Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207– 216

www.elsevier.com/locate/seppur

Produced water from polymer flooding process in crude oil

extraction: characterization and treatment by a novel
crossflow oil–water separator
Shubo Deng a,*, Renbi Bai a, J. Paul Chen a, Zhanpeng Jiang b, Gang Yu b,
Fusheng Zhou c, Zhongxi Chen c
a
Department of Chemical and En6ironmental Engineering, National Uni6ersity of Singapore, 10 Kent Ridge,
119260 Singapore, Singapore
b
Department of En6ironmental Science and Engineering, Tsinghua Uni6ersity, Beijing 100084, People’s Republic of China
c
Daqing Oilfield Limited Company, Daqing 163712, People’s Republic of China
Received 25 December 2001; received in revised form 30 April 2002; accepted 6 May 2002

Abstract

Produced water from polymer flooding was much more difficult to be treated than that from water flooding in
many oilfields. The simulated experimental results showed that the small initial sizes of oil droplets were the main
reason that caused the difficulty in treating the produced water from the polymer flooding process. Polymer
hydrolyzed polyacrylamide (HPAM) increased oil–water separation when its concentration was less than 790 mg l − 1.
The flocculating effect by the polymer was found to play a dominant role at low HPAM concentration, even though
it increased the wastewater viscosity and water film strength. Enhancing the coalescence of oil droplets and shortening
rising time of oil droplets were the critical factors affecting the treatment of produced water. A novel crossflow
oil–water separator with coalescence and separation sections was exploited. The coalescence section accelerated the
coalescence of the small oil droplets and the separation section shortened the rising time of oil droplets. The in situ
experiments showed that the separator successfully treated the produced water from the polymer flooding. When the
polymer concentration was below 410 mg l − 1, the quality of the treated water after the separator can meet the water
requirement for the subsequent filtration processes. © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Polymerflooding; Produced water; Polymer; Crossflow oil– water separator; Oil droplets; Hydrolyzed polyacrylamide
(HPAM)

1. Introduction

In crude oil extraction, water can be injected

* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 65-6874-8483; fax: + 65-
into the stratum to drive the crude oil out of the
6779-1936 ground, which is often termed as water flooding
E-mail address: chedsb@nus.edu.sg (S. Deng). process or secondary oil extraction. The oil con-

1383-5866/02/$ - see front matter © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 8 3 - 5 8 6 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 8 2 - 5
208 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
tent would decrease after the secondary oil extrac-
tion is operated for some time. In order to im-
prove the oil recovery, polymer flooding (injected
water containing polymer) and alkaline– surfac-
tant –polymer flooding (injected water containing
alkaline, surfactant and polymer) would subse-
quently be used, which is often called as tertiary
oil extraction. Industrial experiences show that
polymer flooding can enhance oil recovery by up
to 12% and plays a key role in the oil exploitation
[1,2]. This technology has been widely used in
Daqing oilfield in China in recent years [3– 5].
Recent statistics show that oil production by poly-
mer flooding in China reached 8.8× 106 ton in
2000, and Daqing oilfield has the largest polymer
flooding project in the world [6].
As illustrated in Fig. 1, a large quantity of a
polymer (hydrolyzed polyacrylamide, HPAM) is
dissolved in water to increase the solution viscos-
ity before water is injected into the stratum
through water wells. The HPAM solution with
some crude oil is then extracted from the oil wells.
The produced liquid becomes produced water
(oily wastewater) after dehydration process using
three-phase separators. The produced water needs
to be further treated for oil removal, and the
Fig. 1. Process of tertiary oil extraction by polymer flooding and treatment of produced water.
treated effluent can then be injected into the stra-
tum again for reuse [7–10]. Since about 6×107
ton of produced water from polymer flooding is
generated in Daqing oilfield each year, its treat-
ment plays an important role in oil production.
As most of the polymer remains in the pro-
duced water, the viscosity of the wastewater is
rather high and the oil droplets in it are very
small. The in situ experiments in Daqing Oilfield
showed that produced water from the polymer
flooding was more difficult to be treated than that
from the water flooding. Conventional technolo-
gies (e.g. gravity settling [11], flotation [12], de-
mulsification [13–15], membrane separation
[16–22], and biotechnology [23]) have not been
able to meet the requirement for this produced
water treatment in this oilfield. It is, therefore,
crucial to develop effective technologies to treat
polymer flooding wastewater. To our knowledge,
no studies in this aspect have been reported for
the treatment of produced water from polymer
flooding in the literatures.
In this study, a series of experiments were con-
ducted to study the characteristics of produced
water from polymer flooding. A novel crossflow
oil –water separator was successfully used to treat
the produced water.
 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
Table 1
Quality of in situ produced water from polymer flooding in Daqing oilfield
Median diameter of oil droplets Concentration of oil
(mm) (mg l−1)
3–5 B2000
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials
The crude oil obtained from the local oilfield in
Daqing has water content of less than 0.5%, den-
sity and viscosity of 850 kg m − 3 (at 45 °C) and
60.89 mPa s (at 45 °C), respectively. The polymer
(HPAM) from S.N.F. Company (France) has an
average molecular weight (MW) of 2.72× 106,
and a degree of hydrolysis of about 25– 30%. A
commercial surfactant ORS-41 from Witco Com-
pany (US) with a major component of alkyl ben-
zene sulphonate was used. The other chemicals
used in this study were reagent-grade.
2.2. Preparation of brine
The brine was prepared on the basis of the
quality of ground water in Daqing oilfield. The
salts concentrations in the brine were as follows:
[NaCl]=1523 mg l − 1, [NaHCO3]= 2820 mg l − 1,
[Na2CO3]= 168.7 mg l − 1, [Na2SO4]= 10.5 mg
l − 1, [CaCl2]= 56.9 mg l − 1, [MgCl2 · 6H2O] =35.5
mg l − 1.
2.3. Preparation of produced water
The quality of the produced water from poly-
mer flooding process in Daqing oilfield is shown
in Table 1. Based on these characteristics, with
particular attention to the diameter of oil
droplets, the method for preparing produced wa-
ter from polymer flooding in the lab was as
follows:
1. Twenty gram of 1% surfactant ORS-41 and
180 g of brine were added to a 500 ml jar. The
mixture was then heated to 45 °C. A 200 g
crude oil at 45 °C was added consecutively.
The mixture was finally emulsified for 5 min at
209
Concentration of HPAM MW of HPAM Temperature
(mg l−1) (×104) (°C)
312–630 200–500 42–45
20 000 rpm with a PT3000 emulsifier (Kine-
matich Company, Switzerland) to obtain the
50% oil–water mixture. The median diameter
of the oil droplets was measured as 3.89 mm.
2. A 99.6 ml stock solution with different concen-
tration of polymer was prepared in a 250 ml
jar.
3. 0.4 g of the 50% oil– water mixture was added
to the polymer solution. The sample was
shaken to produce 2000 mg l − 1 of the simu-
lated produced water.
4. The produced water was transferred to a 100
ml beaker, and allowed to settle for 4 h at
45 °C in an oven. A 50 ml wastewater was
then withdrawn from the bottom of the beaker
using a syringe and its oil concentration was
determined.
2.4. Viscosity measurement
CS-Rheometer RS100 (with double-gap sensor
DG40) from HAAKE Company (Germany) was
used to determine the viscosity of the produced
water. In the measurement, the temperature of
wastewater was 45 °C, and the used shear rate
was 10 s − 1.
2.5. Size determination of the oil droplets
A laser particle size analyzer (CILAS Com-
pany, France) was used to determine the diameter
of the oil droplets. The measurement procedure
was as follows. Deionized water (500 ml) was
added to a beaker, and heated up to 45 °C in a
water bath. A proper volume of produced water
containing oil droplets was then added to the
beaker and stirred gently with a glass rod, and
transferred to a cuvette. The median diameter of
oil droplets was then measured.
210 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
2.6. Interfacial elasticity measurement
A CIR-100 rheometer (Camtel Enterprises,
UK) was used to determine the oil– water interfa-
cial elasticity. This instrument provides interfacial
rigidity modulus G (interfacial elasticity) by mea-
suring of amplitude of the motion of ring. The
resonance frequency is 2 Hz, and amplitude is
0.015 rad. The temperature was controlled to
45 °C, and oil/double distilled water without
added chemicals was used as the reference inter-
face in all measurements.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Characterization of produced water
3.1.1. Effect of HPAM concentration
MW of HPAM in polymer flooding wastewater
was normally in a range of (2–5) ×106. In this
study, the HPAM with a MW of 2.72× 106 was
used to investigate the effect of HPAM on oil–
water separation.
Fig. 2 illustrates the effect of HPAM concentra-
tion on the wastewater viscosity and oil– water
separation. As shown, the wastewater viscosity
increases with an increase in the HPAM concen-
tration. The profile of the oil concentrations in the
wastewater (after 4 h settling as stated in Section
2) exhibits a V-shape. The oil concentration de-
creased from an initial value of 430 mg l − 1 to a
Fig. 2. Effect of HPAM concentration on wastewater viscosity
and oil concentration.
Table 2
Effect of polymer concentration on coalescence of oil droplets
Number Concentration of Median diameter (mm)
HPAM (mg l−1)
0.5 h 2h
1 0 3.97 4.29
2 200 6.67 10.55
3 600 10.27 13.54
Initial median diameter of oil droplets was 3.89 mm.
critical minimal value of 164 mg l − 1 (wastewater
viscosity of 1.298 mPa s) when the HPAM con-
centration was increase from 0 to 400 mg l − 1. The
oil concentration then increased from the minimal
value to 795 mg l − 1 when the HPAM concentra-
tion was increased from 400 to 1200 mg l − 1.
When the HPAM concentration was less than 790
mg l − 1, the oil concentration was less than that in
the absence of the polymer.
When HPAM concentration was less than 790
mg l − 1, effective oil–water separation occurred.
This is attributed to the fact that the HPAM was
a macromolecular polymer, which has favorable
effects on the oil–water separation. Although it
increases the viscosity in wastewater, the HPAM
can flocculate the individual oil droplets and
cause them to coalesce into bigger ones, making
their separation easier.
3.1.2. Effect of HPAM concentration on the
coalescence of oil droplets
The effect of polymer on the coalescence of oil
droplets was studied. The produced water was
added to the jar and shaken on a to-and-fro
shaker KS10/TH10 (swing 17 mm, frequency 100
min − 1, temperature 45 °C). The diameter of oil
droplets at different time intervals was measured.
As can be seen from Table 2, the size of oil
droplets became larger as the time proceeded and
polymer concentration increased. In the absence
of HPAM, size increase was slight. Oil droplets
coalescence was, however, significant with the ad-
dition of HPAM. The median diameter of oil
droplets reached 13.54 mm after 2 h in the pres-
ence of 600 mg l − 1 HPAM. The coalescence of oil
droplets is the main reason for the HPAM-aided
enhancement on oil–water separation.
 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
3.1.3. Interfacial elasticity
The residual oil concentrations depend on the
extent of coalescence of oil droplets in produced
water. The more oil droplets coalesce, the less the
residual oil contents. When two oil droplets ap-
proach each other, a thin aqueous film between
the surfaces of the droplets is formed. The water
film must be broken before the two droplets coa-
lesce into one droplet. The strength of water film,
therefore, determines the degree of difficulty for
coalescence of oil droplets [27]. Interfacial elastic-
ity has been used to quantify the film strength of
adsorbed emulsifier layers at the fluid interfaces
[27 – 30]. In our study, the effect of the polymer on
the interfacial elasticity was investigated.
As shown in Fig. 3, the interfacial elasticity
increased with increasing the polymer concentra-
tion, which indicates that the polymer increased
the difficulty of coalescence of oil droplets. As the
produced water contains the polymer, the thin
water film between oil droplets is more difficult to
break during the coalescence of oil droplets.
When some surfactants including Spans 20, 80,
and 83 were used to stabilize emulsions, the inter-
facial elasticity increased with surfactant concen-
tration [28]. This explains why the produced water
from polymer flooding is more difficult to treat, as
compared with that from water flooding.
3.1.4. Mechanism of effect of HPAM on
oil– water separation
Industrial experimental results showed that the
Fig. 3. Effect of HPAM concentration on interfacial elasticity.
211
Table 3
Qualities of different produced water in Daqing oilfield
Produced water Viscosity (mPa s) Median diameter of oil
droplets (mm)
Polymer 1.533 3.55
flooding
Water flooding 0.701 34.57
retention time in settling tanks for produced water
from polymer flooding was 12 h, while the reten-
tion time for water flooding was 4 h when the oil
concentration was less than 100 mg l − 1. Table 3
shows that the wastewater from polymer flooding
was more viscous and the sizes of oil droplets
were less than that in the water flooding.
In the presence of the polymer, the initial me-
dian diameter of oil droplets in the produced
water from polymer flooding was very small (3.55
mm), in contrast to 34.57 mm of the median di-
ameter of oil droplets in produced water from
water flooding. According to the Stoke’s Law, the
rising velocity of oil droplets is proportional to
the square of the diameter of oil droplets and is
inversely proportional to the wastewater viscosity.
Therefore, the small size of the oil droplets and
the high viscosity of the produced water are ex-
pected to cause the difficulty of oil–water separa-
tion for produced water from the polymer
flooding. During the coalescence of oil droplets,
the polymer increases the strength of water films
between oil droplets, and it is difficult for oil
droplets to break the water films and coalesce into
bigger ones. The polymer in produced water also
increases the viscosity of produced water, which
decreases the rising velocity of oil droplets. On the
other hand, polymer can flocculate oil droplets
and enhance the coalescence of oil droplets. At
lower concentration of polymer, flocculating ef-
fect is more significant than the viscosity’s effect,
and thus enhances oil–water separation (see Fig.
2). For this reason, the polymer should not be a
problem in treating produced water from polymer
flooding if the concentration is not too high.
At present, the gravity settling method is widely
used for treating produced water from water
212 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
flooding in Daqing oilfield. Due to the high
wastewater viscosity and small sizes of oil
droplets, gravity settling is not working well for
treating produced water from polymer flooding.
Therefore, it is essential to develop effective tech-
nologies to treat produced water from polymer
flooding. According to above results, how to ac-
celerate the coalescence of oil droplets and
shorten the retention time appear to be important
in treating the produced water. Thus, the novel
crossflow oil –water separator was exploited in
our research for the treatment of produced water
from polymer flooding.
3.2. No6el system for oil– water separation
3.2.1. Principles of crossflow oil – water separator
Plate-coalescing devices had been used widely
for oil–water separation during the last 20 years
[31]. Parallel-plate interceptor (PPI) was designed
to improve the performance of existing horizon-
tal –rectangular API separator by installing a se-
ries of parallel flat plates at 45° angle to the
direction of water flow. Some improvements have
been devised for corrugated-plate interceptors
(CPI) separator [11]. The operating principles of
all the separators are to allow oil droplets rise to
a plate surface where coalesce will occur, forming
bigger oil droplets which are easier to separate.
In our study, the common CPI separator was
improved. The crossflow oil– water separator was
Fig. 4. Schematic illustration of crossflow oil – water separator.
incorporated with a coalescence section and a
separation section (as shown in Fig. 4). Produced
water first passes through the coalescence section
where small oil droplets coalesce into bigger ones.
The larger oil droplets subsequently flow with the
water into the separation section where oil–wa-
ter–sludge is successfully separated. In order to
achieve better separation of small oil droplets,
two series of coalescence and separation sections
were installed in the equipment. The oil can rise
while the sludge sinks to the bottom and the
treated water flows out of the separator.
3.2.2. Principle of coalescence section
Coalescence technology has widely been used in
oil –water separation [24,25]. The materials of the
coalescence plates are usually made of hydropho-
bic polypropylene, which ensured that the oil
droplets would adhere to the surface of the plates
and coalesce. In this study, the coalescence plates
in the equipment were constructed with a serial of
trapezoidal polypropylene plates which were
cross-placed each other (Fig. 5a). When a stream
passes through the plates, the size and direction of
channel change along the direction of liquid flow
and the velocity of the stream was different. The
hydraulic diameters (R) were determined to range
from 0.0071 to 0.093 m, and the Reynolds num-
bers (Re) ranged from 24.3 to 318.8. These hy-
draulic conditions were found to enhance collision
and coalescence of small oil droplets into big ones
 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216 213

Fig. 5. Schematic illustration of coalescence section in crossflow oil – water separator. (a) Three-dimensional structure (b) flow state
of wastewater in coalescence section.

without breaking the larger droplets in the pro- oil – water separation. The crossflow oil – water
cess. The flow pattern obtained was in sinusoidal separator, therefore, avoids the disadvantage in
shape and increased collision between oil droplets CPI and the separation performance could be
and coalescence plates. The schematic is shown in improved.
Fig. 5b.
3.2.4. Treating produced water from polymer
flooding by crossflow oil–water separator
3.2.3. Principle of separation section To investigate the actual treatment performance
The principle of the separation plates in the of produced water from polymer flooding with the
separation section is similar to that of parallel flat crossflow oil –water separator, pilot-scale experi-
plates in PPI, but the water current and the ments were conducted in Daqing oilfield. Fig. 7
structure of plates are different. The separation shows the overall experimental set-up used in the
plates consist of a series of hexahedrons plates.
The liquid stream flowed through large, medium
and small channels in series where the velocity of
the flow continuously changed. The hydraulic di-
ameters of large, medium and small channels were
1.485× 10 − 2, 9.56× 10 − 3, and 4.95×10 − 3 m,
respectively, and the corresponding Reynolds
numbers were 48.79, 94.23 and 146.37. Since the
Reynolds numbers were less than 500 and
changed continuously, the produced water had
laminar flow and the oil droplets were able to
collide and coalesce further. Along the flow direc-
tion, oil moved upward while the sludge glided
downward in the separation section and a good
quality of the treated water was obtained (Fig. 6).
This is contrasted to the flow pattern in conven-
tional PPI with mainly upward or downward [26],
which result in the flow of oil, water and sludge to Fig. 6. Schematic illustration of separation section in crossflow
be in the same direction that is unfavorable for oil– water separator.
214 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216

Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of experimental set-up used for produce water treatment from polymer flooding.

study. The produced water flowed first through was reduced to 54– 93 mg l − 1 through the separa-
the separator and then two filters packed with tor (shown in Table 4). The final oil concentration
multi-layer media. The oil contents of wastewater after passing through the two filters was below 4.9
in the inlet and the outlet of the separator were mg l − 1 and the solids concentration was less than
determined. There were many factors, including 2.7 mg l − 1, which met the criterion of injection
oil droplet size, initial oil concentration, retention water for low permeate stratum in Daqing oilfield.
time, that affected the effectiveness of the From the above study, it can be concluded that
crossflow oil–water separator. Among those fac- the oil concentration of produced water from
tors, retention time was often most important as polymer flooding can be reduced to below 100 mg
the effectiveness of the separator increased with l − 1 by the crossflow oil –water separator, and the
the increase of retention time. In this study, the water quality is able to meet the need of down-
retention time of the separator was 30 min. stream filtration process. Thus the crossflow oil–
water separator can be used to replace the settling
In the pilot-scale experiments, the dimension of
tanks and flocculating tanks in the treatment sys-
the separator was ƒ 1.0× 1.5 m, and the treat-
tem for produced water from polymer flooding. In
ment capacity of the separator was 1.0 m3 h − 1.
fact, the separator has been widely used to treat
The polymer concentration of the in situ pro-
produced water from polymer flooding in Daqing
duced water was 406 mg l − 1 and its viscosity was
oilfield now.
0.83 mPa s. The experimental results are shown in
Fig. 8. It can be seen that when the oil content of
the produced water ranged from 897 to 2946 mg
l − 1, the oil concentration of treated water
through the separator was in the range of 68– 101
mg l − 1.
After the pilot tests, industrial scale tests were
conducted in Daqing oilfield. The size of the
separator was ƒ 4.0×12.5 m, and its treatment
capacity was 70 m3 h − 1. When the polymer con-
centration was 410 mg l − 1 and the viscosity was
0.93 mPa s, and initial oil concentration varied Fig. 8. Pilot-scale testing results of produced water treatment
from 580 to 2400 mg l − 1, the oil concentration by crossflow oil – water separator.
 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216 215

Table 4
Industrial experimental results of produced water from polymer flooding

Oil concentration (mg l−1) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Original produced water 1300 990 2400 580 1005 1730 1440
After crossflow oil–water separator 69 54 81 93 61 86 72
After second filter 3.5 2.9 4.9 3.7 3.9 4.4 4.7

4. Conclusions participating in parts of this research. A post-doc-

1. The polymer had two effects on oil– water
separation. One effect was that the polymer
had flocculating ability and made small oil
droplets coalesce into big ones. The other ef-
fect was to increase the produced water viscos-
ity and water film strength, which made
separation difficult. When the polymer concen-
tration was below 790 mg l − 1, the overall
effect of the polymer was to increase oil– water
separation.
2. The difficulty for oil– water separation of pro-
duced water from polymer flooding was due to
the initial small sizes of the oil droplets. Thus,
the key to treating the wastewater was to
enhance coalescence of oil droplets.
3. A novel crossflow oil – water separator con-
sisted of a coalescence section and a separation
section was exploited and found to accelerate
the coalescence of small oil droplets in the
coalescence section and improve the separa-
tion oil and water in the separation section.
4. The results from pilot-scale and industrial
scale experiments showed that the crossflow
oil –water separator was suitable for treating
produced water from polymer flooding, and
oil concentration can be reduced to below 100
mg l − 1 by the separator.
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Key Tech-
nologies Research and Development Programme
of the Ninth 5-year Plan of P.R. China (Project
Number 97-317-06-02). Ruiquan Zhang, Di Wu,
Fujun Xia and Yan Chen of Daqing Oilfield
Limited Company are greatly acknowledged for
toral fellowship from A*Star of Singapore to S.B.
Deng is highly appreciated.
References
[1] D.K. Han, C.Z. Yang, Z.Q. Zhang, Z.H. Lou, Y.I.
Chang, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 22 (1 – 3) (1999) 181 – 188.
[2] D.M. Wang, J.C. Cheng, J.Z. Wu, SPE 49018 (1998)
313 – 317.
[3] Q.M. Wang, Petrol. Geol. Oilfield Dev. Daqing 18 (4)
(1999) 1 – 5.
[4] K.C. Taylor, SPE 29008 (1995) 675 – 690.
[5] T.L. Chen, Z.Y. Song, Y. Fan, C.Z. Hu, L. Qiu, J.X.
Tang, SPE Reservoir Eval. Eng. 1 (1) (1998) 24 – 29.
[6] Q.L. Gang, Oil Gas Recovery Technol. 5 (4) (1998) 1 – 7.
[7] K.D.Dreher, T.D. Shoppman, J. Petrol. Technol. 37 (8)
(1985) 1459 – 1465.
[8] R. Mohammand, R. Juergen, P. Guenter, SPE 25 (1992)
154 – 162.
[9] K.C. Taylor, R.A. Burke, H.A. Nasr-El-Din, L.L.
Schramm, J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 21 (1998) 129 – 139.
[10] Q. Wang, Y. Dan, X.G. Wang, J. Macromol. Sci. Pure
Appl. Chem. A34 (7) (1997) 1155 – 1169.
[11] F.A. Kenawy, M.E. Kandil, M.A. Fouad, T.W. Aboarab,
SPE Produc. Faciliti. 12 (2) (1997) 112 – 115.
[12] G.J. Thoma, M.L. Bowen, D. Hollensworth, Sep. Purif.
Technol. 16 (1999) 101 – 107.
[13] J.C. Lee, K.Y. Lee, Biotechnol. Lett. 22 (14) (2000)
1157 – 1163.
[14] K.L. Janiyani, H.J. Purohit, R. Shanker, P. Khanna,
World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 10 (4) (1994) 452 – 456.
[15] N. Nurxat, W.H. Chen, W. Chen, Z.P. Li, H.Q. Wang, J.
Dispersion Sci. Technol. 20 (5) (1999) 1501 – 1506.
[16] M. Cheryan, N. Rajagopalan, J. Membr. Sci. 151 (1998)
13 – 18.
[17] J. Kong, K. Li, Sep. Purif. Technol. 16 (1999) 83 – 93.
[18] T. Bilstad, E. Espedal, Water Sci. Technol. 34 (9) (1996)
239 – 246.
[19] K. Karakulski, A. Kozlowski, A.W. Sep. Technol. 5 (4)
(1995) 197 – 205.
[20] W. Scholzy, W. Fuchs, Water Res. 34 (14) (2000) 3621 –
3629.
[21] P. Lipp, C.H. Lee, A.G. Fane, C.J.D. Fell, J. Membr. Sci.
36 (1988) 161 – 177.
216 S. Deng et al. / Separation and Purification Technology 29 (2002) 207–216
[22] C. Visvanathan, P. Svenstrup, P. Ariyamethee, Water Sci.
Technol. 41 (10 – 11) (2000) 117 –123.
[23] L.L.Palmer, A.H. Beyer, J. Stock, J. Petrol. Technol. 33
(6) (1981) 1136 – 1140.
[24] S. Sokolovic, R. Secerov-Sokolovic, S. Sevic, Water Sci.
Technol. 26 (9– 11) (1992) 2073 –2076.
[25] S. Sokolovic, R. Secerov-Sokolovic, S. Putnik, Environ.
Technol. 13 (10) (1992) 987 –994.
[26] H.M. Yuan, Environ. Protection Chem. Eng. 18 (1998)
146 – 149.
[27] D.M. Li, J. Colloid Interf. Sci. 163 (1994) 108 – 119.
[28] F.O. Opawale, D.J. Burgess, J. Colloid Interf. Sci. 197 (1)
(1998) 142 – 150.
[29] B.S. Murray, E. Dickinson, Food Sci. Technol. Int. 2 (3)
(1996) 131 – 137.
[30] D.J. Burgess, N.O. Sahin, in: C.A. Herb, R.K. Prud’home
(Eds.), Structure and Flow in Surfactant Solutions,
American Chemical Society, Washington, DC, 1994,
p. 380.
[31] B.W. Bradley, Oil Gas J. 18 (1985) 136 – 139.