Literature DB >> 34150287

Comparing the performance of the conventional and fixed-bed membrane bioreactors for treating municipal wastewater.

Hamidreza Khastoo1, Amir Hessam Hassani2, Roya Mafigholami1, Rouhallah Mahmoudkhani3.   

Abstract

Membrane bioreactor (MBR) is relatively a new technology in wastewater treatment. It can efficiently remove soluble and suspended organics. However, it may constantly encounter bio-fouling and cannot efficiently remove nutrient pollutants. These two deficiencies have motivated researchers to upgrade the design and operation of conventional MBR (CMBR). This study evaluates the performance of hybrid fixed bed MBR (FBMBR) treating real domestic wastewater in different operational conditions. It also compares the experimental results of FBMBR with the CMBR. For this purpose, two identical reactors are constructed as CMBR and FBMBR. Each module contains the net volume of 140 L and is operated continuously in two aerobic (DO > 4 mg/L) and anoxic (DO < 1 mg/L) conditions with average organic loading rates (OLRs) of 0.58, 0.71 and 1.55 kgCOD/m3d. The pore sizes of flat sheet membranes are 0.2-0.8 μm with total surface area of 1.4m2 per module. The experimental results revealed that the removal efficiencies of BOD, COD and TSS are above 95 % in both CMBR and FBMBR in all operating conditions. However, fouling occurs with lower rates in FBMBR. The growing rate of transmembrane pressure (TMP) in aerobic condition is 1.7mBar/day in CMBR, while it reduces to 1.2mBar/day for FBMBR in solid retention time (SRT) of 75 days and OLR of 0.58 and 0.71 kgCOD/m3d. In anoxic condition with SRT of 100 days and OLR of 1.55 kgCOD/m3d, the TMP in FBMBR is 59 % of CMBR. In addition, total nitrogen (TN) removal is between 12 % (aerobic) and 27 % (anoxic) in CMBR, while it is between 25 % (aerobic) and 49 % (anoxic) in FBMBR. Total phosphorous (TP) removal also ranges between 50 and 66 % in CMBR, while it is between 51 and 86 % in FBMBR. Consequently, using hybrid systems of FBMBR can reduce membrane fouling rate and improve nutrient removal efficiency in comparison with CMBR. This approach can reinforce the biological treatment efficiency and preserve permeate quality in higher OLRs or in lower DO level. © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biofilm; Fouling; Hybrid; Membrane bioreactor (MBR); Wastewater treatment

Year:  2021        PMID: 34150287      PMCID: PMC8172747          DOI: 10.1007/s40201-021-00664-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Health Sci Eng


  13 in total

1.  Evaluation of different configurations of hybrid membrane bioreactors for treatment of domestic wastewater.

Authors:  G Cuevas-Rodríguez; P Cervantes-Avilés; I Torres-Chávez; A Bernal-Martínez
Journal:  Water Sci Technol       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 1.915

2.  Influence of relaxation modes on membrane fouling in submerged membrane bioreactor for domestic wastewater treatment.

Authors:  Rasikh Habib; Muhammad Bilal Asif; Sidra Iftekhar; Zahiruddin Khan; Khum Gurung; Varsha Srivastava; Mika Sillanpää
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2017-04-12       Impact factor: 7.086

3.  Assessing membrane fouling and the performance of pilot-scale membrane bioreactor (MBR) to treat real municipal wastewater during winter season in Nordic regions.

Authors:  Khum Gurung; Mohamed Chaker Ncibi; Mika Sillanpää
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2016-11-29       Impact factor: 7.963

Review 4.  Current state and challenges of full-scale membrane bioreactor applications: A critical review.

Authors:  Kang Xiao; Shuai Liang; Xiaomao Wang; Chunsheng Chen; Xia Huang
Journal:  Bioresour Technol       Date:  2018-09-13       Impact factor: 9.642

Review 5.  Fate of pharmaceuticals during membrane bioreactor treatment: Status and perspectives.

Authors:  Yanling Gu; Jinhui Huang; Guangming Zeng; Lixiu Shi; Yahui Shi; Kaixin Yi
Journal:  Bioresour Technol       Date:  2018-08-11       Impact factor: 9.642

6.  Integrated fixed-film activated sludge membrane bioreactors versus membrane bioreactors for nutrient removal: A comprehensive comparison.

Authors:  Giorgio Mannina; George A Ekama; Marco Capodici; Alida Cosenza; Daniele Di Trapani; Hallvard Ødegaard
Journal:  J Environ Manage       Date:  2018-08-18       Impact factor: 6.789

7.  New functional biocarriers for enhancing the performance of a hybrid moving bed biofilm reactor-membrane bioreactor system.

Authors:  Lijuan Deng; Wenshan Guo; Huu Hao Ngo; Xinbo Zhang; Xiaochang C Wang; Qionghua Zhang; Rong Chen
Journal:  Bioresour Technol       Date:  2016-02-20       Impact factor: 9.642

8.  Enhanced biological nitrogen removal under low dissolved oxygen in an anaerobic-anoxic-oxic system: Kinetics, stoichiometry and microbial community.

Authors:  Lin Wang; Bingrong Li; Yongmei Li; Jianmin Wang
Journal:  Chemosphere       Date:  2020-08-29       Impact factor: 7.086

9.  Comparative study of membrane bioreactor (MBR) and activated sludge processes in the treatment of Moroccan domestic wastewater.

Authors:  S Kitanou; M Tahri; B Bachiri; M Mahi; M Hafsi; M Taky; A Elmidaoui
Journal:  Water Sci Technol       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 1.915

Review 10.  Membrane Bioreactor (MBR) Technology for Wastewater Treatment and Reclamation: Membrane Fouling.

Authors:  Oliver Terna Iorhemen; Rania Ahmed Hamza; Joo Hwa Tay
Journal:  Membranes (Basel)       Date:  2016-06-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.