Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 145 views

    MBR Calculations

    Uploaded by

    isquare77
    The document compares membrane bioreactors (MBR) and ultrafiltration followed by moving bed biofilm reactors (UF-MBBR) wastewater treatment processes. Conventional MBRs have high membrane fouling due to immersed membranes in mixed liquor, requiring fine screening, high recirculation rates, and air scouring. This leads to low flux rates and high energy use. UF-MBBR separates biological and membrane processes, reducing fouling and allowing higher flux rates and energy savings without recirculation or air scouring while maintaining treatment performance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    MBR Calculations

    Uploaded by

    isquare77
    145 views13 pages
    The document compares membrane bioreactors (MBR) and ultrafiltration followed by moving bed biofilm reactors (UF-MBBR) wastewater treatment processes. Conventional MBRs have high membrane fouling due to immersed membranes in mixed liquor, requiring fine screening, high recirculation rates, and air scouring. This leads to low flux rates and high energy use. UF-MBBR separates biological and membrane processes, reducing fouling and allowing higher flux rates and energy savings without recirculation or air scouring while maintaining treatment performance.

    Original Description:

    mbr calculations

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document compares membrane bioreactors (MBR) and ultrafiltration followed by moving bed biofilm reactors (UF-MBBR) wastewater treatment processes. Conventional MBRs have high membrane fouling due to immersed membranes in mixed liquor, requiring fine screening, high recirculation rates, and air scouring. This leads to low flux rates and high energy use. UF-MBBR separates biological and membrane processes, reducing fouling and allowing higher flux rates and energy savings without recirculation or air scouring while maintaining treatment performance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    145 views13 pages

    MBR Calculations

    Uploaded by

    isquare77
    The document compares membrane bioreactors (MBR) and ultrafiltration followed by moving bed biofilm reactors (UF-MBBR) wastewater treatment processes. Conventional MBRs have high membrane fouling due to immersed membranes in mixed liquor, requiring fine screening, high recirculation rates, and air scouring. This leads to low flux rates and high energy use. UF-MBBR separates biological and membrane processes, reducing fouling and allowing higher flux rates and energy savings without recirculation or air scouring while maintaining treatment performance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 13

    MEMBRANE BIOREACTORS

    AS - MBR Vs MBBR - UF

    EEC GLOBAL OPERATION


    By: C.S. Umre Technical Director
    AS - MBR PROCESS
     Conventional membrane bioreactors process
    immerses membranes directly into highly
    concentrated mixed liquor suspended solids.
     MLSS contains high levels of dispersed , small
    particles comprised of inert and colloidal material.
     High membrane fouling environment, which results
    in low membrane flux rates, which require large
    membrane surface area.
    TO AVOIDE LOW FOULING
    CONDITIONS IN AS - MBR
    HIGH ENERGY
    INTENSIVE CONSUMPTION HIGH
    PRESCREENING MEMBRANE
    & DISPOSAL AREA

    MBR
    HIGH MEMBRANE FOULING
    ENVIRONMENT

    LARGE SUBSTANTIAL
    EQUALIZATION OPERATOR
    BASIN TRAINING
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR HAS LOW PEAK FLOW TOLERANCE.

    WITH THE HIGH MEMBRANE FOULING


    ENVIRONMENT CONSTRAINING THE FLUX, THE
    MBR HAS VERY LOW PEAK FLOW TOLERANCE.
    HENCE IT REQUIRES LARGE EQUALIZATION TANK
    VOLUME.
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR REQUIRES FINE SCREENING. (1 mm OR
    LESS)

    FINE SCREENING REMOVES SUBSTANTIAL


    AMOUNT OF UNTREATED WASTE THAT MUST BE
    DISPOSED of. FINE SCREENING ALSO REQUIRES A
    LARGE AREAAND IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN
    STANDARD WASTEWATER SCREENING.
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR REQUIRES HIGH MLSS RECIRCULATION
    RATES.

     AS PERMEATE IS REMOVED THROUGH THE


    MEMBRANE, THE ALREADY HIGH CONCENTRATION
    OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS AT THE MEMBRANE
    SURFACE OF MBR INCREASES AND FOULING RATES
    ARE COMPOUNDED.
     THIS REQUIRES RECIRCULATING MLSS WITH IN THE
    BIOREACTOR AND THUS RESULTS IN LARGE
    AMOUNT OF ENERGY CONSUMPTION,
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR REQUIRES HIGH MEMBRANE AIR
    SCOUR RATES.

     LARGE AMOUNTS OF ENERGY MUST BE INPUT TO


    GENERATE AIR TO TO SCOUR THE MEMBRANE
    SURFACE OF SUSPENDED SOLIDS.
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR REQUIRES HIGH BIOREACTOR
    AERATION RATES.

     THE HIGH MLSS CONCENTRATION OF MBR


    REDUCES OXYGEN TRANSFER EFFICIENCY
    WITHIN THE BIOREACTOR, RESULTING IN A
    HIGHER ENERGY REQUIREMENT IN ORDER TO
    AERATE THE BIOREACTOR.
    AS - MBR LIMITATIONS
     MBR HAS LOW MEMBRANE FLUX RATES.

     MEMBRANE COMPONENT COSTS CONTRIBUTE A


    VERY HIGH CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS.
    UF FOLLOWED BY MBBR
     UF FOLLOWED BY MBBR MAINTAINS SEPARATE
    BIOLOGICAL AND MEMBRANE UNIT PROCESSES,
    ALLOWING FOR MAXIMUM TOTAL SYSTEM
    PERFORMANCE.
     EACH PROCESS IS INDIVIDUALLY CONTROLLED AND
    OPTIMIZED.
     MBBR MLSS PARTICLES SETTLE WELL AND EXIBIT
    LOW MEMBRANE FOULING.
     REDUCES THE MLSS TO THE UF MEMBRANE BY 97%
     THIS DIRECTLY INCREASES THE MEMBRANE FLUX.
    CONTROLLING MEMBRNE FOULING
    RATES WITH MBBR - UF
     CAN TOLERATE MODERATE PEAK FLOW RATES.
    WILL REQUIRE SMALLER EQUALIZATION TANK.
     NO FINE SCREENING REQUIREMENT.
     NO SLUDGE RECIRCULTION. ENERGY SAVING.
     NO AIR SCOURING REQUIRED. ENERGY SAVING.
     SINCE MLSS IS LOW IN MBBR, OXYGEN TRANSFER
    EFFICIENCY IS HIGH.
     FLUX RATES CAN BE MUCH HIGHER, SAVES COST
    OF MEMBRANES.
     SINCE MLSS IS VERY LOW, MEMBRANE FOULING
    MINIMUM.
    ENERGY CONSUMPTION
    COMPARISION

    AS - MBR MBBR - UF
    MEMBRANE AIR 38% NOT REQUIRED
    BLOWER
    RECIRCULTION 18% NOT REQUIRED
    PUMPS
    PROCESS AIR 35% 17%
    BLOWERS
    MISCLLANEOUS 9% 9%
    TOTAL 100% 26%
    MBR AND MBBR – MBR
    COMPARISION
    AS - MBR MBBR – UF
    MLSS MEMBRANE FOULING HIGH LOW
    MEMBRANE FLUX LOW MODERATE
    MEMBRANE REQUIREMENT HIGH MODERATE
    MEMBRANE COST HIGH MODERATE
    RECIRCULATION ENERGY HIGH NIL
    AIR SCOUR ENERGY HIGH NIL
    OXYGEN TRANSFER EFF. LOW HIGH
    SCREENING REQUIREMENTS HIGH LOW
    PEAK F:OW TOLERANCE LOW MODERATE
    FOOT PRINT MODERATE MODERATE

    You might also like