| Literature DB >> 30544899 |
Jakub Drewnowski1, Jacek Makinia2, Lukasz Kopec3, Francisco-Jesus Fernandez-Morales4.
Abstract
The biodegradation of particulate substrates starts by a hydrolytic stage. Hydrolysis is a slow reaction and usually becomes the rate limiting step of the organic substrates biodegradation. The objective of this work was to evaluate a novel hydrolysis concept based on a modification of the activated sludge model (ASM2d) and to compare it with the original ASM2d model. The hydrolysis concept was developed in order to accurately predict the use of internal carbon sources in enhanced biological nutrient removal (BNR) processes at a full scale facility located in northern Poland. Both hydrolysis concepts were compared based on the accuracy of their predictions for the main processes taking place at a full-scale facility. From the comparison, it was observed that the modified ASM2d model presented similar predictions to those of the original ASM2d model on the behavior of chemical oxygen demand (COD), NH₄-N, NO₃-N, and PO₄-P. However, the modified model proposed in this work yield better predictions of the oxygen uptake rate (OUR) (up to 5.6 and 5.7%) as well as in the phosphate release and uptake rates.Entities:
Keywords: ASM2d; OUR; batch tests; denitrification; hydrolysis; internal C source
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30544899 PMCID: PMC6313309 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15122817
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Characteristics of the influent wastewater during studied periods at Debogorze WWTP.
| Definition | Symbol | Unit | Monthly Average Value | Source of Data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Influent COD | CODin | g COD/m3 | 856 | Laboratory analyses |
| Influent COD in filtered sample | CODf,in | g COD/m3 | 211 | Laboratory analyses |
| Volatile Fatty Acids | VFA | g/m3 | 167 | Laboratory analyses |
| Influent BOD5 | BOD5,in | g BOD5/m3 | 319 | Laboratory analyses |
| Influent Biodegradable COD | BCODin | g COD/m3 | 545 | Calculation [ |
| Effluent COD | CODout | g COD/m3 | 25.4 | Laboratory analyses |
| Effluent COD in filtered sample | CODf,out | g COD/m3 | 20.5 | Laboratory analyses |
| BOD5/BODU ratio | fBOD | – | 0.67 | Laboratory analyses |
WWTP: Wastewater treatment plant; COD: Chemical oxygen demand; BOD5: Five days biochemical oxygen demand; BODu: Ultimate biochemical oxygen demand.
Figure 1Scheme of the procedure followed in the modelization.
Figure 2Scheme of the ASM2d, in continuous lines, and the modification proposed in the hydrolysis process, in dashed lines. XI: Inert particulate substrate; XH: Heterotrophic organisms; XS: Particulate substrate; XSH: Rapidly hydrolysable substrate; SF: Fermentable substrate; SA: Fermentation product; K hyd: First Hydrolysis stage; K hyd,r: Second Hydrolysis stage.
Figure 3Experimental data and model predictions in the batch test treating SWW without pretreatment and after C–F. Solid lines corresponds to conventional ASM2d predictions and dashed ones to the modified ASM2d predictions. (a) PRR/anoxic PUR tests without pretreatment; (b) C–F treatment for PRR/anoxic PUR tests; (c) OUR tests without pretreatment; (d) C–F treatment for OUR tests.
Comparison of the calibration values at the original and the modified ASM2d.
| Symbol | Unit | Original ASM2d | Modified ASM2d |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| YH | gCOD/gCOD | 0.625 | 0.68 |
|
| |||
| khyd | 1/d | 2.5 | 2 |
| khyd,r | 1/d | - | 10 |
| ηfe | - | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| ηfer | - | - | 0.4 |
| kx | 1/d | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| kxr | 1/d | - | 0.03 |
| ηNO3, Hyd | - | 0.6 | 0.6 |
| ηNO3, Hydr | - | - | 0.4 |
| KO2 | g O2 /m3 | 0.2 | 0.2 |
| KNO3 | g N/m3 | 0.5 | 0.5 |
Differences in the ARD obtained with the original and modified ASM2d.
| Test | Process Rate | ARD Differences between the Original and Modified ASM2d [%] | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Settled Wastewater | Coagulation-Flocculation | ||||
| Fall | Spring | Fall | Spring | ||
|
| Nitrate utilization | 1.6 | 17.0 | 1.6 | 5.0 |
| Soluble COD utilization | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | |
|
| Phosphate release | 0.0 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.6 |
| Phosphate uptake | 2.2 | 0.6 | 3.3 | 1.1 | |
| Nitrate utilization | 9.6 | 9.0 | 6.8 | 1.0 | |
|
| Phosphate release | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.8 | 0.1 |
| Phosphate uptake | 5.9 | 1.9 | 11.3 | 4.4 | |
| Ammonia utilization | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 | |
| Oxygen uptake | 5.4 | 5.6 | 1.5 | 1.2 | |
|
| Oxygen uptake | 0.8 | 0.7 | 5.7 | 4.4 |
| SCOD utilization | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 1.1 | |
NUR: Nitrate uptake rate; PRR: Phosphorous release rate; PUR: Phosphorous uptake rate; OUR: oxygen uptake rate.