Comparison of the operational characteristics between a nitrifying membrane bioreactor and a pre-denitrification membrane bioreactor process

Won Sik Lee; Soon Ho Hong; Jin Suk Chung; Keungarp Ryu; Ik-Keun Yoo

Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.16, No.4, 546-550, July, 2010

DOI10.1016/j.jiec.2010.03.024 Export Citation

Comparison of the operational characteristics between a nitrifying membrane bioreactor and a pre-denitrification membrane bioreactor process

Won Sik Lee, Soon Ho Hong , Jin Suk Chung , Keungarp Ryu , and Ik-Keun Yoo^†

School of Chemical Engineering and Bioengineering, University of Ulsan, Ulsan 680-749, Republic of Korea

E-mail:

A single submerged membrane bioreactor (MBR) for nitrification of ammonium and a pre-denitrification MBR process for total nitrogen (TN) removal were investigated in comparison. A single nitrifying MBR was fed with syntheticammonium wastewater of up to 900 mgN/l without organics so that the MBR was maintained as a pure nitrifying system. A high nitrifying capacity around 1.8 kgNH4-N/m3/day was achieved while keeping the ammonium oxidation rate above 98%. Sludge volume index (SVI) gradually decreased down to less than 50 indicating good settleability of nitrifying sludge. The increase of suction pressure was less than 5 cm Hg over 7-months of operation. TN removal efficiency was determined in a pre-denitrification configuration with an anoxic reactor. Synthetic wastewater of 1200 mgCOD/l and 200 mgN/l was fed to the system at loads of 2.4 kgCOD/m3/day and 0.4 kgN/m3/day, respectively. As the internal recycle ratio from aerobic to anoxic zone increased from 2 to 6, TN removal efficiency was enhanced from 70 ± 9 to 89 ± 3%. With the sludge concentration of around 12,000 mg/l, SVI was highly fluctuated from 60 to 350 indicating the partial deterioration of sludge settleability. The suction pressure after 8 months of operation increased to above 10 cm Hg which is higher than that in a single nitrifying MBR. The concentration of extracellular polymeric substances (EPS), especially for carbohydrate content, was higher in the operation of a pre-denitrification MBR process than in a single nitrifying MBR. It is likely that the sludge characteristic such as settleability is related with membrane fouling but, further extensive study is needed. The performance of a pre-denitrification MBR process was also verified with real petrochemical nitrogen wastewater.

Keywords:Membrane bioreactor;Nitrification;Pre-denitrification;Sludge volume index

[References]

Wiesmann U, Adv. Biochem. Eng. Biotechnol., 51, 113 (1994)
Rosenberger S, Kruger U, Witzig R, Manz W, Szewzyk U, Kraume M, Water Res., 36, 413 (2002)
Nah YM, Ahn KH, Yeom IT, Environ. Technol., 21, 107 (2000)
Ueda T, Hata K, Water Res., 33, 2888 (1999)
Lawrence P, Adham S, Barrott L, Desalination., 152, 291 (2002)
Ghyoot WS, Vandaele S, Verstraete W, Water Res., 33, 23 (1999)
Yoon TI, Lee HS, Kim CG, J. Membr. Sci., 242(1-2), 5 (2004)
Yamamoto K, Hiasa M, Mahmood T, Matsuo T, Water Sci. Technol., 21, 43 (1989)
APHA Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th ed., APHA, Washington, DC, USA (1998)
Dubois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F, Anal. Chem., 28, 350 (1956)
Liebig TM, Wagner M, Bjerrum L, Denecke M, Bioprocess. Biosyst. Eng., 24, 203 (2001)
Jih CG, Huang JS, Hsieh KC, J. Hazard. Mater., 85(3), 213 (2001)
Henze M, Kristensen GH, Strube R, Water Sci. Technol., 29, 101 (1994)
Tseng CG, Potter TG, Koopman B, Water Res., 32, 165 (1998)
Chiemchaisri C, Wong YK, Urase T, Yamamoto K, Water Sci. Technol., 25, 231 (1992)
Magara Y, Itoh M, Water Sci. Technol., 23, 1583 (1991)
Defrance L, Jaffrin MY, J. Membr. Sci., 157(1), 73 (1999)
Lee J, Ahn WY, Lee CH, Water Res., 35, 2435 (2001)
Meng F, Shi B, Yang F, Zhang H, Bioprocess. Biosyst. Eng., 30, 359 (2007)
Lee W, Kang S, Shin H, J. Membr. Sci., 216(1-2), 217 (2003)

[Related Articles]

[1] Wiesmann U, Adv. Biochem. Eng. Biotechnol., 51, 113 (1994)

[2] Rosenberger S, Kruger U, Witzig R, Manz W, Szewzyk U, Kraume M, Water Res., 36, 413 (2002)

[3] Nah YM, Ahn KH, Yeom IT, Environ. Technol., 21, 107 (2000)

[4] Ueda T, Hata K, Water Res., 33, 2888 (1999)

[5] Lawrence P, Adham S, Barrott L, Desalination., 152, 291 (2002)

[6] Ghyoot WS, Vandaele S, Verstraete W, Water Res., 33, 23 (1999)

[7] Yoon TI, Lee HS, Kim CG, J. Membr. Sci., 242(1-2), 5 (2004)

[8] Yamamoto K, Hiasa M, Mahmood T, Matsuo T, Water Sci. Technol., 21, 43 (1989)

[9] APHA Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, 20th ed., APHA, Washington, DC, USA (1998)

[10] Dubois M, Gilles KA, Hamilton JK, Rebers PA, Smith F, Anal. Chem., 28, 350 (1956)

[11] Liebig TM, Wagner M, Bjerrum L, Denecke M, Bioprocess. Biosyst. Eng., 24, 203 (2001)

[12] Jih CG, Huang JS, Hsieh KC, J. Hazard. Mater., 85(3), 213 (2001)

[13] Henze M, Kristensen GH, Strube R, Water Sci. Technol., 29, 101 (1994)

[14] Tseng CG, Potter TG, Koopman B, Water Res., 32, 165 (1998)

[15] Chiemchaisri C, Wong YK, Urase T, Yamamoto K, Water Sci. Technol., 25, 231 (1992)

[16] Magara Y, Itoh M, Water Sci. Technol., 23, 1583 (1991)

[17] Defrance L, Jaffrin MY, J. Membr. Sci., 157(1), 73 (1999)

[18] Lee J, Ahn WY, Lee CH, Water Res., 35, 2435 (2001)

[19] Meng F, Shi B, Yang F, Zhang H, Bioprocess. Biosyst. Eng., 30, 359 (2007)

[20] Lee W, Kang S, Shin H, J. Membr. Sci., 216(1-2), 217 (2003)