Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • chemokine receptor antagonist br Design requirements br Elec

    2018-10-29


    Design requirements
    Electrodialysis system
    Validation
    Product conceptualization ED only removes charged particles and does not disinfect the water if biological contaminants are present. Therefore, it is important to retain the pre- and post-filtration components from existing in-home RO water purifiers. These components include a sediment filter and carbon filter for pre-filtration, as well as a carbon filter and UV filter for post filtration. Since ED membranes are less sensitive to sediments in the feed supply than RO membranes (Pilat, 2001), less pre-filtration is likely required. However, given the primary focus on desalination, this chemokine receptor antagonist requirement was not analyzed in this study. Fig. 9 is a schematic of the complete in-home electrodialysis system and the water flow paths. An important aspect of demonstrating the feasibility of an in-home ED system is ensuring that all the components can be packaged within a form factor acceptable to the consumer. Since users are already accustomed to the size and functionality of in-home RO units, the design concept for this ED system inherited a similar form factor (Fig. 10). An exploded view of the proposed ED water treatment system is visually illustrated in Fig. 11. Although it does not include smaller components such as valves and tubing, it serves to demonstrate the general concept. The model incorporates the PCCell test unit as the ED stack, but an alternative stack may be implemented in the commercial version. The use of different pumps or alterations to the length to width ratio of the stack (preserving the area) may provide a superior packaging or performance solution as well. Given the conceptual nature of this work, these modifications were not investigated during this study.
    Limitations and recommendations for future work We intended for our work to be a first-order feasibility of the simplest configuration of the ED technology. Thus, certain developments and ED variants were not studied in this work. A development that was not analyzed in this paper was the use of new carbon electrodes developed General Electric (GE Power and Water, 2013) instead of platinum-coated titanium electrodes. Carbon electrodes present a promising avenue for decreasing the cost of the system by reducing electrode costs (Barber et al., 2013). In addition to providing a less expensive alternative to titanium electrodes, they do not require degasifiers, thereby potentially eliminating the need for an electrode rinse solution and a rinse pump. Future development work should study this alternative design which could significantly lower costs. Future development work should also consider the feasibility of Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR), the variant of ED where the stack polarity is periodically reversed to reduce fouling occurring on the membranes.
    Conclusion This chemokine receptor antagonist study indicated that it is feasible to design a small-scale electrodialysis system that can process groundwater in the salinity range of 500–3000ppm typically found in India while providing a higher water recovery than existing RO products. The electrodialysis system conceptualized in this study provided an 80% recovery, producing desalinated water at a rate of 12L/h. Furthermore, it was shown that such a product could be priced and packaged in a manner that is familiar to consumers. At $270, the cost of the proposed system was estimated to be within the price range of existing in-home RO products, with potential reductions that could be realized with economies of scale in purchasing and manufacturing pumps and filtration components.
    Acknowledgment This work was supported by the Tata Center for Technology and Design through the Global Engineering course at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The authors would like to thank Jignesh Shah and his team at Tata Chemicals Ltd for providing active feedback during the design process.