A laboratory-scale oxygen-limited hybrid membrane bioreactor (OyHMBR) treating synthetic municipal wastewater was operated to investigate performance in terms of chemical oxygen demand (COD) and nitrogen removal and membrane fouling mechanism during stable state operation period. Round porous polymer carriers were added to generate a combination system, in which attached biomass and suspended sludge grow simultaneously. At a constant hydraulic retention time of 8 h and dissolved oxygen (DO) concentration below 0.5 mg/L, the removal rate of COD in the OyHMBR was about 91.7% independent of mixed liquor volatile suspended solids (MLVSS). However, NH4+–N conversion was significantly influenced by MLVSS concentration, and NH4+–N was almost completely oxidized in case that the average MLVSS concentration was above 2,000 mg/L. The transmembrane pressure increase was effectively retarded by carriers scouring compared to that absent of carriers fluidization at a constant flux of 8 L/(m2·h). The mean particle size of suspension of OyHMBR increased more sharply than that of seed sludge by article size distribution analysis. Sludge characteristics were also evaluated in terms of soluble microbial products and bound extracellular polymeric substances. It was found that over four times higher loose bound extracellular polymeric substances in cake sludge compared with bulk sludge. Results of scanning electron microscopy indicated diverse bacteria deposited on membrane. Also, Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy analysis demonstrated that the protein-like substance was the main pollutant in cake layer. This critical investigation would contribute toward a better understanding of the performance and membrane fouling behavior in OyHMBR operation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArtigaP., OyanedelV., GarridoJ.M., and MéndezR. (2005). An innovative biofilm-suspended biomass hybrid membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment. Desalination, 179, 171.
2.
AslamM., McCartyP.L., BaeJ., and KimJ. (2014). The effect of fluidized media characteristics on membrane fouling and energy consumption in anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactors. Sep. Purif. Technol. 132, 10.
3.
BaeJ., YooR., LeeE., and McCartyP.L. (2013). Two-stage anaerobic fluidized-bed membrane bioreactor treatment of settled domestic wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. 68, 394.
4.
BaeT.H., and TakT.M. (2005). Interpretation of fouling characteristics of ultrafiltration membranes during the filtration of membrane bioreactor mixed liquor. J. Membr. Sci. 264, 151.
5.
ChenZ.L., WangW.B., HouL.A., LiuH.X., and RenZ.J. (2012). Comparative Study of the flux of filamentous bulking MBR and non-bulking MBR. Adv. Mater. Res. 368–373, 3809.
6.
DamayantiA., UjangZ., and SalimM.R. (2011). The influenced of PAC, zeolite, and Moringa oleifera as biofouling reducer (BFR) on hybrid membrane bioreactor of palm oil mill effluent (POME). Bioresour. Technol. 102, 4341.
7.
DrewsA., EvenblijH., and RosenbergerS. (2005). Potential and drawbacks of microbiology-membrane interaction in membrane bioreactors. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy, 24, 426.
8.
DrewsA., VocksM., IversenV., LesjeanB., and KraumeM. (2006). Influence of unsteady membrane bioreactor operation on EPS formation and filtration resistance. Desalination, 192, 1.
9.
GomecC.Y. (2010). High-rate anaerobic treatment of domestic wastewater at ambient operating temperatures: A review on benefits and drawbacks. J. Environ. Sci. Health A Tox. Hazard. Subst. Environ. Eng. 45, 1169.
10.
GuoJ.H., PengY.Z., PengC.Y., WangS.Y., ChenY., HuangH.J., and SunZ.R. (2010). Energy saving achieved by limited filamentous bulking sludge under low dissolved oxygen. Bioresour. Technol. 101, 1120.
11.
HenriquesI.D., HolbrookR.D., KellyR.T., and LoveN.G. (2005). The impact of floc size on respiration inhibition by soluble toxicants—A comparative investigation. Water Res. 39, 2559.
12.
HuY.S., WangX.C., ZhangY.M., LiY.Y., ChenH., and JinP.K. (2013). Characteristics of an A2O–MBR system for reclaimed water production under constant flux at low TMP. J. Membr. Sci. 431, 156.
13.
HuangX., WeiC.H., and YuK.C. (2008). Mechanism of membrane fouling control by suspended carriers in a submerged membrane bioreactor. J. Membr. Sci. 309, 7.
14.
IorhemenO.T., HamzaR.A. and TayJ.H. (2017). Membrane fouling control in membrane bioreactors (MBRs) using granular materials. Bioresour. Technol. 240, 1.
15.
JarusutthirakC., AmyG., and CroueJ.P. (2002). Fouling characteristics of wastewater effluent organic matter (EfOM) isolates on NF and UF membranes. Desalination, 145, 247.
16.
JiL., and ZhouJ.T. (2006). Influence of aeration on microbial polymers and membrane fouling in submerged membrane bioreactors. J. Membr. Sci. 276, 168.
17.
JinL., OngS.L., and NgH.Y. (2013). Fouling control mechanism by suspended biofilm carriers addition in submerged ceramic membrane bioreactors. J. Membr. Sci. 427, 250.
18.
KimJ., KimK., YeH., LeeE., ShinC., MccartyP.L., and BaeJ. (2011). Anaerobic fluidized bed membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, 576.
19.
KumarM., AdhamS.S., and PearceW.R. (2006). Investigation of seawater reverse osmosis fouling and its relationship to pretreatment type. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 2037.
20.
LaspidouC.S., and RittmannB.E. (2002). A unified theory for extracellular polymeric substances, soluble microbial products, and active and inert biomass. Water Res. 36, 2711.
21.
LeeJ., AhnW.Y., and LeeC.H. (2001). Comparison of the filtration characteristics between attached and suspended growth microorganisms in submerged membrane bioreactors. Water Res. 35, 2435.
22.
LeeW., KangS., and ShinH. (2003). Sludge characteristics and their contribution to microfiltration in submerged membrane bioreactors. J. Membr. Sci. 216, 217.
23.
LiB.K., and IrvinS.N. (2007). The roles of nitrogen dissimilation and assimilation in biological nitrogen removal treating low, mid, and high strength wastewater. J. Environ. Eng. Sci. 6, 483.
24.
LiX.Y., and YangS.F. (2007). Influence of loosely bound extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) on the flocculation, sedimentation and dewaterability of activated sludge. Water Res. 41, 1022.
25.
LinH.J., XieK., MahendranB., BagleyD.M., LeungK.T., LissS.N., and LiaoB.Q. (2009). Sludge properties and their effects on membrane fouling in submerged anaerobic membrane bioreactors (SAnMBRs). Water Res. 43, 3827.
26.
LiuQ., WangX.C., LiuY.G., YuanH.L., and DuY.J. (2010). Performance of a hybrid membrane bioreactor in municipal wastewater treatment. Desalination, 258, 143.
27.
LowryO.H., RosebroughN.H., FarrA.L., and RandallR.J. (1951). Protein measurement with the Folin phenol reagent. J. Biol. Chem. 193, 265.
28.
MarcatoC.E., MohtarR., RevelJ.C., PouechP., HafidiM., and GuiresseM. (2009). Impact of anaerobic digestion on organic matter quality in pig slurry. Int. Biodeterior. Biodegradation, 63, 260.
29.
Martinez-SosaD., HelmreichB., NetterT., ParisS., BischofF., and HornH. (2011). Anaerobic submerged membrane bioreactor (AnSMBR) for municipal wastewater treatment under mesophilic and psychrophilic temperature conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 10377.
30.
MengF.G., and YangF.L. (2007). Fouling mechanisms of deflocculated sludge, normal sludge, and bulking sludge in membrane bioreactor. J. Membr. Sci. 305, 48.
31.
MengF.G., YangF.L., ShiB.Q., and ZhangH.M. (2008). A comprehensive study on membrane fouling in submerged membrane bioreactors operated under different aeration intensities. Sep. Purif. Technol. 59, 91.
32.
MengF.G., YangF.L., XiaoJ.N., ZhangH.M., and GongZ. (2006a). A new insight into membrane fouling mechanism during membrane filtration of bulking and normal sludge suspension. J. Membr. Sci. 285, 159.
33.
MengF.G., ZhangH.M., YangF.L., LiY.S., XiaoJ.N., and ZhangX.W. (2006b). Effect of filamentous bacteria on membrane fouling in submerged membrane bioreactor. J. Membr. Sci. 272, 161.
34.
MengF.G., ZhouZ.B., NiB.J., ZhengX., HuangG.C., JiaX.S., LiS.Y., XiongY., and KraumeM. (2011). Characterization of the size-fractionated biomacromolecules: Tracking their role and fate in a membrane bioreactor. Water Res. 45, 4661.
35.
MunchE.V., BarrK., WattsS., and KellerJ. (2000). Suspended carrier technology allows upgrading high-rate activated sludge plants for nitrogen removal via process intensification. Water Sci. Technol. 41, 5.
36.
NamkungE., and RittmannB.E. (1986). Soluble microbial products (SMP) formation kinetics by biofilms. Water Res. 20, 795.
37.
NgC.A., SunD., and FaneA.G. (2006a). Operation of membrane bioreactor with powdered activated carbon addition. Sep. Sci. Technol. 41, 1447.
38.
NgH.Y., TanT.W., and OngS.L. (2006b). Membrane fouling of submerged membrane bioreactors: Impact of mean cell residence time and the contributing factors. Environ. Sci. Technol. 40, 2706.
39.
NogueraD.R., ArakiN., and RittmannB.E. (1994). Soluble microbial products (SMP) in anaerobic chemostats. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 44, 1040.
40.
RaunkjaerK., Hvitved-JacobsenT., and NielsenP.H. (1994). Measurement of pools of protein, carbohydrates and lipid in domestic wastewater. Water Res. 28, 251.
41.
RittmannB.E., and McCartyP.L. (2012). Environmental Biotechnology: Principles and Applications. Tata McGraw-Hill Education.
42.
RosenbergerS., LesjeanB., GnirssR., AmyG., JekelM., and SchrotterJ.C. (2006). Impact of colloidal and soluble organic material on membrane performance in membrane bioreactors for municipal wastewater treatment. Water Res. 40, 710.
43.
SeghezzoL., ZeemanG., JulesB.V.L., HamelersH.V.M., and LettingaG. (1998). A review: The anaerobic treatment of sewage in UASB and EGSB reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 65, 175.
44.
ShengG.P., YuH.Q., and LiX.Y. (2010). Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) of microbial aggregates in biological wastewater treatment systems: A review. Biotechnol Adv. 28, 882.
45.
SiembidaB., CornelP., KrauseS., and ZimmermannB. (2010). Effect of mechanical cleaning with granular material on the permeability of submerged membranes in the MBR process. Water Res. 44, 4037.
46.
SinghK.S., HaradaH., and ViraraghavanT. (1996). Low-strength wastewater treatment by a UASB reactor. Bioresour. Technol. 55, 187.
47.
SmidtE., and ParraviciniV. (2009). Effect of sewage sludge treatment and additional aerobic post-stabilization revealed by infrared spectroscopy and multivariate data analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 1775.
48.
SponzaD.T. (2002). Extracellular polymer substances and physicochemical properties of flocs in steady- and unsteady-state activated sludge systems. Process Biochem. 37, 983.
49.
State Environmental Protection Administration of China (SEPA). (2002). Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, China. Beijing: Environmental Science Press.
50.
SuX., TianY., LiH., and WangC. (2013). New insights into membrane fouling based on characterization of cake sludge and bulk sludge: An especial attention to sludge aggregation. Bioresour. Technol. 128, 586.
51.
WangL., LiangW.Z., ChenW.S., ZhangW.X., MoJ.H., LiangK.G., BingT., YiZ., and FengJ. (2017). Integrated aerobic granular sludge and membrane process for enabling municipal wastewater treatment and reuse water production. Chem. Eng. J. 337, 300.
52.
WangZ., WuZ., and TangS. (2009). Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) properties and their effects on membrane fouling in a submerged membrane bioreactor. Water Res. 43, 2504.
53.
WeiC.H., HuangX., WangC.W., and WenX.H. (2006). Effect of a suspended carrier on membrane fouling in a submerged membrane bioreactor. Water Sci. Technol. 53, 211.
54.
YamagiwaK., OohiraY., and OhkawaA. (1994). Performance evaluation of plunging liquid jet bioreactor with crossflow filtration for amallscale treatment of domestic wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 50, 131.
55.
YangS., YangF., FuZ., and LeiR. (2009). Comparison between a moving bed membrane bioreactor and a conventional membrane bioreactor on organic carbon and nitrogen removal. Bioresour. Technol. 100, 2369.
56.
YangW., PaetkauM., and CicekN. (2010). Improving the performance of membrane bioreactors by powdered activated carbon dosing with cost considerations. Water Sci. Technol. 62, 172.
57.
YeY., SaikalyP.E., and LoganB.E. (2017). Simultaneous nitrogen and organics removal using membrane aeration and effluent ultrafiltration in an anaerobic fluidized membrane bioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 244(Pt 1), 456.
58.
ZhangB., YamamotoK., OhgakiS., and KamikoN. (1997). Floc size distribution and bacterial activities in membrane separation activated sludge processes for smallscale wastewater treatment-reclamation. Water Sci. Technol. 35, 37.
59.
ZhangW.X., and JiangF. (2019). Membrane fouling in aerobic granular sludge (AGS)-membrane bioreactor (MBR): Effect of AGS size. Water Res. 157, 445.
60.
ZhengY., ZhangW.X., TangB., BinL.Y., DingJ., ZhengY., and ZhangZ.E. (2018). Membrane fouling mechanism of biofilm-membrane bioreactor (BF-MBR): Pore blocking model and membrane cleaning. Bioresour. Technol. 250, 398.
61.
ZitomerD.H., and ShroutJ.D. (1998). Feasibility and benefits of methanogenesis under oxygen-limited conditions. Waste Manage. 18, 107.
