desalination. 2018;431:86–99. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2017.11.038
   Google Scholar
• Tsuyuhara T, Hanamoto Y, Miyoshi T, et al. Influence of membrane properties on physically reversible and irreversible fouling in membrane bioreactors. Water Sci Technol. 2010;61(9):2235–2240. doi: 10.2166/wst.2010.122
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Der Bruggen B, Vandecasteele C, Van Gestel T, et al. A review of pressure-driven membrane processes in wastewater treatment and drinking water production. Environ Prog. 2003;22(1):46–56. doi: 10.1002/ep.670220116
   Google Scholar
• Buisson H, Lee N, Amy G, et al. Identification and understanding of fouling in low-pressure membrane (MF / UF) filtration by natural organic. Water Res. 2004;38:4511–4523. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2004.08.013
   Google Scholar
• Yu W-Z, Graham N, Liu H-J, et al. Comparison of FeCl3 and alum pre-treatment on UF membrane fouling. Chem Eng J. 2013;234:158–165. doi: 10.1016/j.cej.2013.08.105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma B, Xue W, Bai Y, et al. Enhanced alleviation of ultrafiltration membrane fouling by regulating cake layer thickness with pre-coagulation during drinking water treatment. J Membr Sci. 2020;596:117732–117732. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2019.117732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Günther J, Hobbs D, Albasi C, et al. Modeling the effect of packing density on filtration performances in hollow fiber microfiltration module: a spatial study of cake growth. J Membr Sci. 2012;389:126–136. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2011.10.055
   Google Scholar
• Salinas-Rodriguez SG, Prabowo A, Abushaban A, et al. Pre-coating of outside-inside capillary UF membranes with iron hydroxide particles to limit non-backwashable fouling during seawater algal blooms. Desalination Water Treat. 2016;57:26730–26740. doi: 10.1080/19443994.2016.1190111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• White MC, Thompson JD, Harrington GW, et al. Evaluating criteria for enhanced coagulation compliance. J Am Water Works Assoc. 1997;89(5):64–77. doi: 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1997.tb08228.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westerhoff P, Aiken G, Amy G, et al. Relationships between the structure of natural organic matter and its reactivity towards molecular ozone and hydroxyl radicals. Water Res. 1999;33(10):2265–2276. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(98)00447-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paar H, Benecke J, Ernst M, et al. Pre-coagulation and ultrafiltration of effluent impaired surface water for phosphorus removal and fouling control. Water Supply. 2011;11(2):211–218. doi: 10.2166/ws.2011.037
   Google Scholar
• Wray HE, Andrews RC, Bérubé PR. Coagulation optimization for DOC removal: pilot-scale analysis of UF fouling and disinfection byproduct formation potential. Water Supply. 2016;16:473–480. doi: 10.2166/ws.2015.157
   Google Scholar
• Wang L, Miao R, Wang X, et al. Fouling behavior of typical organic foulants in polyvinylidene fluoride ultrafiltration membranes: characterization from microforces. Environ Sci Technol. 2013;47(8):3708–3714. doi: 10.1021/es4004119
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Q, Xu Z, Pinnau I. Fouling of reverse osmosis membranes by biopolymers in wastewater secondary effluent: role of membrane surface properties and initial permeate flux. J Membr Sci. 2007;290(1-2):173–181. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2006.12.027
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen SC, Wan CF, Chung T-S. Enhanced fouling by inorganic and organic foulants on pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) hollow fiber membranes under high pressures. J Membr Sci. 2015;479:190–203. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2015.01.037
   Google Scholar
• Jung CW, Kang LS. Application of combined coagulation-ultrafiltration membrane process for water treatment. Korean J Chem Eng. 2003;20:855–861. doi: 10.1007/BF02697288
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ma B, Yu W, Liu H, et al. Effect of low dosage of coagulant on the ultrafiltration membrane performance in feedwater treatment. Water Res. 2014;51:277–283. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.069
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan M, Shen X, Gao B, et al. Coagulation-ultrafiltration integrated process for membrane fouling control: influence of Al species and SUVA values of water. Sci Total Environ. 2021;793:148517. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.148517
   Google Scholar
• Oh J, Lee S. Influence of streaming potential on flux decline of microfiltration with in-line rapid pre-coagulation process for drinking water production. J Membr Sci. 2005;254(1-2):39–47. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2004.12.030
   Google Scholar
• Wang W, Yue Q, Guo K, et al. Application of Al species in coagulation/ultrafiltration process: influence of cake layer on membrane fouling. J Membr Sci. 2019;572:161–170. doi: 10.1016/j.memsci.2018.11.014
   Google Scholar
• Wu S, Ma B, Hu C, et al. Cake layer 3D structure regulation to optimize water channels during Al-based coagulation-ultrafiltration process. Water Res. 2023;236:119941. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2023.119941
   Google Scholar
• Schweiger A, Buchta P, Vial D, et al. Coating of ultrafiltration membranes – the solution to improve the efficiency of the pre-treatment. Proceedings of the desalination for the environment: clean water and energy conference; 2018 Sept 3-6; Athens, Greece. Rome (Italy): European Desalination Society; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Ladouceur JD, Narbaitz RM. Reduced low–pressure membrane fouling by inline coagulation pretreatment for a colored river water. Membranes. 2022;12(11):1028. doi: 10.3390/membranes12111028
   Google Scholar
• Ladouceur JD, Narbaitz RM. Comparing sedimentation, flotation, and inline pre-treatment for low-pressure membrane fouling reduction. J Environ Eng US. 2023;149(4):04023002. doi: 10.1061/JOEEDU.EEENG-7070
   Google Scholar
• Hillis P. Enhanced coagulation, flocculation and immersed ultrafiltration for treatment of low alkalinity and highly coloured upland water. J Water Supply Res Technol-Aqua. 2006;55:549–558.
   Google Scholar
• Yoo SS. Operating cost reduction of in-line coagulation/ultrafiltration membrane process attributed to coagulation condition optimization for irreversible fouling control. Water Switz. 2018;10(8):1076. doi: 10.3390/w10081076
   Google Scholar
• Zheng X, Zietzschmann F, Plume S, et al. Understanding and control of biopolymer fouling in ultrafiltration of different water types. Water Switz. 2017;9(4):298. doi: 10.3390/w9040298
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer AI, Fane AG, Waite TD. Cost factors and chemical pretreatment effects in the membrane filtration of waters containing natural organic matter. Water Res. 2001;35(6):1509–1517. doi: 10.1016/S0043-1354(00)00418-8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edzwald JK, Van Benschoten JE. Aluminum coagulation of natural organic matter. In: Hahn HH, Klute R, editors. Chem water wastewater treat. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 1990. p. 341–359.
   Google Scholar
• O’Melia CR, Becker WC, Au K-K. Removal of humic substances by coagulation. Water Sci Technol. 1999;40(9):47–54. doi: 10.2166/wst.1999.0440
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edzwald JK. Coagulation in drinking water treatment: particles, organics and coagulants. Water Sci Technol. 1993;27(11):21–35. doi: 10.2166/wst.1993.0261
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moore DRJ, Nagpal NK. Ambient water quality guidelines for organic carbon in British Columbia: a report. Victoria, British Columbia (Canada): British Columbia Environment and Resource Management Dept.; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Toming K, Kotta J, Uuemaa E, et al. Predicting lake dissolved organic carbon at a global scale. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):8471. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-65010-3
   Google Scholar
• Water environment federation, American society of civil engineers. Design of water resource recovery facilities. 6th ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Citulski J, Farahbakhsh K, Kent F. Optimization of phosphorus removal in secondary effluent using immersed ultrafiltration membranes with in-line coagulant pretreatment - implications for advanced water treatment and reuse applications. Can J Civ Eng. 2009;36(7):1272–1283. doi: 10.1139/L09-062
   Google Scholar
• Nir T, Arkhangelsky E, Levitsky I, et al. Removal of phosphorus from secondary effluents by coagulation and ultrafiltration. Desalination Water Treat. 2009;8(1-3):24–30. doi: 10.5004/dwt.2009.686
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hua G, Reckhow DA. Characterization of disinfection byproduct precursors based on hydrophobicity and molecular size. Environ Sci Technol. 2007;41:3309–3315. doi: 10.1021/es062178c
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United States environmental protection agency. Enhanced coagulation and enhanced precipitative softening guidance manual. Washington, DC: Office of Water; 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Ladouceur JD, Narbaitz RM, Lan CQ. Dissolved air flotation pretreatment for low-pressure membranes in water treatment: a review of fouling mitigation and product water quality. J Water Process Eng. 2023;56:104391. doi: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2023.104391
   Google Scholar
• Tabatabai A, Schippers SA, Kennedy JC, et al. Effect of coagulation on fouling potential and removal of algal organic matter in ultrafiltration pretreatment to seawater reverse osmosis. Water Res. 2014;59:283–294. doi: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.04.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wray HE, Andrews RC, Bérubé PR. Ultrafiltration organic fouling control: comparison of air-sparging and coagulation. J - Am Water Works Assoc. 2014;106:E76–E85.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng X, Plume S, Ernst M, et al. In-line coagulation prior to UF of treated domestic wastewater – foulants removal, fouling control and phosphorus removal. J Membr Sci. 2012;403–404:129–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickers JC, Thompson MA, Kelkar UG. The use of membrane filtration in conjunction with coagulation processes for improved NOM removal. Desalination. 1995;102(1-3):57–61. doi: 10.1016/0011-9164(95)00041-Y
   Google Scholar
• Best G, Singh M, Mourato D, et al. Application of immersed ultrafiltration membranes for organic removal and disinfection by-product reduction. Water Supply. 2001;1(5-6):221–231. doi: 10.2166/ws.2001.0118
   Google Scholar
• Wang F, Gao B, Ma D, et al. Reduction of disinfection by-product precursors in reservoir water by coagulation and ultrafiltration. Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2016;23(22):22914–22923. doi: 10.1007/s11356-016-7496-1
   Google Scholar
• Shin JY, Spinette RF, Melia O, et al. Stoichiometry of coagulation revisited. Environ Sci Technol. 2008;42(7):2582–2589. doi: 10.1021/es071536o
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oliveira D, Teixeira DS, C E. Experimental evaluation of helically coiled tube flocculators for turbidity removal in drinking water treatment units. Water SA. 2017;43(3):378. doi: 10.4314/wsa.v43i3.02
   Google Scholar
• Cahyana GH, Suwandhi P, Mulyani T. Novel helical or coiled flocculator for turbidity reduction in drinking water treatment: a performance study. IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci. 2021;623(1):012009. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/623/1/012009
   Google Scholar
• Hlavacek M, Remy JF. Simple relationships among zeta potential, particle size distribution, and cake specific resistance for colloid suspensions coagulated with ferric chloride. Sep Sci Technol. 1995;30(4):549–563. doi: 10.1080/01496399508225609
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Black V. Pfas national cost model report. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association; 2023; Report No.: WITAF 56.
   Google Scholar
• Kim M, Au J, Rahardianto A, et al. Impact of conventional water treatment coagulants on mineral scaling in RO desalting of brackish water. Ind Eng Chem Res. 2009;48(6):3126–3135. doi: 10.1021/ie800937c
   Google Scholar
• Gabelich CJ, Ishida KP, Gerringer FW, et al. Control of residual aluminum from conventional treatment to improve reverse osmosis performance. Desalination. 2006;190(1-3):147–160. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2005.09.002
   Google Scholar