随着水源环境的恶化和饮用水安全标准的提高，超滤成为替代饮用水常规处理技术的最佳选择之一。然而，水中天然有机物(NOM)却是造成超滤膜污染的重要因素之一。研究通过特定的化学反应对不同截留分子量的再生纤维素（RC）超滤膜进行改性，得到一系列间隔臂长度不同的荷负电超滤膜。选用腐殖酸(HA)作为天然有机物的代表物质，比较不同间隔臂长度和不同截留分子量的RC膜对腐殖酸去除效果和膜污染情况，并进行膜阻力的分析。实验结果表明，不同截留分子量的改性膜对腐殖酸的去除效果都比未改性膜好，同时膜通量的衰减变小，即膜污染现象减轻。间隔臂长度较大的膜对腐殖酸的去除更有效，同时膜污染更轻，这主要是由于间隔臂长度较大的改性荷负电膜上的zeta电位较大，与带同种电荷的腐殖酸之间的静电排斥作用更大。

With the deterioration of water environment and the stringency of water standards, ultrafiltration has become one of the best alternatives replacing conventional drinking water treatment techniques. However, the natural organic matter (NOM) in water is one of the important factors causing membrane fouling. In this study, appropriate chemical modifiers and chemical reactions were chosen to fabricate a series of negatively charged regenerated cellulose (RC) membranes with different spacer arm lengths and MWCOs. Humic acid was chosen as a model for NOM. Removal effects of HA and membranes fouling were compared with essentially neutral and negatively charged RC membranes with different spacer arm lengths and MWCOs. Results showed that the appropriate charge modification on the neutral RC membrane of different MWCOs could be an effective way for better removal of HA and reduction of the membrane fouling. The membrane with longer spacer arm length performs better in removal of HA due to its higher zeta potential value and stronger electrostatic repulsion with negatively charged HA.

[1]张惠，于海琴. 水中天然有机物对超滤膜污染的研究[J]. 工业用水与废水，2007,38（4）：98-101.
[2]刘振中，宋刚福. 水源水中腐殖酸的危害及去除方法[J]. 江西科学，2006,24（4）：247-252.
[3]张显球，张林生，吕锡武. 纳滤对水中有机微污染的去除效果与应用[J]. 水处理技术，2005,31（2）：62-65.
[4]吴一蘩，高乃云，乐林生编著. 饮用水消毒技术[M]. 化学工业出版社，2006.
[5] Zularisam A W, Ismail A F, Salim R. Behaviors of natural organic matter in membrane filtration for surface water treatment-a review[J]. Desalination, 2006, 194(1-3): 211-231. 
[6]张玲玲，顾平．微滤和超滤膜技术处理微污染水源水的研究进展[J]．膜科学与技术，2008, 28(5): 103-109.
[7]Wang Y, Xu X M, Jegatheesan V,et al. Effects of coagulants on the fouling and performance of ultrafiltration(UF) membranes[J]. Desalination and water treatment, 2009, 11(1-3): 32-37.
[8]Cho J,Amy G, Pellegrino J. Membrane filtration of natural organic matter: factors and mechanisms affecting rejection and flux decline with charged ultrafiltration (UF) membrane[J].  J. Membr. Sci., 2000, 164(1-2): 89-110.
[9] 侯娟，邵嘉慧，何义亮． 荷电超滤膜对天然有机物去除及膜污染行为的影响[J] ．环境科学，0250-3301（2010）06-1525-07.
[10] Shao J, Hou J, Song H.  Comparison of humic acid rejection and flux decline during filtration with negatively charged and uncharged ultrafiltration membranes[J]. Water Res. 45 (2011) 473–482.
[11] Song H, Shao J.  Natural organic matter removal and flux decline with charged ultrafiltration and nanofiltration membranes[J].  J. Membr. Sci. 376 (2011) 179–187.
[12]Zou H, Luo Q, Zhou D.  Affinity membrane chromatography for the analysis and purification of proteins[J]. J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods, 49 (2001) 199-240.
[13]Meta A, Zydney A Z.  Effect of spacer arm length on the performance of charge-modified ultrafiltration membranes[J]. J. Membr. Sci., 2008, 313: 304-314.
[14] 张述林，罗启芳. 水生腐殖酸净化技术研究进展［J］.城市环境，2002,16（6）：7-9.
[15]赵媛媛，王志，王纪孝. 含腐殖酸类有机物模拟废水超滤过程研究[J] 膜科学与技术，2006,26(1):42-46.
[16]Yuan W.  Fouling by humic acids during ultrafiltration and microfiltration for water treatment [D]. Delaware: University of Delaware,2001.
[17] van Reis .  Charged filtration membranes and uses therefor[P]. United States. US 7,001,550 B2.
[18]Douglas B B,Andrew L Z. Buffer effects on the zeta potential of ultrafiltration membranes[J]. J Membr Sci,2000,172:39-48
[19]Zularisam A W，Ismaila A F,Salimc M R,et al. The effects of natural organic matter(NOM) fractions on fouling characteristics and flux recovery of ultrafiltration membranes[J]. Desalination, 2007,212:191-208.
[20]罗欢，刘广立，刘杰. 不同超滤膜过滤天然有机物的膜污染特性研究[J]. 环境污染治理技术与设备，2005,6(5):46-50.
[21]Dong B Z, Chen Y, Gao N Y,et al. Effect of pH on UF membrane fouling[J]. Desalination, 2006,195:201-208.
[22] 岳兰秀.  红枫湖、百花湖水中溶解有机物相对分子质量分布特征及环境地球化学意义[J] 贵阳:中国科学院地球化学研究所,2004.