You are on page 1of 58

(MBR)

886-3-4515811#55720
886-3-4622232
http://green.vnu.edu.tw

lcjuang@vnu.edu.tw

(1997)
(1989)
(1987)

(2006 ~)
(2009/10~)
(2004/2 2007/5)
(2004/2~2007/5)
(2003/8~2009/9)
(1997/8~2004/1)
(1994/8 1997/7)
(1994/8~1997/7)

()

()

(
)

--

()

(
(87 (876 (87 (876 (876 987
624) 24) 624) 24)
24)
28)

38 (5-9)
-----35 (10 4)

pH

6 5-8
6.5
8.55

6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0

6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0

6 0-9
6.0
9.00

6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0

6 0 ~ 9.0
6.0
90

DO (mg/L)

6.5

5.5

4.5

--

--

--

--

--

--

550

SS ((mg/L)

g )

25

25

40

100

30

BOD5 (mg/L)

--

--

30

COD (mg/L)

( /L)
(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

100

--

--

--

--

--

10

(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

10

NO3-N (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

50

NH3-N
N (mg/L)

0 1
0.1

0 3
0.3

0 3
0.3

--

--

--

TP (mg/L)

0.02

0.05

--

--

--

--

PO4 3-(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

F-((mg/L)
g )

--

--

--

--

--

15

-(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

S2

(()

(
(87 (876 (87 (876 (87 987(
624) 24) 624) 24) 624)
28)

(CFU/100mL)
50
5000
10000
--200,000

CN (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

Mn (mg/L)

0 05
0.05

0 05
0.05

0 05
0.05

0 05
0.05

0 05
0.05

--

(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

10

(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

10

Ag (mg/L)

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.5

As (mg/L)

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.5

Cd (mg/L)

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.03
2

Cr (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

Cu (mg/L)(g )

0.03

0.03

0.03

0.03

0.03

Hg (mg/L)

0.002

0.002

0.002

0.002

0.002

0.005

Ni (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

Pb (mg/L)

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

0.1

Se (mg/L))
( g/ ))

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

Zn (mg/L)

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

0.5

B (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

(mg/L)

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.05

0.5

(mg/L)

--

--

--

--

--

(mg/L)

0.005

0.005

0.005

0.005

0.005

0.005

(S/cm)

--

()

--

750

--

BOD5 (mg/L)

< 15

--

--

TDS ((mg/L)

g )

--

800

--

800

F-(mg/L)

--

0.8

--

0.8

Cl (mg/L)

--

250

175

250

SO4 2-(mg/L)

--

250

200

250

(mg/L)

--

400

--

--

(CFU/100mL)

--

50

(NTU)

--

--

(mg/L)

--

--

30
3.0

--

NO3-N (mg/L)

--

10

--

10

NO2-N (mg/L)

--

0.1

--

NH3-N (mg/L)

--

0.5

--

0.1

TP (mg/L)

--

--

--

--

As (mg/L)

--

0.05

0.05

0.05

Cd (mg/L

--

0.005

001

0.005

Cr (mg/L)

--

0.05

0.1

0.05

Cu (mg/L)

--

1.0

0.2

1.0

Ni (mg/L)

--

--

0.2

0.1

(mg/L)

--

05
0.5

50
5.0

05
0.5

--

0.05

--

0.01

CN (mg/L)

Ideal Industrial Waste Management Practices

RO

NF

O
+
*
+
+
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
O

+
O
+
*
*
O
O

+
+
+
*
*
+
O

+
+
+
*
*
O
O

+
+
+
*
*
+
+

+
*
O
*
*
+
O

+
+
O
+
+
O
O

+
+
+
+
+
O
O

+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
+
+
+
+
+
+

*
*
*
+
O
*
*

+
+
+
+
+
O
O

*
*
*
O
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
+
+
O
*
*
*
*

*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*

O
O
*
*
*
*
+
O

O
O
O
O
*
*
*
*

+
O
*
*
*
*
*
*

O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

O
*
*
*
*
*
+
O

*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
*
*
*
*
*
+
+

O
*
*
*
*
*
O
*

*
+
*
*
*
*
*
*

*
+
*
*
*
*
*
*

+
+
+
+
+
O
O
O

+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+

+
*
+
+
+
+
*
*

O
+
+
+
+
+
*
*

*
+
+
*
+
*
*
*

*
*
+
+
+
+
*
*

UF

MF

+
+
O
+
+
+
+

UV+

O
+
*
+
+
*
O

O
+
*
+
+
*
O

O
+
*
+
O
*
O

+
+
*
+
O
+
+

UV
V

10m
10m

BOD

COD

+ o
+

*
*

10

11

Part 1-
Part 2-(MBR)
Part 3-MBR

12

Part 1-

13

14

:
-:
-:UV
-:

:
:///,
(MMF)(AC).
15M cm
:,15M-cm,
RO CDI UV(254nm).
:
1)RO+IX:
1)RO+IX:,,,
,,,.
2)IX+RO:,, ,

,,,.
:,,
TOC UV UF ,IC
.

15

1






2
pH:
Turbidity: , NTU
S.S: ,ppm
Oil & grease: ,ppm
C.O.D: , ppm
Conductivity: ,
s/cm
Resistivity: , M-cm
Alkanility,ppm
Hardness--,ppm
H d

Silica, ppm
L.S.I
SDI
SDI
Bacteria count: ,CFU/100ml

16


:
1 /
1./
2./
3.
4.:,
5./
6.,
7.
8
8.
9./
10.
:
1.:(MMF)(AC)
2.: 2B3T
3.MF/UF/NF/RO/EDR/CEDI
4.O3/UV
5./

17

18


:
RO
NF
UF
MF
ED
BP
DD
PV
MD
GA

(REVERSE OSMOSIS)------
(NANOFILTRATION)-------
(ULTRAFILTRATION)------
(MICROFILTRATION)------
(ELECTRO DIALYSIS)------
DIALYSIS)

(Bipolar Membrane)------
(DIFFUSION DIALYSIS)---
(Pervaporation)--------
(Membrane Distillation)-
(GAS SEPARATION)------SEPARATION)

19

(SPIRAL WOUND)
(PLATE TYPE)
(TUBULER)
(HOLLOW FIBER)

20

RO

, gpd(m3/d)
(%)
%

BW30-400
10,500 (40)

TM 7 2 0- 400L .
10,200 (37)

99 50%
99.50%

99 0%
99.70%

2,000mg/L Nacl

2,000mg/L Nacl

225 PSI

225 PSI

25

25

15%

15%

600 PSI

600 PSI

45

45

3-9

3-9

2-11

2-10

1000 ppm-hours

1000 ppm-hours

<5

<5

polyamide

polyamide

*(mm)

201*1016

201*1016

(mm)

29

32

PH

SDI

()

400 ft
FRP

400 ft2
FRP

21

RO

(scale formation)

(metal oxide deposition)


(colloidal fouling)

(suspended solid fouling)


(biological fouling)

(organic fouling)

22

23


PH
/


24

RO

10%~15%
10%
15%
90%
>1.5

15k
:
15kg/cm
/ 2

-:

: 14.7kg/cm
14 7kg/cm2
: 14.0kg/cm2

25

(Ion exchanger process)


,

SACSO3H

WAC:COOH
Ca2+Mg2+
SBAN+(CH3)3

WBA: SO4=Cl
NO3HCO3CO3=SiO4=

26

27

MMF (Multi-Media Filter)

0.45mm

45cm

12mm

10cm

2 5
25mm

10
10cm

1020mm

15cm

2050mm

15cm

28

MMF(MultiMediaFilter)

10 m/hr

1520 m/hr

29

CEDI()
CEDI1990

CEDI
(95%)
.,,(95%)
:pH:5~7, 15M-cm,24Hr
.
CEDI,

,,,
RO,RO,CEDI
.

30

CEDI

31

(1)
( )

1.

2.

32

(2)
( )

33

(3)
( )

2B3T

34

(4)
( )
:
1.
2
2.
3.
4 (CMP)
4.(CMP)

35

(5)
( )

11.MMF/ACF
MMF/ACF
2.
3.RO
4 /UF
4./UF
5.On-line

1.: ,
2.(Local scrubber):

11.UFNF/RO
UFNF/RO
2.MBR,

36

Part 2(MBR)

37

(Membrane Bioreactor, MBR)


0.10.5m

(Transmembrane pressure,
pressure TMP)

Kpa
p

(Flux)
LMH(liter meter2 hr-1)

(Critical flux)

(Subcritical flux)

38


(Foulant)

(Reversible fouling)

(Irreversible fouling)

(Cross flow)

(Dead-end flow)

39

(Side-stream)

(Submerged/immersed)
(S b
d/i
d)

(backflush)

(Chemical cleaning)

40

41

42

(400X)

43

0.4

hr-1

0.3

0.2

0.1

20

40

60

80

100

44


0 min

30 mins later

45

()

46

MBR
MBR
pH meter

pump
air

47

MBR
MBR

()
MBR0.1~0.4m
(RO)
(RO)

48

What is MBR
Pi
Primary
Clarifier

Secondary
Clarifier

Aeration tank

Effluent

wastewater

ASP

Excess sludge

Return sludge

A
A

High quality
Effluent

wastewater

MBR

Aeration tank

Brings conventional
clarification,
l ifi ti
aeration
ti
and filtration together
into a single step

less sludge

49

MBR

1.
1.
2 2.
2.
2
3. 3.

4.
5
5.
6.
7
7.

50

51

Two Major Membrane Bioreactor Configurations

52


Dead-end

Permeatee

Cross-flow

Permeate

53


MBRMBR

MBR

MBR
MBR

MBRMBR
50~120 LMH
7-30Kpa
MBR

54



MBR

1990
MBR

MBR
15~50 LMH
3-4KpaMBR
MBR

MBR

55


MBRMBR

MBR
MBR

2002MBRMBR

MBR

56

1.
2
2.

3.
4
4.
5.
6.

1.
2.
3.
4.
5
5.

MLSS

1.

2.

3
3.

1.
2.

3.

57

MBR

1.
2.

1.
2.

1.

2.

58

MBR

pH

MLSS

1.
2.
3.
1
1.

2. MLSS
3. MLSS
4 MLSS
4.
1.
2.
1
1.
2.
3.

1.
2.
3.
4.

59

(Kinematic viscosity)
13%

(Hydraulic

(Hydraulic resistance)
resistance)
(Deterioration)

60

61


P
(PR)

62

(boundary layer)
(bulk
(
convective flow)
)
(back-diffusion effect)

63

pH

pH

pH
pH
(CA)pH 3~8
pH

pH 5

(Composite)PS PVDF Cellulose


pH 3~8

64



(MTC)

(P)MTC
P

65


MBR


MBR ()

66

MBR
(foulants)
(fo lants)

(
(fouling)
g)

67

adsorption

biofilm


biofouling

precipitation

ageing

68


Concentration

Polarization, CP

69

RO


MBR 0.3~5m

70


NF RO
MF UF
MF

71

MBR

1. SS
2.
2

1. SS
2
2.

1.
2. PVDFPE
1.

2. (EPS)
1.
1.
2. 2. EPS

72

MBR

MLSS < 6,000 mg/L


MLSS
MLSS > 15,000 mg/L

1
1.
2. DO
3. DO < 0.1 mg/LEPS

HRT
SRT

1. HRT
2. HRTMLSS

1. SRTEPS
2. SRTMLSS

73

MBR

74

(m)

(mm)

pH
(oC)

Kubota

Kubota

PE

Toray

Toroy

PVDF

0.4

11-13
13
40

0.08
7

75

/
/
/
( mm)
(m2)
(/ )(bar)
)(b )
(m2/m3)
mm
,
(LMH/bar)
(LMH)

(g/l)

Kubota

Kubota

Toray

Toroy

510

515

1000/490/6
0.8

1500/550/6
1.25

1608
1.4

115

115

135

7
1110
30 - 40

6-12

76

GE-Zenon

ZeeWeed
ZW500d

Mitsubishi-Rayon

Sterapore SUR Sterapore SADF

USFilter

PVDF

PE

(m)

(ID/OD) (mm)

0.04

0.8/1.9

0.4

0.37/0.54

0.4

1.1/2.8

(1000ppm)
2.0-10.5
400
3

1-13
00-400
1.7

1-10
00-400
2.9

pH
(oC)
(mm)

PVDF

3-6

PVDF
0.1

77

GE-Zenon

ZeeWeed
d
ZW500d

Mitsubishi-Rayon

Sterapore SUR Sterapore SADF

USFilter

(mm)
(//)
(m2)
, (/
)(bar)
(m2/m3)

2198/844/49

1483 /606/886

2000 /1250/30

31 6
31.6
0.55/ -

105
0.1-0.4

25

93
9.3

300

485, 131

333, 71

(LMH/b )
(LMH/bar)
(LMH)
(g/l)

10-20
8-10
5-100
5

10 -20
9-13

2-3

3-6
3
6

78

Part 3-MBR
Characteristics and effects of soluble microbial
products in the effluent of membrane bioreactors
TFT-LCD industry wastewater (TFT-LCD), Domestic
wastewater (DW),
(DW) wool processing industry wastewater
(WPI).

79

Out e
Outline
`
`
`

`
`

The definition of SMP (soluble microbial products)


Obj ti
Objective
Wastewater pre-treatment system and
characteristics
The calculation of SMP content
Results and Discussion
`
the characteristics of raw wastewater
`
wastewater properties in the MBR reactor
`
the SMP composition after the treatment of MBR
`
Wastewater properties of the permeate from UF
membrane filtered with MBR effluent

80

Introduction
1 Membrane Bioreactor System(MBR)
1.
<traditional activated sludge treatment process>
Primary
sedimentation
tank

A.S. tank

Secondary
sedimentation
tank

Sand
filtration

Disinfection
tank

Effluent

substitute
Membrane bioreactor

Effluent or recycle
<MBR treatment process>

Wastewater treatment flow chart for A.S. and MBR pprocesses

81

The definition of SMP


The pool of organic compounds that are released into the solution from
substrate metabolism (usually with biomass growth) and biomass
d
decay
d i the
during
th complete
l t mineralization
i
li ti off simple
i l substrate.
b t t (Noguera
(N
et al., 1994Rittmann et al., 2001)
SMP are broadly classified substrate metabolism and biomass as part of
cell decay.
Two subcategories of SMP:
(1)UAP (substrate-utilization-associated products) are produced
di tl during
directly
d i substrate
b t t metabolism,
t b li
including
i l di intermediate
i t
di t andd final
fi l
products.
((2)BAP
)
((biomass-associated pproducts)) are formed directlyy from
biomass, presumably as part of maintenance and decay, such as humic
and fulvic acids, and organic acids. BAP comprise of nucleic acids,
pproteins,
ote s, carbohydrate,
ca bo yd ate, lipids,
p ds, amino
a
o acids,
ac ds, and
a d vitamins.
v ta
s.

82

The formation pattern


of SMP

The diagram description about


SMP fformation
i pattern iin
(a)de Silva and Rittmann,2000
(b)Laspidou and Rittmann,2002
(c)Aq ino and Stuckey,2008
(c)Aquino
St cke 2008

(Menniti and Morgenroth, 2010)

83

(Aquino and Stuckey,84


2008)

SMP comprise a wide range of high and low molecular weight,


weight such as
polysaccharides, humic and fulvic acids, proteins, nucleic acids,
enzymes and structural compounds of cells and products of energy
metabolism. However, the major of compounds are carbohydrate
and proteins.
The major composition of effluent COD in wastewater treated by
biological treatment process is SMP .
The accumulation of SMP has been shown to adversely affect
membrane flux, metabolic activity of activated sludge, and
nitrification.
The limitation of water resources has lead to demands for the
development of alternative water resource. Currently, the interest in
wastewater reuse in various parts of the world has promoted the
development of wastewater and secondary effluent treatment
technologies.

85

The objective of this Topic:


Introduce wastewater properties sampling from biological
t t
treatment
t processes in
i three
th kinds
ki d off industrial
i d t i l or domestic
d
ti
wastewater.
Analyze the characteristics and some organic index of water
quality in effluent treated by MBR process.
process
SMP composition and contents in effluent treated by MBR
process.

86

Wastewater p
pre-treatment system
y
and characteristics
Wastewater source: TFT-LCD industry wastewater (TFT-LCD),
Domestic wastewater (DW), wool processing industry wastewater (WPI).
Process organic
g
wastewater
AOAO+MBR treatment process

Pre-treatment process
MBR

Aerobic
Tank (1)

Anoxic
Tank (1)

TS4

Aerobic
Tank (2)

Anoxic
Tank (2)

TS1

TS2

Effluent

TS3

Adjustment tank
Returned sludge
Sludge drain
Treatment recycle
for sludge

<Other wastewater treatment process>

Treatment flow chart of AOAO + MBR for TFT-LCD organic wastewater


87

Domestic Wastewater
treated by MBR system

Effluent

Domestic
wastewater

DS3

DS1
DS2

MBR tank

Sludge
g drain

pH adjustment
tank
WPI Process
wastewater

Collection
Tank

Sedimentation
tank

First stage wastewater


biological treatment
(High efficiency A.S.)

WS1

Sludge (1)

Effluent

Sedimentation
tank

WS4
Aerobic
tank

WS3

Biological
Contactor
Tank

Buffer
tank

Multi-Buffer
t k
tank

Buffer
t k
tank

WS2

Pre-treatment process
Returned sludge

Sludge
g (2)
( )

Sludge (2)
Sludge
treatment

Sludge (1)
Sludge (2)

Treatment flow chart for Wool Processing Industry wastewater decomposed by

biological treatment process

88

Analysis
A l i items
i
off sampling
li
analysis item
sampling

Water
Organic
quality compounds
analysis

SMP analysis
l i off composition
ii
Total
total protein
EEM
carbohydrate
content
analysis
concentration
analysis

Raw wastewater

MBR influent

In MBR

MBR effluent

(1) Water quality: pHDOSSVSS


(2) Organic compounds analysis : SCOD, DOC, UV254, SUVA, molecular weight.
(3) SMP analysis of composition: Total carbohydrate concentration, total protein content
analysis, EEM analysis .

89

UV254 absorbance indicates the concentration of organic compound with aromatic


groupings
i
or unsaturated
t t d bonds.
b d
SUVA (specific ultraviolet absorption) is an indicator of the humic content of water.
SUVA (L/mg-m) = 100 (cm/m) [UV254 (m-1)/DOC mg/L]
SUVA values of less than about 3 L/mg
L/mg-m
m signify a water containing mostly nonnon
humic material.
SUVA values of 4 to 5 L/mg-m are typical of waters containing primarily hydrophobic
humic material and the property is similar with nature organic compound (NOM)
(Edzwald and Van Benschoten, 1990).

Theory molecule weight ratio


O2/C=32/12=2.66
If the SCOD/DOC value is higher than the theory value 2.66, it means wastewater
comprised more non-carbon organic material.

90

The calculation of SMP content(1)

SCODSMP=[conversion factors from carbohydrate as COD *


y
concentration + conversion factors from pproteins as
carbohydrate
COD * protein content ](1)
((Jiang
g et al.,, 2008))

..(2)
( )

COD// Weight =
COD

...(3)
(3)
(Rittmann & McCarty, 2001)

91

The calculation of SMP content (2)

Bradford method to analyze protein concentration:


assuming a stoichiometric conversion factor of 1.5
1 5 which was
derived from the typical formula of proteins (C16H24O5N4)
Phenol-sulfuric acid method to analyze carbohydrate
concentration:
assuming a stoichiometric conversion factor of 1.07 which
was derived from the typical formula of glucose (C6H12O6)
(Aquino & Stuckey, 2004)
SCODSMP=[1.07* carbohydrate concentration +1.5* protein content ](4)
DOCSMP=[0.4* carbohydrate concentration +0.545* protein content ](5)

92

Result and Discussion (1) - the characteristics of raw


wastewater
pH

TFT-LCD
AVE
Range
8 59
8.59
7 74-99.60
7.74
60

DW
AVE
Range
7 77 7.64
7.77
7 64-77.91
91

WPI
AVE
Range
2 09
2.09
1 99-22.30
1.99
30

DO
6.9
5.2-7.9
3.8
2.6-5.5
6.9
6.6-7.2
(mg/L)
Dimethyl
y sulfoxide
Monoethanolamine
Tetramethylammonium
y
Isopropyl
p py Alcohol
Name
SS
(
DMSO
,(CH
)
SO)
(MEA,C
H
ONH
)
Hydroxide
(
TMAH
,
(
IPA
,
2 5
2 81-101
11
0-23
94
282
132-530
(mg/L)
(CH ) NOH)
CH CHOHCH )
VSSMolecular
+
10CH3
0-21 HO 76
70-87 R 255
116-495
OH
structure
(mg/L)
O
S
R N R
OH
SCOD
R
2
1324
910-1524 136 NH
127-152
2423 1939-2857
CH3
(mg/L)
3 2

3 4

DOC
(mg/L)
SCOD/DOC

384.7 322.8-494.5 29.3 26.6-32.7

882.1 616.3-1171.0

3 49
3.49

2 81
2.81

2 75 4 62
2.75-4.62

4 66 4.45-4.86
4.66
4 45 4 86

2 44 3 15
2.44-3.15

UV254
(1/cm)

0.097 0.052-0.204 0.146 0.128-0.167 2.000 1.341-3.067

SUVA
(L/mg-m)

0.024 0.016-0.041 0.507 0.391-0.629 0.240 0.115-0.366


93

Presume organic
wastewater
g
contained high
concentration Ncompound, such as
DMSO or MEA.

Molecular weight
g ((MW)) distribution of raw wastewater in ((a)TFT-LCD
)
(b)DW (c)WPI

94

Result and Discussion (2) - wastewater properties in the


MBR reactor
The wastewater characteristics in three types of MBR
TFT-LCD

DW

WPI

Qin (CMD)

4000

0 0144
0.0144

300

V(m3)

444

0.02

200

SRT(days)

60

30

20-30
20
30

membrane pore size(m)

0.04

0.22

0.4

VSS/SS

0 90
0.90

0 76
0.76

0 73
0.73

F/M (gSCOD/gVSS d)

0.24

0.15

0.09

Sludge sampling
95
from MBR tank

Result and Discussion (2) - The characteristics of DW


wastewater treated by MBR
MBR Influent

In MBR
R
Range

MBR Effluent

A
Ave.

R
Range

A
Ave.

A
Ave.

pH

7.77

7.64-7.91

7.14

6.29-7.71
7.36
HRT:33.3 hours

6.50-7.88

DO(mg/L)

3.8

2.6-5.5

4.4

SRT: 30 days
3.2-5.1
7.0

6.7-7.2

( g )
SS(mg/L)

94

81-101

885

F/M: 0.15 gSCOD/gVSS.d


Pore size: 0.22
764-1004
3 m 1-5

VSS(mg/L)

76

70-87

672

598-736

0-3

SCOD(mg/L)

136

127 152
127-152

70

65 76
65-76

24

19 29
19-29

DOC(mg/L)

29.3

26.6-32.7

18.7

17.9-19.7

10.1

8.6-10.9

SCOD/DOC

4.66

4.45-4.86

3.72

3.60-3.86

2.38

2.20-2.65

UV254(1/cm)

0.146 0.128-0.167 0.143

0.136-0.150

0.139 0.132-0.148

SUVA(L/mg-m) 0.507 0.391-0.629 0.763

0.756-0.776

1.392 1.292-1.526

MBR reactor

R
Range

96

Result and Discussion (2) - The characteristics of TFT-LCD


wastewater treated by MBR
MBR Influent

In MBR

MBR Effluent

AVE

Range

AVE

Range

AVE

Range

pH

7.47

7.38-7.57

7.58

7.49-7.66

7.74

7.60-7.88

DO(mg/L)

1.1

0.4-2.8

SS(mg/L)

9260

8375-9856

VSS(mg/L)

8370

7060 9097
7060-9097

SCOD(mg/L)

286

230-350

233

179-282

15

10-26

DOC(mg/L)

69.4

51.2-79.2

64.7

56.0-77.2

8.7

5.2-15.7

SCOD/DOC

4.15

3.03-4.64
3.03
4.64

3.58

3.20-4.16
3.20
4.16

1.80

1.60-1.99
1.60
1.99

MBR reactor
0.4
0.1-0.7
6.4
5.7-7.9
HRT: 2.67 hours
SRT: 60 days
11966 9170-13633
F/M: 0.24 gSCOD/gVSS.d
Pore size: 0.04 m

10790 8442-12693
8442 12693

UV254(1/cm) 0.120

0.081-0.192

0.128 0.094-0.199 0.075 0.040-0.155

SUVA(L/mg-m) 0.176

0.107-0.269

0.198 0.150-0.302 0.819 0.726-0.987


97

Result and Discussion (2) - The characteristics of WPI


wastewater treated by MBR
MBR Influent

In MBR
Range

MBR Effluent

AVE

Range

AVE

AVE

pH

7.70

7.56-7.90

6.21

DO(mg/L)

6.3

5.8-6.7

3.8

SS(mg/L)

31

26-35

5868

HRT:16 hours
SRT: 20~30 days
2.4-5.4
6.8
6.4-7.0
F/M: 0.09 gSCOD/gVSS.d
4278-7584
3-14
Pore size: 0.47m

VSS(mg/L)

21

17-25

4265

3086-5571

1-9

SCOD(mg/L)

251

210-286

168

120-206

103

68-125

DOC(mg/L)

61.3

35.9-83.8

64.1

49.0-79.5

26.5

16.9-35.7

SCOD/DOC

4 35
4.35

3 41 5 84
3.41-5.84

2 63
2.63

2 23 2 96
2.23-2.96

3 95
3.95

3 50 4 43
3.50-4.43

UV254(1/cm)

0.502 0.378-0.609

0.480

0.323-0.621

0.407

0.261-0.535

SUVA(L/mg-m) 0.910 0.451-1.362


0.764 0.602-1.056

1.575

1.268-1.986
98

MBR reactor6.62
5.84-6.68

Range
6.03-6.93

Organics removal efficiencies at pre-treatment process for three kinds of wastewater


Removal efficiency (%)
TFT-LCD
DW

items

WPI

SCOD

78 43(1324286mg/L)
78.43
(1324 286mg/L)

89 65(2423251
89.65
(2423 251 mg/L)

DOC

81.97(384.769.4 mg/L)

93.05(882.161.3 mg/L)

UV254

-23.51((0.0970.120 cm-1)

74.92((2.0000.502cm-1)

MW distribution after pre-treatment process for (i)TFT-LCD (ii)WPI

99

[4.15]
[3.58]

The variation on the


concentration ratio of SCOD
to DOC at the influent,, the
reactor or MBR effluent for
(a)TFT-LCD (b)DW (c)WPI.
The variation of SUVA at the
influent, the reactor or MBR
effluent for (d)TFT-LCD
(d)TFT LCD
(e)DW (f)WPI

[1 80]
[1.80]

[[4.66]]
[3.72]
[2.38]

[ ]SCOD/DOC concentration ratio

[4 35]
[4.35]
[2.63]
[3.95]

100

Result and Discussion (3) - the SMP composition after


the treatment of MBR
[[4.14]]

The contents of carbohydrate and


protein in SMP composition
within the different treated
wastewater of MBR treatment
processes for (a) TFT-LCD (b)
DW (c) WPI, expressed as SCOD
to substitute for the SMP
concentration, and for (d) TFTLCD (e) DW (f) WPI , expressed
as DOC to substitute for the SMP
concentration

[4 27]
[4.27]
[8.98]

[5.2]

[ ] the concentration ratio of


carbohydrate/protein , C/N

[6.48]

[9.29]
[13.13]
[2 29]
[2.29]
101

The concentration ratio of SMP to total SCOD or total DOC


MBR Influent
AVE
Range

TFT-LCD

DW

WPI

AVE

MBR
Range

MBR Effluent
AVE
Range

SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)

9.43

7.07~
14.26

14.62

10.16~
23.08

75.57

52.13~
87.41

DOCSMP/DOC
(%)

14.83

7.94~
94
23.42

19.61

12.43~
12
43
31.28

58.01

06
50.67~
64.00

SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)

23 42
23.42

20.41~
26.20

39 63
39.63

35.34~
43.80

DOCSMP/DOC
(%)

37.59

33.53~
42.70

40.41

34.41~
49.09

SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)

7.94

6.28~
8.76

28.42

23.43~
33.92

34.35

30.41~
40.88

DOCSMP/DOC
(%)

12.97

7.99~
99
18.80

28.01

227.20~
20
37.37

50.40

43.58~
43
8
58.78

102

Fluorescence Excitation-Emission Matrixs (EEM) defined excitation and emission


wavelength boundaries (dashed
lines) for five EEM regions.(Chen et al.,2003) 103

The fulvic
acid has
higher
concentration

The humic
acid has
higher
concentration

EEM fluorescence spectroscopy of the effluent for MBR treatment at (a)blank (b)TFT-LCD

104
(c)DW (d)WPI

Wastewater properties of the permeate from UF membrane filtered with effluent MBR
TFT-LCD

pH
DO(mg/L)
SCOD(mg/L)
DOC(mg/L)
UV254(1/cm)
SUVA(L/mg m)
SUVA(L/mg-m)
SCOD/DOC

DW

WPI

MBR
Effluent

UF
Effluent
(ave)

MBR
Effluent

UF
Effluent
(ave)

MBR
Effluent

UF
Effluent
(ave)

7.87
7
87
6.0
10
5.2
0.040
0 763
0.763
1.99

88.01
01
7.7
7
4.8
0.033
0 701
0.701
1.44

77.54
54
6.0
33
12.6
0.151
1 198
1.198
2.62

77.76
76
6.3
24
9.6
0.118
1 226
1.226
2.51

77.64
64
6.2
73
20.3
0.417
1 252
1.252
3.60

77.68
68
6.5
57
15.0
0.376
1 539
1.539
3.78

105

The SMP content and the ratio of SMP to the concentration of organics at the MBR
effluent and UF permeate
TFT-LCD
MBR
UF
Effluent Effluent
(ave)

DW

WPI

MBR
Effluent

UF
Effluent
(ave)

MBR
UF
Effluent Effluent
(ave)

Carbohydrate
(mg/L)

6.39

5.00

13.53

9.93

18.45

13.70

Protein
(mg/L)

0.97

0.73

1.64

ND

2.45

1.38

SCODSMP
(mg/L)

8.29

6.44

16.94

10.62

23.42

16.73

DOCSMP
(mg/L)

3.08

2.40

6.31

3.97

8.72

6.23

80.27

94.26

51.32

44.26

32.08

29.61

59 32
59.32

50 44
50.44

50 05
50.05

41 58
41.58

42 93
42.93

41 69
41.69

SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)
DOCSMP/DOC
(%)

106

Although the removal


efficiency of organic
acids is poor for the
filtration of UF
membrane the proteins
membrane,
has significantly
removed.

EEM fluorescence
spectroscopy for both of the
MBR effluent and UF
permeate at (a) TFT
TFT-LCD
LCD (b)
DW (c) WPI and (d) TFTLCD (e) DW (f) WPI,
p
y
respectively.
107

Scaling on
the
membrane
surface

Original
membrane has
the consistency
of pore size.

Significant
scaling on the
membrane
surface

Scaling on the
membrane
surface and
the pore size
si e
decrease

SEM photograph on the cross-section of UF membrane filtrated the MBR effluent for
(a)blank(b)TFT LCD (c)DW(d)WPI
(a)blank(b)TFT-LCD

108

AFM spectroscopy on the


surface of UF membrane at
(a)blank(Ra=77.88nm)
(b)TFT LCD(Ra=22 44nm)
(b)TFT-LCD(Ra=22.44nm)
(c)DW(Ra=38.93nm)
(d)WPI(Ra=30.26nm)

109

110

The peak intensity of


function group on C-F
and O-H bonds are
became weak after the
filtration with UF
membrane treated the
effluent of MBR

The peak intensity of


C=C, O-H, and C-H
bonds are increased at
DW and WPI treatment
processes, that is, there
has a protein or acid
matters.

ATR-FTIR spectroscopy of
UF membrane
b
filt t d the
filtrated
th
effluent of MBR

MBR effluent:
In
MBR
reactor:
1. The
weight
component
of carbohydrate
is moremechanisms
than that in MBR,
thatwater
is, thequality
protein for
Relationships
between
the possible
DW removal
and the
1. Thematter
ratio of
C/N isclogged
bigger than
that of TFT-LCD wastewater.
is easily
on MBR
membrane.
both the
reactor and MBR effluent.
2. 2.EEM
fluorescence
spectroscopy
theSMP
composition
of huminThis
acid is
and
fulvicfrom
acidthe
and DOC
/DOC is increased.
caused
The ratio of SCODSMP/SCOD shows
i significantly
is
i ifi ofl protein
greateristhan
hmore
soluble
l bl that
microbiological
i of bi
l i l by-product-like.
b
d
lik
removal
than
carbohydrate.
3. 3.BAP
ought
to beof
thehumic
majoracid
consistent
ofspectroscopy
SMP.
The
intensity
on EEM
is also high.

111

Relationships between the possible TFT-LCD removal mechanisms and the water
quality for both the MBR reactor and MBR effluent.

112

Relationships between the possible WPI removal mechanisms and the water quality for
both the MBR reactor and MBR effluent.

113

TFT-LCD is a high nitrogen-contained wastewater. Owing to the substrate


is sufficient and the activity of microorganism is high, the major content of
SMP should be UAP estimated from the analysis of water quality, organic
compounds, SMP composition and EEM.
DW wastewater
t
t property
t is
i a biodegradable
bi d
d bl wastewater,
t
t thereafter,
th
ft the
th
content and the variation of SMP produced from MBR biological
treatment is low. The microorganism metabolism products in MBR effluent
was characterized with EEM fluorescence is humic material. Those SMP
may infer from the comparison of literature is BAP.
WPI is a refractoryy wastewater treated with three stage
g of microorganism
g
pre-treatment processes, thereafter, the substrate in the influent of MBR is
refractory and non-sufficient resulting in produced a lot of BAP from the
microorganism endogenous degradation
degradation. The metabolism products in MBR
effluent was characterized with EEM fluorescence is humic material.

114

Co
Co-Researchers
Researchers11 2
3
Institution:
1
2
3

115

116