Response Surface Methodology for Modeling Bisphenol A Removal Using Ultrafiltration Membrane System

  • Mimi Suliza Muhamad
  • Nuramidah Hamidon
  • Mohd Razman Salim
  • Zulkifli Yusop
  • Woei Jye Lau
  • Tony HadibarataEmail author


In this work, the effects of various operating parameters (pressure, pH, BPA concentration, and filtration time) toward bisphenol A (BPA) removal via ultrafiltration (UF) membrane system were investigated using response surface methodology (RSM). Historical data design of RSM was used to obtain the interaction between variables and response as well as optimizing the process. The analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed that the third-order polynomial model was significant in which pH and filtration time were identified as significant terms that influence BPA removal. The 3D response surface plots revealed the two-factor interaction between independent and dependent variables. The optimization process of the model predicted optimum conditions of 99.61% BPA removal at 1 bar, pH 6.7, 10 μg/L BPA concentration, and 10-min filtration time. The predicted optimum conditions for BPA removal were consistent with the obtained experimental values, indicating reliable application of historical data design RSM for modeling BPA removal in UF membrane system.


BPA removal Response surface methodology Variables Response Historical data design 



concentration of feed (μg/L)


concentration of permeate (μg/L)


removal of BPA (%)


number of variables


constant coefficient


linear coefficients


quadratic coefficients


interaction coefficients









The authors wish to thank the Universiti Teknologi Malaysia and Ministry of Education Malaysia (MOE) for providing LRGS grant (R.J30000.7809.4L810) for Water Security entitled Protection of Drinking Water: Source Abstraction and Treatment (203/PKT/6720006) as financial support of this project.


  1. Alventosa-deLara, E., Barredo-Damas, S., Alcaina-Miranda, M. I., & Iborra-Clar, M. I. (2012). Ultrafiltration technology with a ceramic membrane for reactive dye removal: optimization of membrane performance. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 209-210, 492–500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bezerra, M. A., Santelli, R. E., Oliveira, E. P., Villar, L. S., & Escaleira, L. A. (2008). Review: response surface methodology (RSM) as a tool for optimization in analytical chemistry. Talanta, 76(5), 965–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bing-zhi, D., Lin, W., & Nai-yun, G. (2008). The removal of bisphenol A by ultrafiltration. Desalination, 221(1–3), 312–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bing-zhi, D., Hua-qiang, C., Lin, W., Sheng-ji, X., & Nai-yun, G. (2010). The removal of bisphenol A by hollow fiber microfiltration membrane. Desalination, 250(2), 693–697.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Careghini, A., Mastorgio, A. F., Saponaro, S., & Sezenna, E. (2015). Bisphenol A, nonylphenols, benzophenones, and benzotriazoles in soils, groundwater, surface water, sediments, and food: a review. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(8), 5711–5741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen, H. W., Liang, C. H., Wu, Z. M., Chang, E. E., Lin, T. F., Chiang, P. C., & Wang, G. S. (2013). Occurrence and assessment of treatment efficiency of nonylphenol, octylphenol and bisphenol-A in drinking water in Taiwan. Science of the Total Environment, 449, 20–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Colin, A., Bach, C., Rosin, C., Munoz, J.-F., & Dauchy, X. (2014). Is drinking water a major route of human exposure to alkylphenol and bisphenol contaminants in France? Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 66, 86–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Deblonde, T., Cossu-Leguille, C., & Hartemann, P. (2011). Emerging pollutants in wastewater: a review of the literature. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, 214(6), 442–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Eladak, S., Grisin, T., Moison, D., Guerquin, M.-J., N’Tumba-Byn, T., Pozzi-Gaudin, S., Benachi, A., Livera, G., Rouiller-Fabre, V., & Habert, R. (2015). A new chapter in the bisphenol A story: bisphenol S and bisphenol F are not safe alternatives to this compound. Fertility and Sterility, 103(1), 11–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fan, Z., Hu, J., An, W., & Yang, M. (2013). Detection and occurrence of chlorinated byproducts of bisphenol a, nonylphenol, and estrogens in drinking water of China: comparison to the parent compounds. Environmental Science & Technology, 47, 10841–10850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gou, Y.-Y., Lin, S., Que, D. E., Tayo, L. L., Lin, D.-Y., Chen, K.-C., Chen, F.-A., Chiang, P.-C., Wang, G.-S., Hsu, Y.-C., Chuang, K. P., Chuang, C.-Y., Tsou, T.-C., & Chao, H.-R. (2016). Estrogenic effects in the influents and effluents of the drinking water treatment plants. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, 23(9), 8518–8528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gupta, V. K., Carrott, P. J. M., & Ribeiro Carrott, M. M. L. (2009). Low-cost adsorbents: growing approach to wastewater treatment—a review. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 39, 783–842.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hadibarata, T., & Kristanti, R. A. (2014). Potential of a white-rot fungus Pleurotus eryngii F032 for degradation and transformation of fluorene. Fungal Biology, 118(2), 222–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Heo, J., Flora, J. R. V., Her, N., Park, Y.-G., Cho, J., Son, A., & Yoon, Y. (2012). Removal of bisphenol A and 17β-estradiol in single walled carbon nanotubes–ultrafiltration (SWNTs–UF) membrane systems. Separation and Purification Technology, 90, 39–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huang, Y. Q., Wong, C. K. C., Zheng, J. S., Bouwman, H., Barra, R., Wahlstrom, B., Neretin, L., & Wong, M. H. (2012). Bisphenol A (BPA) in China: a review of sources, environmental levels, and potential human health impacts. Environment International, 42(1), 91–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jeirani, Z., Jan, B. M., Ali, B. S., Noor, I. M., See, C. H., & Saphanuchart, W. (2013). Prediction of the optimum aqueous phase composition of a triglyceride microemulsion using response surface methodology. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 19(4), 1304–1309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Landaburu-Aguirre, J., Pongrácz, E., Perämäki, P., & Keiski, R. L. (2010). Micellar-enhanced ultrafiltration for the removal of cadmium and zinc: use of response surface methodology to improve understanding of process performance and optimisation. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 180, 524–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lazim, Z. M., Hadibarata, T., Puteh, M. H., & Yusop, Z. (2015). Adsorption characteristics of bisphenol A onto low cost modified phyto-waste material in aqueous solution. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 226(34), 1–11.Google Scholar
  19. Michałowicz, J. (2014). Bisphenol A—sources, toxicity and biotransformation. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology, 37, 738–758.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Muhamad, M. S., Salim, M. R., & Lau, W.-J. (2015). Surface modification of SiO2 nanoparticles and its impact on the properties of PES-based hollow fiber membrane. RSC Advances, 5(72), 58644–58654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Muhamad, M. S., Salim, M. R., Lau, W. J., & Yusop, Z. (2016). A review on bisphenol A occurrences, health effects and treatment process via membrane technology for drinking water. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 23(12), 11549–11567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Myers, R. H., Montgomery, D. C., & Anderson-Cook, C. M. (2009). Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. In D. J. Balding, N. A. C. Cressie, G. M. Fitzmaurice, I. M. Johnstone, G. Molenberghs, D. W. Scott, et al. (Eds.), (3rd ed.). Wiley.Google Scholar
  23. Nam, S., Jo, B., Yoon, Y., & Zoh, K. (2014). Occurrence and removal of selected micropollutants in a water treatment plant. Chemosphere, 95, 156–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Nie, M., Yang, Y., Liu, M., Yan, C., Shi, H., Dong, W., & Zhou, J. L. (2014). Environmental estrogens in a drinking water reservoir area in shanghai: occurrence, colloidal contribution and risk assessment. Science of the Total Environment, 487, 785–791.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Padhye, L. P., Yao, H., Kung’u, F. T., & Huang, C.-H. (2014). Year-long evaluation on the occurrence and fate of pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disrupting chemicals in an urban drinking water treatment plant. Water Research, 51, 266–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Rajasimman, M., & Sangeetha, R. (2009). Optimization of process parameters for the extraction of chromium (VI) by emulsion liquid membrane using response surface methodology. Journal of Hazardous Materials, 168(1), 291–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rezg, R., El-Fazaa, S., Gharbi, N., & Mornagui, B. (2014). Bisphenol A and human chronic diseases: current evidences, possible mechanisms, and future perspectives. Environment International, 64, 83–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rochester, J. R. (2013). Bisphenol A and human health: a review of the literature. Reproductive Toxicology, 42, 132–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rubin, B. S. (2011). Bisphenol A: an endocrine disruptor with widespread exposure and multiple effects. Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 127(1–2), 27–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruby Figueroa, R. A., Cassano, A., & Drioli, E. (2011). Ultrafiltration of orange press liquor: optimization for permeate flux and fouling index by response surface methodology. Separation and Purification Technology, 80, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Smital, T. (2008). Acute and chronic effects of emerging contaminants. In D. Barcelo & M. Petrovic (Eds.), Emerging contaminants from industrial and municipal waste (5S/1., Vol. 5, pp. 105–142). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  32. Wirasnita, R., Hadibarata, T., Yusoff, A. R. M., & Yusop, Z. (2014). Removal of bisphenol A from aqueous solution by activated carbon derived from oil palm empty fruit bunch. Water, Air, and Soil Pollution, 225(2148), 1–12.Google Scholar
  33. Yamazaki, E., Yamashita, N., Taniyasu, S., Lam, J., Lam, P. K. S., Moon, H.-B., Jeong, Y., Kannan, P., Achyuthan, H., Munuswamy, N., & Kannan, K. (2015). Bisphenol A and other bisphenol analogues including BPS and BPF in surface water samples from Japan, China, Korea and India. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 122, 565–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Yang, J., Dai, J., & Li, J. (2013). Visible-light-induced photocatalytic reduction of Cr(VI) with coupled Bi2O3/TiO2 photocatalyst and the synergistic bisphenol A oxidation. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 20, 2435–2447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Yuliwati, E., Ismail, A. F., Lau, W. J., Ng, B. C., Mataram, A., & Kassim, M. A. (2012). Effects of process conditions in submerged ultrafiltration for refinery wastewater treatment: optimization of operating process by response surface methodology. Desalination, 287, 350–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Zhao, F.-B., Tang, C.-C., Liu, X.-Y., Shi, F.-J., Song, X.-R., Tian, Y., & Zhan-Shuang, L. (2015). Transportation characteristics of bisphenol A on ultrafiltration membrane with low molecule weight cut-off. Desalination, 362, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Advanced Technology Centre, Faculty of Engineering TechnologyUniversiti Tun Hussein Onn MalaysiaPagoh, MuarMalaysia
  2. 2.Centre for Environmental Sustainability and Water Security (IPASA), Research Institute for Sustainable Environment (RISE), Faculty of Civil EngineeringUniversiti Teknologi MalaysiaSkudaiMalaysia
  3. 3.Advanced Membrane Technology Research Centre (AMTEC)Universiti Teknologi MalaysiaSkudaiMalaysia
  4. 4.Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and ScienceCurtin UniversityMiriMalaysia

Personalised recommendations