United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
 Industrial Environmental Research
 Laboratory
 Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
EPA-600/S2-81-132  Sept. 1981
Project  Summary
Demonstration of  Zinc
Cyanide Recovery  Using
Reverse Osmosis  and
Evaporation

Kenneth J. McNulty and John W. Kubarewicz
  A field test was conducted to
demonstrate closed-loop recovery of
zinc cyanide rinsewater at a job shop
plating facility. Since the zinc cyanide
bath  operates at room  temperature
with very little evaporation from the
bath, reverse osmosis (RO) treatment
of the  rinsewater must be supple-
mented by evaporation in order to
achieve the volume reduction neces-
sary for return of a concentrate to the
plating  bath. The permeate from the
RO unit was recycled to the first rinse
after plating, while the distillate from
the evaporator was recycled to  the
second rinse after plating. Contin-
uous, unattended  operation of this
system  was demonstrated with no
adverse effects on plating quality.
  Spiral-wound  PA-300 membrane
modules were used in the RO unit.
Periodic tests were conducted through-
out the demonstration to characterize
membrane performance under stan-
dard conditions. These tests indicated
a gradual loss in membrane flux and
rejection. After 3,000 hours of  ex-
posure to the rinsewater, the  mem-
branes were cleaned byflushing with a
cleaning solution. The cleaning resulted
in nearly complete restoration of flux
and rejection. The gradual loss in
membrane performance is thus attrib-
utable to fouling of the membrane by
particulates in the rinsewater. Such
fouling can be reduced by better pre-
filtration and reversed by periodic
cleaning.
  The economics of the combined RO
evaporation system were assessed for
a system designed to provide rinsing
equivalent to the present two-stage
counter-current rinse at the demon-
stration site. The analysis showed that
the total operating cost (including
amortization) was somewhat less for
the combined RO evaporation system
than for evaporation alone. The mini-
mum cost occurred for 90% water
recovery in the RO system. However,
credits for rinsewater recovery were
insufficient  to completely off-set the
total operating  cost of the recovery
system.
  This report was submitted in fulfill-
ment of EPA Grant Number R805300
by The American Electroplaters'
Society, Inc. (AES) under the partial
sponsorship of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. This report covers
the period August 24, 1977, to
November 24. 1978, and work was
completed as of February 7, 1979.

  This Project Summary was devel-
oped by EPA's Industrial Environmen-
tal Research Laboratory. Cincinnati,
OH. to announce key findings of the
research project that is fully docu-
mented in a separate report of the
same title (see Project Report ordering
information at back).

-------
 V  -/
 ? '  *
e:-.
  f  "*"
    Introduction
      Wastewater treatment technologies
    for the  electroplating industry can be
    broadly  classified  as end-of-pipe de-
    struction processes or in-plant recovery
    processes. The end-of-pipe destruction
    processes treat a total shop effluent to
    remove  a mixture of heavy metals. At
    present  it  is neither technically nor
    economically feasible to recover and
    recycle  metals from the end-of-pipe
    processes (1). In-plant recovery
    processes,  however, treat  rinsewater
    from a  specific plating bath (or  other
    operation) making it possible to recover
    and return  the heavy metals to the
    plating bath.
      Because of the inherent disadvantage
    of end-of-pipe treatment  —  loss of
    valuable plating  chemicals, cost of
    treatment chemicals, cost of sludge
    disposal — increasing attention has
    been focused on closed-loop recovery
    methods. In many cases, the economics
    of closed-loop recovery have been very
    favorable, resulting in rapid payback on
    the capital  investment for recovery
    equipment (2).
      Aside  from  a few applications in
    which  closed-loop recovery can  be
    achieved  by countercurrent  rinsing
    alone, some technique must be used to
    remove  the dissolved plating chemicals
    from the  rinsewater. Although  other
    techniques  are  under development,
    evaporation, reverse osmosis (RO), and
    ion exchange are the most commonly
    used piocesses for rinsewater recovery
    .(1,3).  Each  of these techniques has
    particular advantages and disadvantages
    and the best technique or combination
    of techniques  will depend  on factors
    specific  to each application.
      A number of advantages can be cited
    for the use of RO in rinsewater recovery.
    These  include low capital  cost, low
    energy and operating costs, and minimal
    space requirements.  However, there
    are also some limitations.  The major
    limitations for RO are:
       1. The membrane modules deterio-
         rate with time and require periodic
         replacement. The rate of deterio-
         ration  depends  on the type of
         membrane, the rinsewater pH and
         temperature, and the concentration
         of other reactants in the rinsewater
         such as oxidants.
      2. Reverse osmosis cannot produce a
         highly concentrated stream  for
         recycle to the plating  bath. Thus
         for ambient temperature baths,
         RO must be  supplemented with
     some other concentration tech-
     nique,  such as evaporation, in
     order to close the loop.
  To date, RO has been applied primarily
to the recovery of nickel rinsewaters.
For nickel, the rinsewaters are relatively
mild in pH (4-6) resulting in acceptable
life for  the  conventional  commercial
membranes (cellulose acetate and
aromatic polyamide). In addition, nickel
baths operate at elevated temperatures
where substantial evaporation occurs,
and  closed-loop operation  can be
achieved with RO alone.
  Several programs, jointly sponsored
by EPA and AES, have been conducted
to evaluate the applicability of  RO to
plating baths other than nickel (4,5,6).
Laboratory tests were conducted  with a
variety of newly developed membranes
and rinsewaters with extreme pH levels
(6). These tests indicated  that of the
membranes  tested,  the PA-300 was
superior to the other membranes for
treatment  of  copper  cyanide, zinc
cyanide, and chromic acid rinsewaters.
The PA-300  membrane  has since been
commercialized (currently designated
TFC-PA; manufactured by Fluid Systems
Division of UOP) and is available in  a
spiral-wound modular configuration.
  A  field test was undertaken  to
evaluate the PA-300 membrane module
for recovery of zinc cyanide rinsewater
under realisitic conditions. Zinc cyanide
was selected  because of the large
volume of zinc cyanide plating done by
the industry and because the high pH of
the rinsewaters would provides "worst
case" test of the membrane for  resist-
ance to alkaline conditions. Since the
zinc cyanide bath operates at room
temperature, it was necessary to use an
evaporator to supplement RO treatment
and achieve the level of concentration
necessary for closed-loop operation.
This report summarizes and discusses
the results of this field test.

Methods and Materials
  A mobile RO test system was leased
from Abcor, Inc., and an evaporator was
leased from Wastesaver Corporation for
the duration  of the field test. These two
units were installed  on an automatic
rack, zinc cyanide plating  line at New
England Plating Co. in Worcester,
Massachusetts. The overall schematic
of the installation is shown in Figure 1.
Feed to the RO system was withdrawn
from Rinse Tank #1 and separated by
the RO system into a permeate stream
and a concentrate stream. For purposes
of design, it was assumed that the RO
system would produce about 7.5 Ipm (2
gpm) of permeate and would operate at
90% conversion. (Conversion is defined
as the ratio of permeate flow to feed
flow.) Thus the RO system would be fed
at the rate of 8.4 Ipm (2.22 gpm) and
would produce concentrate  at the rate
of .8 Ipm (0.22 gpm). The permeate was
returned to Rinse Tank #1  and the
concentrate was fed to the evaporator.
  Since drag-in and drag-out were
essentially identical for the plating bath
and the rate of evaporation was neg-
ligible, there was no room in the plating
bath for  a concentrate stream. If the
evaporator were fed only RO  concen-
trate,  it would have to evaporate it to
dryness in order to prevent eventual
overflow of the bath. In order to prevent
precipitation of plating chemicals in the
evaporator a  3.8 Ipm  (1 gpm) purge
stream was circulated from  the plating
bath through the evaporator and carried
the plating salts introduced with the RO
concentrate back to the  plating bath.
That is, the evaporator concentrate was
higher in concentration than the plating
bath by the amount added  by the RO
concentrate.  The distillate from the
evaporator was collected in a  holding
tank and added at a controlled rate to
Rinse Tank #2. A float valve operating
off the level in  Rinse Tank #1  insured
that the  rate of RO concentrate pro-
duction was exactly balanced by the rate
of distillate returned to Rinse Tank #2. A
slight excess of distillate was produced
to insure that  the holding tank would
always remain full; and the excess was
permitted to overflow into the plating
bath (.08 Ipm). The steam rate was cut
back  to  minimize  overflow from the
holding tank.
  A flow schematic of the RO system is
shown in Figure 2. Feed from the first.
rinse  tank was withdrawn by a booster
pump and passed through two string-
wound cartridge filters in parallel. Both
1-/u and  20-fj filters were  used at
different times during the field test.
Excess flow from the booster pump was
returned to the rinse tank. After pre-
filtration,  the feed  was pressurized to
48.6  atm  (700  psi) with a multi-stage
centrifugal feed pump and  passed
through three 102 mm (4-inch)diameter,
spiral-wound, PA-300 modules arranged
in series. Most of the concentrate frpm
the third  module was recycled to the
suction of the  feed pump in  order to
maintain the required feed flow rate>
through the modules. A heat exchanger*

-------
                        Distillate
                        0.90 Ipm
                       (0.24 gpm)
                                Overflow
                                0.075 Ipm
                                (0.02 gpm)
                      Plating Bath
   Evaporator
   Concentrate
     3.8 Ipm
    (1.0 gpm)
                                           Distillate
                                           0.83 Ipm
                                          (0.22 gpm)
                                           Rinse
                                          Tank #2
Evaporator
Feed
3.86 Ipm
(1.02 gpm)
                                           EO
                                          Feed
                                         8.4 Ipm
                                        (2.22 gpm)
                                    Permeate
                                     7.8 Ipm
                                     (2 gpm)
                                     RO
                                 Concentrate
                                  0.83 Ipm
                                  (0.22 gpm)
Figure  1.    Overall schematic of RO/evaporator operation.
in the recirculation loop removed heat
generated by the energy input of the
pumps. A small  flow  of concentrate
from the third module  was fed to the
evaporator (see  Figure  1), and the
permeate from the three modules was
combined and returned to the first rinse
tank. The instrumentation and controls
for the RO system are shown in Figure
2.
  In  order to characterize membrane
performance  with  a  standard feed
solution, the RO system was periodically
operated in a total recycle mode using
the auxiliary feed tank. For this mode of
   ration, the booster pump recycle line
                 was closed off, the concentrate line to
                 the evaporator was opened, and the
                 permeate was returned to the auxiliary
                 tank  rather than the  rinse tank. The
                 standard solution (generally a portion of
                 plating bath diluted to 10% by volume or
                 original bath strength) was charged to
                 the auxiliary tank and  the system was
                 operated with total recycle until steady
                 state was achieved. At  steady state, the
                 permeate flow rate for each module was
                 measured, and samples of the feed and
                 permeate from each module  were
                 obtained for analysis.
                  Typical operating  conditions for both
                 closed-loop and total recycle were:
     Feed Pressure 48.6 atm (700 psi)
     Recirculation
     Flow Rate     37.8 Ipm (10 gpm)
     Temperature   21-32°C (70-90°F)
     Concentrate   0.75 Ipm (0.2 gpm)
     Flow Rate     closed-loop only

   The flow schematic for the evaporator
 is shown  in Figure 3. Steam  was fed
 through a  pressure reducing valve to a
 tube bundle submerged in the boiler
 section  of the evaporator, and  steam
 condensate was returned to the plant
 boiler. For most installations, a cooling
 tower is used to cool the water  which is
 recirculated through  the condenser
 section of the evaporator. However, for
 this installation it was more convenient
 to use recirculated chilled water since it
 was readily available at the installation
 site and the chiller had sufficient excess
 capacity. The evaporator was  main-
 tained  under vacuum  by circulating
 water through  an eductor.  Cooling
 water was added to the  eductor tank to
 remove the energy input of the eductor
 circulation  pump. Feed to the evaporator
 was controlled by a level switch (LS) and
 solenoid valve. Upon low level signal,
 the solenoid valve opened and feed was
 drawn by vacuum into the evaporator.
 The  distillate from evaporation of the
 feed condensed, was collected in a tray
 below the condenser, and was contin-
 uously pumped back to the second rinse
 after  plating (see  Figure 1). The con-
 centrate from the  boiler section of the
 evaporator  was  continuously pumped
 back to the plating bath.
  Typical operating conditions for the
 evaporator were:
    Vacuum      0.87 atm abs.
                  (26-27 in. Hg)
    Temperature  38-43°C
                  (100-110° F)
                  <1.3 atm abs.
                  «19.7psig)
Steam
Pressure
Concentrate
Flow Rate
                  3.8 Ipm (1 gpm)
  During the field test, the RO modules
were cleaned using a cleaning sequence
recommended by the membrane manu-
facturer. The modules were first flushed
with  189 liters  (50 gal) of water to
remove the plating chemicals. A 0.1%
by volume solution of Triton X-100, a
non-ionic surfactant, was prepared and
recirculated through the modules  at a
pressure of 48.6  atm  abs (700 psi), a
flow rate of 37.9  Ipm  (10 gpm), and a
temperature of 49°C  (120°F) for 45
minutes. After flushing with another

-------
                                              Permeate
                                              Concentrate to Evaporator
   A ux.
   Tank
                                      P       - Pressure Gauge
                                      AP     - Differential Pressure Gauge
                                      PS     - Pressure Switch
                                      T       - Temperature Gauge
                                      TS     - Temperature Switch
                                      TS     - Temperature Wtitch
                                      F       - Flow Meter
                                      CC     - Conductivity Cell
Figure 2.    Flow schematic for RO demonstration system.
189  liters of water, a 2% citric acid
solution was prepared and adjusted to
pH 3.0 with ammonium hydroxide. This
solution was  recirculated through the
modules at the same conditions and for
the same time as the Triton  X-100.
Following  the  citric acid cleaning the
system  was again flushed with water
and  returned to treatment of zinc
cyanide rinsewater. Since the PA-300
membrane  is  rapidly degraded  by
chlorine, all water used for flushing and
preparing  cleaning solutions was de-
chlorinated by the addition of sodium
sulfite.
  Samples collected during the field
test  were analyzed  for zinc (atomic
absorption), free cyanide (selective ion
electrode), total solids  (gravimetic
determination of residue), conductivity
(conductivity bridge), and pH (electrode).
  The nominal  composition  of  the
plating bath was:
                          CN (as NaCN)

                          Caustic

                          Brightener
                          (700 Special)
                 60,000 mg/l
                 8.0 oz/gal
                 75,000 mg/l
                 10.0 oz/gal
                       4 ml/I
                 4 gal/1000 gal
    Zn (as metal)
20,000 mg/l
2.7 oz/gal
                      In addition to these compounds, poly-
                      sulfide was regularly added to the bath
                      for purification, and  the  bath also
                      contained a large quantity of carbonates.
                      The total solids concentration of the
                      bath was in the vicinity of 350,000 mg/l
                      (35% by weight).
Conclusions
  Closed-loop recovery of zinc cyanide
rinsewaters can be  achieved  with  a
combined RO/evaporator system. Con-
tinuous and unattended operation of the
system  was demonstrated over one-
week periods (Monday through Friday,
three shifts per day). No adverse effects
on plating quality were noted during the
demonstration.
  The single-effect vacuum evaporatoi
was  operated at about one-half of its
rated capacity,  and the vacuum was
sufficient to keep the vaporizatior
temperature below 43°C (110°F).  Tht
quality of the distillate was considerec
quite suitable for final rinsing.
  Tests were conducted periodically t<
determine the flux and rejection  per
formance of the three PA-300 spiral
wound modules used in the RO system
Results for Modules #1 and #2 were it
close agreement throughout the dem
onstration. Module #3 was concluded t
be defective from the  outset of thi
program and was removed after 3,00l
hours.
  The flux and rejection of Modules #
and  #2 gradually declined during th
demonstration. Over the first  3,00
hours of exposure, the flux declined t
about one-half of its original value an
the zinc rejection, for example, decline
from 99% to 97%. At 3,000 hours, th
membranes were cleaned by flushin
with a cleaning solution. The clean!

-------
 T      - Temperature Gauge
 P      - Pressure Gauge
 F      - Flow Meter
 LW    - Level Switch
Chilled
Water
      Steam
      Supply
Condensate
  Return
                       Pressure
                       Reducing
                         Valve
\
r
Eductor

Tank
                                                                                            r-X— Cooling Water
                                                              Drain
                                                                                           Distillate to
                                                                                           2nd Rinse
Plationg
Bath
Concentrate 4*
Feed T

Concentrate
from RO
 Figure 3.    Flow schematic for evaporator.
resulted in nearly complete restoration
of flux and rejection. The gradual loss in
membrane performance is thus attrib-
utable to fouling of the membrane by
participates  in  the rinsewater. Such
fouling can be reduced by better pre-
filtration  and reversed  by periodic
cleaning.
  Following the field test, Module  #2
was cut  open  and unwound  for  in-
spection. The  membrane was fouled
with a thin layer of what appeared to be
sulfide sludge. (Polysulfide is used as a
bath  purifier). Examination  of  the
module internals  revealed that some
deterioration in the strength of  the
membrane backing material had  oc-
curred. However,  this produced  no
gross effects on the performance of the
modules as observed during the field
test.
  The economics of the combined RO
evaporation system were assessed for a
system designed  to provide rinsing
equivalent to the  present two-stage
counter-current rinse at the demonstra-
    tion site. The analysis"bhowed that the
    total operating cost (including amorti-
    zation) was somewhat less for the
    combined RO evaporation system than
    for evaporation alone. Total operating
    costs were calculated for various RO
    system  water recoveries,  and the
    minimum cost occurred for 90% water
    recovery in the RO system. However,
    credits  for  rinsewater recovery  were
    insufficient to  completely  off-set the
    total operating cost  of  the  recovery
    system.  Energy costs for evaporation
    using a double effect evaporator were 4-
    5 times greater  than those for RO.
    Continuing  escalation of energy  costs
    would provide further incentive  for a
    combined RO evaporation system.

    Recommendations
      On the basis of this field  test and
    previous laboratory tests (6) the PA-300
    membrane can be recommended for the
    treatment of cyanide rinsewaters on a
    commercial scale. Application to copper
    cyanide recovery appears to be partic-
ularly attractive because of: 1 )the lower
pH  of copper cyanide relative to zinc
cyanide, 2) the higher value of copper
relative to zinc,  and 3)  the higher
evaporation rate from the copper bath
which would permit closed-loop opera-
tion with RO alone (no  evaporator
required).
  Additional development  of the PA-
300 or similar membranes is recom-
mended with particular  emphasis on
the development of modules containing
materials which are highly resistant to
pH  extremes. In  particular,  a  more
alkaline-resistant membrane backing
material  should   be developed for
cyanide applications.
  Data should be obtained on the life of
PA-300 (or similar) modules for longer
exposure times (>4,200  hours). This
data can  be  conveniently and  inex-
pensively  obtained by "soaking" the
module in a solution of the plating bath
diluted to simulate  concentrated  rinse-
water.  The flux and  rejection of the
modules  can then  be determined

-------
periodically. These soak tests will
provide information on the resistance of
various module components to attack by
the major constituents of the bath (e.g.
OH').
  In view of the good acid resistance
exhibited by the PA-300 membrane in
laboratory tests (6), it is recommended
that a field test and long-term soaktests
be  conducted using  PA-300 modules
and low pH rinsewater  such as acid
copper. (In future field tests, the feed to
the modules should  be  pretreated  by
passage through a ]/j filter. The objec-
tive of these tests would be to extend the
applicability of RO to pH levels below 2.5
(the lower limit for cellulose acetate
membranes).
  For evaporative recovery, develop-
ment of a  low capacity, low cost,
mechanical vapor  recompression
evaporator is recommended. This type
of  evaporator is  highly efficient and
could be  operated at a significantly
lower cost  than  the combined  RO/
evaporator system tested in this program.

References
1. Skovronek, H.S., and  M.K. Stinson.
   Advanced Treatment Approaches for
   Metal Finishing Wastewaters  (Part
   II). Plating and Surface Finishing, 64
   (11):  24-31, 1977.
2. Anonymous. Recovery Paysl Plating
   and Surface Finishing, 66 (2): 45-48,
   1979.
3. Hall, E.P.,  D.J. Lizdas, and  E.E.
   Auerbach. Plating  and  Surface
   Finishing, 66 (2); 49-53, 1979
4. Donnelly, R.G., R.L. Goldsmith, K.J.
   McNulty, and M. Tan.  Reverse
   Osmosis Treatment of Electroplating
   Wastes.  Plating, 61  (5): 422-432,
   1974.
5. McNulty, K.J.,  R.L. Goldsmith, A
   Gollan, S. Hossain, and D. Grant.
   Reverse Osmosis  Field Test: Treat-
   ment of Copper Cyanide Rinse
   Waters. EPA-600/2-77-170, U.S.
   Environmental Protection Agency,
   Cincinnati, Ohio, 1977. p. 89.
6. McNulty,  K.J., P.R. Hoover, and R.L.
   Goldsmith. Evaluation of Advanced
   Reverse  Osmosis Membranes for
   the Treatment of Electroplating
   Wastes. In: First Annual Conference
   on Advanced Pollution  Control for
   the  Metal Finishing Industry.  EPA-
   600/8-78-010, U.S. Environmental
   Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio,
    1978. pp. 66-75.
Kenneth J. McNulty and John W. Kubarewioz are with Walden Division of Abcor,
  Inc., Wilmington. MA 01887.
Mary Stinson is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
The complete report, entitled "Demonstration of Zinc Cyanide Recovery Using
  Reverse Osmosis and Evaporation," (Order No. PB 81-231 243; Cost: $6.50,
  subject to change) will be available only from:
       National Technical Information Service
       5285 Port Royal Road
       Springfield,  VA 22161
       Telephone: 703-487-4650
The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
       Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory
       U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       Cincinnati, OH 45268
                               •ft U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, 1981 — 757-012/7360

-------
United States                          Center for Environmental Research                                     Feesfpaid"
Environmental Protection                Information                                                         cn?,i,«nm»r>»
Agency                               Cincinnati OH 45268                                                 Protection
                                                                                                        Agency
                                                                                             	EPA 335

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300

RETURN POSTAGE GUARANTEED                                                                           _. . .  _.
                                                                                                        Third-Class
                                                                                                        Bulk Rate
            US  tHA  KtblUN  V
            23U  b  UtAHdUHiM  ST
            CHICAGO  1L   6060a

-------