Impact of support material type on performance of dynamic membrane bioreactors treating municipal wastewater

Abstract

BACKGROUNDMembrane bioreactor (MBR) applications have been limited by high cost of membrane modules and fouling problems. Dynamic membrane (DM) technology can be a solution for these problems. Low‐cost filters can be used as support materials for dynamic (cake) layer formation. The characteristics of support material play an important role on dynamic layer formation behavior. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the impact of support material type on dynamic membrane bioreactor (DMBR) performance for municipal wastewater treatment. Hollow fiber support materials, made of polyester fabrics and glass fiber materials, were used for DM formation.RESULTSSimilar treatment performances were obtained with each membrane achieving high removal efficiencies for chemical oxygen demand (>97%) and total suspended solids (>99%) parameters. Higher transmembrane pressure (TMP) was observed for glass fiber material in comparison to polyester material. Based on morphological analyses, dynamic layers formed on both support materials had similar composition, organic and inorganic materials. A homogeneous layer was formed on polyester support material, while fine particles were deposited between the filaments of glass fiber support material, which caused clogging.CONCLUSIONBased on TMP results and morphological analyses, polyester support material provided better formation of DM layer. Thus selection of proper support material type is very important to achieve stable DM layer in DMBRs. © 2020 Society of Chemical Industry

Treatment of Municipal Wastewater by Hollow Fiber Dynamic Membrane Bioreactors

“…The experimental setup used in this study was described in detail in previous articles. [13,14] A cylindrical shaped Plexiglass reactor was used as DMBR system with an effective volume of 5.2 L (Figure 1). A cylindrical air diffuser was placed at the bottom of the reactor to mix the reactor content and supply dissolved oxygen (DO) to the system.…”

“…The performance of hollow fiber DM was investigated only with synthetic wastewater in previous studies. [13,14] Isik et al [13] compared the performance of hollow fiber DM with commercial ultrafiltration (UF) membrane. Similar treatment performances were observed for dynamic and commercial membranes in terms of COD and suspended solid removal efficiency and permeate turbidity.…”

“…Fine particles were accumulated between the filaments and clogged the glass fiber support material, which had more filaments in its structure compared to polyester, which resulted in an increase of TMP. [14] In this study, the hollow fiber DM technology was investigated for the treatment of raw municipal wastewater. Filtration and biological treatment performances were evaluated.…”

“…The performance of hollow fiber DM was investigated only with synthetic wastewater in previous studies. [ 13,14 ] Isik et al. [ 13 ] compared the performance of hollow fiber DM with commercial ultrafiltration (UF) membrane.…”

Primary and A-sludge treatment by anaerobic membrane bioreactors in view of energy-positive wastewater treatment plants

“…Peaks at 1633 and 1634 cm − 1 represented amides I (stretching of C=O and C-N bonds). Amides II (deformation of N-H and C=N bonds) corresponded to peaks at 1536 and 1538 cm − 1 (Isik et al, 2020). Peaks at 1416, 1453 and 1236 cm − 1 indicated the presence of amides III (C-N stretching) (Wang et al, 2009;Ersahin et al, 2016).…”