Your web browser is out of date.

Update your browser for better security, speed and to get the best experience on this website.

Update your browser
Advert

You say you want the resolution − loading fluctuations in membrane bioreactors

Posted on
Simon Judd
Simon Judd

Professor Simon Judd has over 30 years’ post-doctorate experience in all aspects of water and wastewater treatment technology, both in academic and industrial R&D. He has (co-)authored six book titles and over 200 peer-reviewed publications in water and wastewater treatment.

In his capacity as director of Judd Water & Wastewater Consultants, Simon is co-owner of The MBR Site.com, as well as of our sister website SludgeProcessing.com. He is Professor in Membrane Technology at the Cranfield Water Science Institute at Cranfield University in the UK where he has been a staff member since 1992. Simon was also a Research Chair at Qatar University in the Middle East for six years until September 2018.

It is recognised that MBRs and the immersed configuration (iMBR) in particular operate more efficiently when fluctuations in loading are reduced. If the option is available, and this normally means space, a buffer tank can reduce fluctuations sufficiently to allow more optimal use of the membranes, and a cost analysis (Verrecht et al, 2010) has shown this to be slightly more cost effective than installing additional membranes for large municipal installations.

However, the costs incurred by very large peak loads can become very significant, particularly if space is at a premium and recourse has to be made to installing large amounts of membrane, which are then underutilised during periods of low flows. This underutilisation can to some extent be mitigated by reducing the energy demand by switching to either more intermittent aeration (for HF membranes) or reduced bulk aeration (for FS membranes) in the case of iMBRs.

For sMBRs the number of membranes on line can be reduced directly without altering the permeation conditions at all, which then means that the unused membranes can effectively be used as spares.

So, whilst extreme peak loads are unwelcome for any membrane process, and inevitably adds to the capital cost through requiring additional membranes to be installed, it seems that there are ways of adapting the conditions to limit the increase in specific energy demand (kWh/m3 permeate) normally associated with low flows.

Indeed, for the air-lift sidestream in particular, it is actually technically possible (though obviously not practically feasible) to match the number of membrane modules on line with the flow. For a medium to large plant with over 100 modules, this equates to a resolution of <1%.

And then we’d have to start improving the precision of the flow monitoring equipment ...

Comments

All comments are moderated and may be edited or deleted at any time. You must not post anything that is defamatory, illegal, offensive or which contravenes our privacy policy guidelines. Email addresses are only used for comments purposes. Contact info@thembrsite.com to remove or edit a comment.

References

Verrecht, B., Maere, T., Nopens, I., Brepols, C., Judd, S. The cost of a large-scale hollow fibre MBR (2010) Water Research, 44 (18), 5274−5283

About this page

This page was last updated on 08 June 2021

Disclaimer

Information on this page may have been supplied by third parties. You are reminded to contact any third parties to confirm information is accurate, up to date and complete before acting upon it. TheMBRSite.com accepts no liability for information provided by third parties, actions taken on the basis of this information or information held on third-party websites.