No abstract

Over a decade ago, the concept of objectively evaluating the performance of control strategies by simulating them using a standard model implementation was introduced for activated sludge wastewater treatment plants. The resulting Benchmark Simulation Model No 1 (BSM1) has been the basis for a significant new development that is reported on here: Rather than only evaluating control strategies at the level of the activated sludge unit (bioreactors and secondary clarifier) the new BSM2 now allows the evaluation of control strategies at the level of the whole plant, including primary clarifier and sludge treatment with anaerobic sludge digestion. In this contribution, the decisions that have been made over the past three years regarding the models used within the BSM2 are presented and argued, with particular emphasis on the ADM1 description of the digester, the interfaces between activated sludge and digester models, the included temperature dependencies and the reject water storage. BSM2-implementations are now available in a wide range of simulation platforms and a ring test has verified their proper implementation, consistent with the BSM2 definition. This guarantees that users can focus on the control strategy evaluation rather than on modelling issues. Finally, for illustration, twelve simple operational strategies have been implemented in BSM2 and their performance evaluated. Results show that it is an interesting control engineering challenge to further improve the performance of the BSM2 plant (which is the whole idea behind benchmarking) and that integrated control (i.e. acting at different places in the whole plant) is certainly worthwhile to achieve overall improvement.

The IWA Anaerobic Digestion Model No.1 (ADM1) was presented in 2002 and is expected to represent the state-of-the-art model within this field in the future. Due to its complexity the implementation of the model is not a simple task and several computational aspects need to be considered, in particular if the ADM1 is to be included in dynamic simulations of plant-wide or even integrated systems. In this paper, the experiences gained from a Matlab/Simulink implementation of ADM1 into the extended COST/IWA Benchmark Simulation Model (BSM2) are presented. Aspects related to system stiffness, model interfacing with the ASM family, mass balances, acid-base equilibrium and algebraic solvers for pH and other troublesome state variables, numerical solvers and simulation time are discussed. The main conclusion is that if implemented properly, the ADM1 will also produce high-quality results in dynamic plant-wide simulations including noise, discrete sub-systems, etc. without imposing any major restrictions due to extensive computational efforts.

No abstract

The COST/IWA Benchmark Simulation Model No 1 (BSM1) has been available for almost a decade. Its primary purpose has been to create a platform for control strategy benchmarking of activated sludge processes. The fact that the research work related to the benchmark simulation models has resulted in more than 300 publications worldwide demonstrates the interest in and need of such tools within the research community. Recent efforts within the IWA Task Group on "Benchmarking of control strategies for WWTPs" have focused on an extension of the benchmark simulation model. This extension aims at facilitating control strategy development and performance evaluation at a plant-wide level and, consequently, includes both pretreatment of wastewater as well as the processes describing sludge treatment. The motivation for the extension is the increasing interest and need to operate and control wastewater treatment systems not only at an individual process level but also on a plant-wide basis. To facilitate the changes, the evaluation period has been extended to one year. A prolonged evaluation period allows for long-term control strategies to be assessed and enables the use of control handles that cannot be evaluated in a realistic fashion in the one week BSM1 evaluation period. In this paper, the finalised plant layout is summarised and, as was done for BSM1, a default control strategy is proposed. A demonstration of how BSM2 can be used to evaluate control strategies is also given.