Influence of loading rates on production and characteristics of retentate from a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR)

Ivanovic, Igor; Leiknes, TorOve; Ødegaard, Hallvard

doi:10.1016/j.desal.2006.03.196

Cited by 36 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Liu et al (2010) and Khan et al (2012) reported better COD removal in a biofilm MBR, while Liang et al (2010) and found a worse removal rate in a biofilm MBR (Figure 6). However, in all cases differences in organic matter removal were very small, indicating, as cited by Ivanovic et al (2006), that generally there is no difference in the degree of organic removal between an activated sludge MBR and biofilm MBR when operated at similar HRT and SRT. The authors also reported that both systems can sustainably achieve high COD removal, typically 95 -99%.…”

Section: Permeate Qualitymentioning

confidence: 91%

Comparison between a conventional membrane bioreactor (C-MBR) and a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR) for domestic wastewater treatment

Subtil

Mierzwa

Hespanhol

2014

Braz. J. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-In this paper, the influence of biofilm carriers in a MBR on the performance of organic matter and nitrogen removal and the influence on membrane fouling were evaluated. The configurations studied included a Conventional Membrane Bioreactor (C-MBR) and a Biofilm Membrane Bioreactor (BF-MBR) operated in parallel, both fed with domestic wastewater. Regarding organic matter removal, no statistically significant differences were observed between C-MBR and BF-MBR, producing an effluent with a Soluble COD concentration of 27 ± 9.0 mgO 2 /L and 26 ±1.0 mgO 2 /L and BOD concentration of 6.0 ± 2.5 mgO 2 /L and 6.2 ± 2.1 mgO 2 /L, respectively. On the other hand, the BF-MBR produced a permeate with lower ammonia and total nitrogen concentrations, which resulted in a removal efficiency of 98% and 73%, respectively. It was also observed that the fouling rate was about 35% higher in the C-MBR than that for the BF-MBR, which also presented a reduction of total membrane resistance, about 29%, and increased operational cycle length around 7 days, compared to C-MBR.

show abstract

Section: Permeate Qualitymentioning

confidence: 91%

Comparison between a conventional membrane bioreactor (C-MBR) and a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR) for domestic wastewater treatment

Subtil

Mierzwa

Hespanhol

2014

Braz. J. Chem. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[11][12] Previous studies have also shown differences in biofilm morphologies at high and low COD SALRs. [13,14] Studies investigating the effects of loading and hydraulic retention time (HRT) in COD removal MBBRs have demonstrated the tendency for effluent particle size distributions to shifts towards larger particles with increasing COD loads in activated sludge membrane bioreactors [15] and with increasing HRTs in MBBRs. [16] Previous work has also revealed better aggregation and submicron particle reduction with low COD loading rates.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Carrier effects on tertiary nitrifying moving bed biofilm reactor: An examination of performance, biofilm and biologically produced solids

Forrest

Delatolla

Kennedy

2015

Environmental Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increasingly stricter ammonia and nitrogen release regulations with respect to wastewater effluents are creating a need for tertiary treatment systems. The moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR) is being considered as an upgrade option for an increasing number of wastewater treatment facilities due to its small footprint and ease of operation. Despite the MBBRs creation as a system to remove nitrogen, recent research on MBBR systems showing that the system's performance is directly related to carrier surface area and is irrespective of carrier shape and type has been performed exclusively on chemical oxygen demand (COD) removal systems. Furthermore, the influence of carrier type on the solids produced by MBBR systems has also been exclusively studied for COD removal systems. This work investigates the effects of three specific carrier types on ammonia removal rates, biofilm morphology, along with solids production and settleability of tertiary nitrifying MBBR systems. The study concludes that carrier type has no significant effect on tertiary nitrifying MBBR system performance under steady, moderate loading conditions. The research does however highlight the propensity of greater surface area to volume carriers to become clogged under high loading conditions and that the high surface area carriers investigated in this study required longer adjustment periods to changes in loading after becoming clogged.

show abstract

“…However, as for all MBR systems, a sustainable operation of the process is dependent on understanding membrane fouling and incorporating strategies and techniques for fouling control and fouling mitigation. Previous studies have shown that membrane fouling in BF-MBR systems appears to be particularly sensitive to the colloidal fraction in the concentrate in the membrane reactor (Ivanovic et al, 2006, 2008, 2007. One of the goals of the alternative process configurations proposed was as to develop a process concept for suspended solids control, energy optimization method, and sludge waste management.…”

Section: Impact Of Alternative Process Configurationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…An additional benefit of the BF-MBR concept is the energy demand for aerobic conditions in the biological reactor compared to the AS-MBR where constraints on oxygen mass transfer rates are a challenge due high MLSS values commonly applied in the process. Studies have been conducted to investigate the potentials of coupling biofilm reactors with membrane separation as a treatment concept for municipal wastewater , Ivanovic et al, 2006, 2008, Leiknes et al, 2007, Phattaranawik et al, 2008. Different biofilm reactor combinations and concepts have been tested to investigate the effect of the biodegradation stage on the performance of the membrane reactor.…”

Section: Weftec 2009mentioning

confidence: 99%

Prospects and Potentials of Biofilm-MBRs for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Leiknes¹,

Phataranawik²,

Ivanovic³

2009

proc water environ fed

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Coupling biofilm reactors with membrane processes as biofilm membrane bioreactors (BF-MBR) is an interesting development as an alternative technology to activated sludge membrane bioreactors (AS-MBR). Biofilm technology for wastewater treatment can provide substantially lower suspended solid environments for membrane filtration compared to activated sludge processes. Potential benefits are; reduced energy consumption for aeration systems (lower viscosity), less membrane clogging problems, lower fouling potentials, ease of membrane cleaning, and new membrane module designs (i.e. higher membrane packing densities). This study was aimed to propose and investigate alternative membrane reactor designs and process configurations of the BF-MBR process. Alternative and novel biofilm reactor designs have been investigated, for example; a double-deck aerated moving bed biofilm reactor, two-stage aerobicanaerobic biofilm reactor. The performance and design of the biofilm reactors was aimed to determine TSS control, effluent quality, and enhanced membrane filterability. The biofilm effluent on average had low TSS (typically <50 mg/L), low turbidities and FCOD. Alternative membrane modules and membrane filtration unit designs have been investigated. These include flat sheet systems, tubular and capillary membranes supplied from various manufacturers.

show abstract

Influence of loading rates on production and characteristics of retentate from a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR)

Cited by 36 publications

References 1 publication

Comparison between a conventional membrane bioreactor (C-MBR) and a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR) for domestic wastewater treatment

Comparison between a conventional membrane bioreactor (C-MBR) and a biofilm membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR) for domestic wastewater treatment

Carrier effects on tertiary nitrifying moving bed biofilm reactor: An examination of performance, biofilm and biologically produced solids

Prospects and Potentials of Biofilm-MBRs for Municipal Wastewater Treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About