2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2014.12.048
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Membrane distillation combined with an anaerobic moving bed biofilm reactor for treating municipal wastewater

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
22
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 75 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
1
22
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Control‐1 reactor achieved the lowest total COD removal rate (83.0 ± 0.6%) because of direct discharge without membrane filtration. The Control‐2 reactor had a similar COD removal rate (92.7 ± 1.0%) to the reported conventional MBR (Kim et al., ). The total COD removal rate of the SEF‐MBR reactor was higher than that of Controls.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…The Control‐1 reactor achieved the lowest total COD removal rate (83.0 ± 0.6%) because of direct discharge without membrane filtration. The Control‐2 reactor had a similar COD removal rate (92.7 ± 1.0%) to the reported conventional MBR (Kim et al., ). The total COD removal rate of the SEF‐MBR reactor was higher than that of Controls.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 56%
“…According to Antoine equation, the increase of ΔT results in more difference in vapor pressure across the membrane, creating the driving force for a higher transportation of water vapors [28]. This positive correlation between the flux and ΔT has been demonstrated in previous DCMD studies [29][30][31].…”
Section: Performance Of Dcmd Systemsmentioning
confidence: 54%
“…As it is well known, a porous hydrophobic membrane is needed to separate pure water from the seawater via MD process [5][6][7]. During the MD operation, liquid water at the hot side (feed side) of the membrane will evaporate at the interface of the hot water and membrane.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%