Modeling submerged hollow-fiber membrane filtration for wastewater treatment

Busch, Jan; Cruse, Andreas; Marquardt, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2006.11.008

Cited by 101 publications

(69 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The packing of the fibers within a module has been observed to be very different axially [111], which causes some non-uniformity in the flow. Due to the complexity of the hydrodynamics in the module [111][112][113][114][115][116], the buildup of cake deposits is not likely to be uniform either among the fibers or along the fiber surface. The misdistribution of fouling deposits, which is acknowledged to be a direct function of the non-uniformity of the flow within the HF module [109,115,[117][118][119][120][121][122], can result in large variations in the performance of fibers at the same position in the module and in poorer performance of the fibers in the middle of the module [108].…”

Section: Blocking and Blocking Mitigation In Submerged Hf Modulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Performance and Fouling Control of Submerged Hollow Fiber (HF) Systems: A Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The submerged membrane filtration concept is well-established for low-pressure microfiltration (MF) and ultrafiltration (UF) applications in the water industry, and has become a mainstream technology for surface-water treatment, pretreatment prior to reverse osmosis (RO), and membrane bioreactors (MBRs). Compared to submerged flat sheet (FS) membranes, submerged hollow fiber (HF) membranes are more common due to their advantages of higher packing density, the ability to induce movement by mechanisms such as bubbling, and the feasibility of backwashing. In view of the importance of submerged HF processes, this review aims to provide a comprehensive landscape of the current state-of-the-art systems, to serve as a guide for further improvements in submerged HF membranes and their applications. The topics covered include recent developments in submerged hollow fiber membrane systems, the challenges and developments in fouling-control methods, and treatment protocols for membrane permeability recovery. The highlighted research opportunities include optimizing the various means to manipulate the hydrodynamics for fouling mitigation, developing online monitoring devices, and extending the submerged HF concept beyond filtration.

show abstract

Section: Blocking and Blocking Mitigation In Submerged Hf Modulesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Performance and Fouling Control of Submerged Hollow Fiber (HF) Systems: A Review

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These two parameters (f and r p ) can be calculated according to the Eqs. (7) and (8) proposed by Busch et al [51] and Giraldo and LeChevallier [52]. 16 16 a f = the membrane's porosity (variable), k = the factor representing the detachment of the cake layer from the membrane surface, n p = pore fouling factor to explain the typically observed exponential rise of TMP due to the pore fouling resistance especially at the final stage of operation of an MBR system, n c = cake fouling factor to explain the typically observed exponential rise of TMP due to the cake layer resistance especially at the final stage of operation of an MBR system, r p = the membrane pore radius (variable).…”

Section: Mbr-gmentioning

confidence: 99%

Membrane fouling reduction and improvement of sludge characteristics by bioflocculant addition in submerged membrane bioreactor

Deng

Guo

Ngo

et al. 2015

Separation and Purification Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe effectiveness of a green bioflocculant (Gemfloc Ò ) on enhanced performance of a submerged membrane bioreactor (SMBR) was evaluated in terms of membrane fouling reduction and sludge characterization. Two MBRs were operated parallelly in this study, namely conventional MBR (CMBR) and MBR with Gemfloc Ò addition (MBR-G). Results showed mitigated membrane fouling through Gemfloc Ò addition in terms of cake layer formation and pore blocking. When compared to the CMBR, in spite of more extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) presented in activated sludge, the MBR-G demonstrated less soluble microbial products (SMP), larger sludge flocs, higher zeta potential and greater relative hydrophobicity of sludge flocs, which decreased cake layer resistance and pore blocking resistance. The reduced cake layer resistance in the MBR-G could be also ascribed to less growth of suspended biomass, lower sludge viscosity, as well as less EPS, SMP and biopolymer clusters in the cake layer. In addition, a modified resistance-in-series model was employed by considering SMP and mixed liquor suspended solids. The simulated results implied that the model could predict the influence of sludge characteristics on membrane fouling behavior of the SMBR.

show abstract

“…Geissler et al [72] set up a model to describe permeability loss of a submerged HF module based on a semi-empirical approach (resistance in series with two fitting parameters) and calibrated this at full scale over three months. Busch et al [86] developed this further to a rigorous model with a www.cet-journal.com high level of detail by including phenomena like concentration polarization, microbial growth in the biofilm, pressure drop in the permeate, etc. However, this model contains a large number of physical and empirical parameters which are subject to uncertainty.…”

Section: Advanced Monitoring and Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Membrane Bioreactors in Waste Water Treatment – Status and Trends

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Due to their unique advantages like controlled biomass retention, improved effluent quality, and decreased footprint, membrane bioreactors (MBRs) are being increasingly used in waste water treatment up to a capacity of several 100,000 p.e. This article reviews the current status of MBRs and reports trends in MBR design and operation. Typical operational and design parameters are given as well as guidelines for waste water treatment plant revamping. To further improve the biological performance, specific or hybrid process configurations are shown to lead to, e.g., enhanced nutrient removal. With regards to reducing membrane fouling, optimized modules, advanced control, and strategies like the addition of flux enhancers are currently emerging. IntroductionThe first reported application of membrane bioreactor (MBR) technology in waste water treatment was in 1969, when an ultrafiltration membrane was used to separate activated sludge from the final effluent of a biological waste water treatment system, and the sludge was recycled back into the aeration tank [1]. Due to their unique advantages like superb and hygienic effluent and reduced footprint which has been shown on large scale [2], MBRs, which are combinations of common bioreactors and membrane filtration units for biomass retention, are becoming increasingly popular for waste water treatment. In Europe, the first full-scale MBR plant for treatment of municipal waste water was constructed in Porlock (UK, commissioned in 1998, 3800 p.e.), soon followed by the Büchel and Rödingen WWTPs (Germany, 1999, 1000 and 3000 p.e., respectively), and Perthes-en-Gâtinais WWTP (France, 1999, 4500 p.e.). . Since then, a large number of new results has been published presenting novel process configurations, more insight into the occurring phenomena, and pointing out innovative ways to combat fouling [11,12]. Between 2005 and 2009, the EC funded two major projects on all aspects of MBR technology (AMEDEUS and EUROMBRA), the outcomes of which can be found on www.mbr-network.eu. This paper aims to provide an overview of where MBR technology stands today and which future trends in process configuration and fouling control are emerging. Due to the vast amount of worldwide studies on MBR, this article will not be able to reflect all ongoing developments in the same depth, but will attempt to highlight the main economic and operational trends. Current Status of MBR Market and CapacityThe global market for membrane bioreactor technology is expected to grow at a compound annual growth rate of 10.5 %, increasing in value from $296.0 million in 2008 to $488.0 million by 2013. Growth rates of MBR systems are not the same for all world regions and are not increasing from the same base. Municipal/domestic wastewater treatment was the ear-

show abstract

Modeling submerged hollow-fiber membrane filtration for wastewater treatment

Cited by 101 publications

References 48 publications

The Performance and Fouling Control of Submerged Hollow Fiber (HF) Systems: A Review

The Performance and Fouling Control of Submerged Hollow Fiber (HF) Systems: A Review

Membrane fouling reduction and improvement of sludge characteristics by bioflocculant addition in submerged membrane bioreactor

Membrane Bioreactors in Waste Water Treatment – Status and Trends

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About