| Literature DB >> 31315190 |
Linlin Yan1, Ruixue Li1, Yu Song1, Yanping Jia1, Zheng Li1, Lianfa Song2, Haifeng Zhang3.
Abstract
In this study, the characteristics of membrane foulants were analyzed with regard to morphology, composition, and aggregation ability during the three stages of transmembrane pressure (TMP) development (fast-slow-fast rise in TMP) in a steady operational membrane bioreactor (MBR). The results obtained show that the fouling layer at the slow TMP-increase stage possessed a higher average roughness (71.27 nm) and increased fractal dimension (2.33), which resulted in a low membrane fouling rate (0.87 kPa/d). A higher extracellular DNA (eDNA) proportion (26.12%) in the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) resulted in both higher zeta potential (-23.3 mV) and higher hydrophobicity (82.3%) for initial foulants, which induced and increased the protein proportion in the subsequent fouling layer (74.11%). Furthermore, the main composition of the EPS shifted from protein toward polysaccharide dominance in the final fouling layer. The aggregation test confirmed that eDNA was essential for foulant aggregation in the initial fouling layer, whereas ion interaction significantly affected foulant aggregation in the final fouling layer.Entities:
Keywords: aggregation; extracellular polymeric substances; membrane bioreactor; membrane foulants; transmembrane pressure
Year: 2019 PMID: 31315190 PMCID: PMC6680539 DOI: 10.3390/membranes9070085
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the membrane bioreactor (MBR) experimental setup. M1, M2, and M3 are identical membrane modules; TMP stands for transmembrane pressure; P stands for pressure meter.
Figure 2Change of the TMP during M3 operation. S1, S2, and S3 are samples scraped from M1, M2, and M3, respectively.
Roughness parameters and fractal dimensions during the different membrane fouling stages.
| Item | Virgin Membrane | M1 | M2 | M3 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average roughness (nm) | 37.35 ± 2.76 | 38.54 ± 1.25 | 71.27 ± 10.73 | 53.28 ± 3.65 |
| Fractal dimension ( | 2.35 | 2.25 | 2.33 | 2.31 |
Figure 3Variations of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) composition in the biofouling layer on the membrane surfaces. PN = proteins; PS = polysaccharides; eDNA = extracellular DNA.
Zeta potential, hydrophobicity, and Ca2+ content for membrane foulants at different stages.
| Item | S1 | S2 | S3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zeta potential (mV) | −23.3 | −18.7 | −14.8 |
| Hydrophobicity (%) | 82.3 | 88.1 | 56.3 |
| Ca2+ content (mg/g SS) | 1.3 | 4.7 | 23.6 |
Figure 4Aggregation efficiency of foulants without treatment after deoxyribonuclease (DNase) or ethylene diamine tetraacetic acid (EDTA) treatment.