| Literature DB >> 22859954 |
Wang Jing-Feng1, Qiu Zhi-Gang, Chen Zhi-Qiang, Li Jun-Wen, Zhang Yi-Hong, Wang Xuan, Zhang Bin.
Abstract
The goal of this study is to investigate the effect of inoculating granules on reducing membrane fouling. In order to evaluate the differences in performance between flocculent sludge and aerobic granular sludge in membrane reactors (MBRs), two reactors were run in parallel and various parameters related to membrane fouling were measured. The results indicated that specific resistance to the fouling layer was five times greater than that of mixed liquor sludge in the granular MBR. The floc sludge more easily formed a compact layer on the membrane surface, and increased membrane resistance. Specifically, the floc sludge had a higher moisture content, extracellular polymeric substances concentration, and negative surface charge. In contrast, aerobic granules could improve structural integrity and strength, which contributed to the preferable permeate performance. Therefore, inoculating aerobic granules in a MBR presents an effective method of reducing the membrane fouling associated with floc sludge the perspective of from the morphological characteristics of microbial aggregates.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22859954 PMCID: PMC3408440 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0040819
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Figure 1Changes in membrane specific permeate flux in both MBRs.
Figure 2Specific resistance of different-size sludge particles in the GMBR at the steady flux stage.
Figure 3Size distribution particles in the contaminated layer of sludge and the mixed liquor sludge in the GMBR.
Figure 4Specific resistance of the contaminated layer of sludge and the mixed liquor sludge in the GMBR.
Characteristics of different sludge size fractions within the contaminated layer on the membrane surfacea.
| Sludge size (mm) | Moisture content (%) | VSS/MLSS (%) | EPS (mg/L) | Sludge surface charge (meq/L) |
|
| 99.85±0.04 | 94.55±0.63 | 198.20±3.07 | −0.957±0.029 |
|
| 99.36±0.05 | 95.10±0.24 | 110.13±1.59 | −0.831±0.028 |
|
| 98.73±0.09 | 96.10±0.23 | 111.18±2.30 | −0.676±0.036 |
|
| 98.61±0.12 | 96.55±0.27 | 87.53±0.62 | −0.326±0.031 |
|
| 97.91±0.06 | 96.68±0.19 | 96.54±1.62 | −0.252±0.030 |
Values are (n = 3).
Figure 5Schematic diagram of the MBR system.