Conference Paper

Comparison of Nitrogen Removal in an AN/AO and an AO Submerged Membrane Bioreactor in Treating Bathing Wastewater

DOI: 10.1109/ICBBE.2008.1014 Conference: Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering, 2008. ICBBE 2008. The 2nd International Conference on
Source: IEEE Xplore

ABSTRACT Simultaneous nitrification and denitrification (SND) and traditional nitrification and denitrification (TND) were studied in lab-scale and the full-scale submerged membrane bioreactor (MBR) tests for the bathing wastewater treatment under the same condition. As a result, the removal of the nitrogen was not only the contribution of the anoxic (AN) tank, but also the aeration (AO) tank because of its SND effect. From the two tests, it can be drawn that there would be two methods to remove the nitrogen. One was nitrification and denitrification in the AO tank and AN tank, which contributed mainly in nitrogen removal. The other was simultaneous nitrification and denitrification occurred in the AO tank, although its effect was not very significant. The contribution ratios of the two kind's nitrogen removal ways in treating the bathing wastewater were about 70% and 30%, respectively. At the same time, the main pollutions in bathing wastewater such as COD and LAS were also studied systemically in the two scale tests. As a result, there had a good removal (over 95%) to the pollutions, in which the microorganisms played a greater role than membrane.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The concept of critical flux (Jc) has been recognised as a convenient parameter for characterising fouling in membrane bioreactors (MBR), although it has recently been shown that membrane fouling takes place in this specific process under sub-critical operating conditions. It is also generally understood that the permeability of membranes used for biomass separation membrane bioreactors is influenced by the method and rate of aeration, the nature and concentration of the sludge and the membrane characteristics. In this study, Jc values have been determined using the flux-step method for various operating conditions of membrane pore and lumen size, mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS) concentration and aeration rates, and sub-critical operation has also been investigated. Results from factorial experimental design analysis have revealed that (1) the impact of membrane pore size on Jc is observed only at low pore size and/or low MLSS levels, (2) no significant difference is apparent for a shift from 4 to 8 gMLSS l−1, but a significant increase of Jc arises for an MLSS increase to 12 g l−1, and (3) the MLSS effect on Jc was generally around double that of the aeration effect. The calculation of mean sub-critical values for a range of pressure-related critical parameters revealed reduced short-term fouling at larger-pore sizes, but that this may be coupled with internal membrane fouling.
    Journal of Membrane Science 07/2003; DOI:10.1016/S0376-7388(03)00164-9 · 4.91 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Membranes can be installed in the clarifier (or aeration tank) of an existing activated sludge plant to enhance the biomass separation function of the system, thereby effectively overcoming any operating constraints associated with sludge settleability. The resulting upgraded plant can be operated at high biomass concentrations (10–20 gMLSS/L), leading to an increase in its treatment capacity. The membranes also ensure a treated water consistently free of suspended solids and a superior disinfection performance. The system offers an enhanced operating flexibility, and allows to operate at high sludge ages leading to a low excess sludge production.Such an immersed membrane activated sludge process (BIOSEP®) has been developed and applied to the treatment of raw sewage. When treating screened raw sewage with this process, with a sludge concentration of 15 gMLSS/L and a volumetric loading of 1.2 kgCOD/m3/d, a 96% COD reduction and a 95% Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) reduction have been obtained. The disinfection performance of the system was over 6 Log removal for fecal coliforms. The resulting production of sludge was 0.20 kgMLSS/kgCOD.Two desk case studies are given for 900 m3/day upgraded plants. In one case, the primary objective was to increase the treatment efficiency and develop nutrient removal for the original plant, while in the other case the primary objective was to increase the capacity of the original 460 m3/day plant.
    Water Science & Technology 01/1998; 37(9):89-95. DOI:10.1016/S0273-1223(98)00275-3 · 1.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The innovative process SAM (sequencing anoxic/anaerobic membrane bioreactor) was developed to enhance biological phosphorus removal (EBPR), and its performance was investigated. A laboratory-scale experiment was performed to treat the household wastewater including toilet-flushing water. The aerobic zone with the submerged membrane was continuously aerated fornitrification and phosphorous uptake as well as fouling control. The mixed liquor was recycled from the aerobic zone to the anoxic/anaerobic sequencing zone intermittently to alternate the anoxic conditions for denitrification and anaerobic conditions for phosphorus release. During the operation, the flux was maintained almost constant at 10 L/m2/h (30 L/d). The modified Luzack-Ettinger (MLE) type MBR process, in which the mixed liquor was recycled continuously from aerobic zone to anoxic zone, was also introduced to compare with the SAM process. The phosphorous removal was much better in the SAM process, yielding 93% removal efficiency. By supplying strict anaerobic conditions without an internal recycle, the phosphorus release was induced in a significant amount, resulting in excellent uptake of phosphorus in the aerobic zone. The nitrogen removal efficiency of the SAM was about 60%, which was slightly lower than that of the MLE-type MBR process. However, it should be noted that the hydraulic retention time of the SAM process in the anoxic condition was 23 times shorter than that of MLE-type MBR process.
    Desalination 08/2003; DOI:10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00415-6 · 3.96 Impact Factor