| Literature DB >> 35323763 |
Zia Ul Islam1, Mariam Ayub1, Shinho Chung1, Heekyong Oh2.
Abstract
Biofouling is one of the main drawbacks of membrane bioreactors (MBRs). Among the different methods, the quorum-quenching (QQ) technique is a novel method as it delays biofilm formation on the membrane surface through disruption of bacterial cell-to-cell communication and thus effectively mitigates membrane biofouling. QQ bacteria require a certain concentration of dissolved oxygen to show their best activities. Despite the importance of the amount of aeration, there have not been enough studies on aeration condition utilizing the separate determination of pure QQ effect and physical cleaning effect. This research aimed to find the optimum aeration intensity by separation of the two effects from QQ and physical cleaning. Three bead type conditions (no bead, vacant bead, and QQ beads) at three aeration intensities (1.5, 2.5, and 3.5 L/min representing low, medium, and high aeration intensity) were applied. From the results, no QQ effect and small QQ effect were observed at low and high aeration, while the greatest QQ effect (48.2% of 737 h improvement) was observed at medium aeration. The best performance was observed at high aeration with QQ beads having a 1536 h operational duration (303% improvement compared to the no bead condition); however, this excellent performance was attributed more to the physical cleaning effect than to the QQ effect.Entities:
Keywords: Rhodococcus sp. BH4; aeration intensity; biofouling mitigation; cell-immobilizing beads (CIBs); membrane bioreactors; quorum quenching (QQ)
Year: 2022 PMID: 35323763 PMCID: PMC8953932 DOI: 10.3390/membranes12030289
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Membranes (Basel) ISSN: 2077-0375
Figure 1Schematic diagram of lab-scale MBR.
Basic operational conditions of the lab-scale MBR.
| Parameters | Description or Values | Parameters | Description or Values |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type of MBR | Single stage, submerged | Manufacturer | PHILOS Korea |
| Working volume | 4 L/reactor | Membrane material | Hydrophilic PVDF |
| Permeate flow rate | 13 mL/min | Pore size | 0.1 µm |
| Backwash flow rate | 26 mL/min | Module design | U-shape |
| SBW frequency | 1 min after every 10 min | Membrane dimension | φ 2.3 mm, length 50 cm, 8 fibers |
| HRT | 5.1 h | Effective surface area | 289 cm2/module |
| SRT | 17~20 days | No. of module | 1 module/reactor |
| MLSS | 8000 mg/L | Flux | 27 L/m2/h |
| MLVSS | 7080 mg/L | Influent COD | 205~250 mg/L |
| Food/Microorganism | 0.12~0.15 gCOD/gVSS·day | Influent Ammonia-N | 26~33 mg/L |
Different research conditions of MBRs.
| Operation Names | Research Variable1: | Research Variable2: | SADm (m3/m2/h) | Velocity Gradient G (/s) a | Beads Size φ (mm) | Filling Ratio of Beads in Reactor (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A1 | No bead | 1.5 | 3.1 | 92 | - | - |
| A2 | No bead | 2.5 | 5.2 | 119 | - | - |
| A3 | No bead | 3.5 | 7.3 | 140 | - | - |
| B1 | Vacant beads | 1.5 | 3.1 | 92 | 3.4 | 1% |
| B2 | Vacant beads | 2.5 | 5.2 | 119 | 3.4 | 1% |
| B3 | Vacant beads | 3.5 | 7.3 | 140 | 3.4 | 1% |
| C1 | QQ-CIBs | 1.5 | 3.1 | 92 | 3.4 | 1% |
| C2 | QQ-CIBs | 2.5 | 5.2 | 119 | 3.4 | 1% |
| C3 | QQ-CIBs | 3.5 | 7.3 | 140 | 3.4 | 1% |
a G = where, Q = air flowrate (m3/h), P1 = absolute pressure at the mixed liquor surface, P2 = absolute pressure at the point of air injection (kPa), V = mixed liquor volume (m3), and μ = dynamic viscosity (Pa·s) [36,37].
Figure 2SEM images of QQ-CIBs taken in this research; (a) cross-section of the bead, 52×; (b) immobilized QQ bacteria, 1300×; (c) 5000×.
Removal efficiencies of COD, ammonia, and one-way ANOVA result.
| Operation | COD | Ammonia (Nitrification) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average Removal (%) | Standard Deviation (%) | n | Average Removal (%) | Standard Deviation (%) | n | |
| A1 | 92.2 | 7.6 | 5 | 96.5 | 5.6 | 4 |
| A2 | 91.9 | 5.8 | 5 | 99.5 | 0.1 | 4 |
| A3 | 93.9 | 4.2 | 5 | 98.9 | 0.9 | 4 |
| B1 | 92.5 | 7.1 | 9 | 95.5 | 5.0 | 5 |
| B2 | 94.5 | 4.9 | 9 | 96.6 | 5.1 | 5 |
| B3 | 94.6 | 8.5 | 5 | 96.2 | 5.8 | 4 |
| C1 | 90.5 | 1.1 | 4 | 97.1 | 4.0 | 3 |
| C2 | 93.2 | 10.7 | 10 | 99.6 | 0.5 | 8 |
| C3 | 92.9 | 7.7 | 18 | 99.3 | 0.7 | 13 |
| One-way | ||||||
Figure 3TMP profiles of each operation.
Figure 4Effect of bead type on operational duration.
Figure 5Effect of aeration intensity on operational duration.
Figure 6Performance improvement by pure QQ effect and physical cleaning effect and their contribution (%).