Bioresource Technology 64 (1998) 1-6

BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT OF SWINE

WASTE USING ANAEROBIC BAFFLED
REACTORS
Ramaraj Boopathy

Master Program
Food Science and Technology
Faculty of Agricultural Technology
Universitas Gadjah Mada

Andika Wicaksono
Putro
15/392402/PTP/01446

INTRODUCTION
Anaerobic Treatment
Reduction of high
solids waste
Recovery methane

Maintaining High
Solid Retention Time
(SRT), and Low
Hydraulic Retention
Time (HRT)

High Total solid

High oxygen demand
Volatile
Solid

Protein,
Lipid,
Cellulose
Swine
Waste

Organic
components

Problems
The
smaller
diameter
particles
do not settle by
gravity
either
in
pretreatment
The particles require
long SRTs to digest

Methane

Need new ABR

design

OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this study were to document the overall
performance of the anaerobic baffled reactors in digesting
whole swine waste and to determine the reactor's ability to trap
small particles.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

ANAEROBIC BAFFLED
REACTOR

Conditions

Value

Reactor volume

15 L

Angle of baffles

40o

Temperature

35oC

SAMPLE
PREPARATION
REACTOR START-UP AND LOADING
Conditions

Value

Total Solid (TS)

8966 mg/l

Volatile Solid (VS)

4341 mg/l

Days

Amount

1-58

1-4 g VS/l/day

59-209

4-8 g VS/l/day

> 210

>8 g VS/l/day

ANALYSIS

Total Solid (TS), Volatile Solid (VS), Chemical Oxygen

Demand (COD)
Alkalinity, pH, Kjeldahl nitrogen, Amonia nitrogen, Volatile
Fatty Acid
Carbon Dioxyde (CO2), Methane (CH4) using Gas
Chromatography
Solid sample (Cellulose, Hemicellulose, Protein, Lipid);
Particle Size Distribution in 10 cm, 20 cm, 30 cm of surface
Solid Retention Time (SRT) using chromium as stable
element marker

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

SOLIDS RETENTION TIME

ESTIMATION

The sampling and analyses were

performed until 100% of the
chromium was recovered, and
got estimation of SRT.
ABR
ABR
ABR
ABR

2
3
4
5

=
=
=
=

25
30
36
42

days
days
days
days

Days

Amount

0-60 (Initial)

0-2 g VS/l/day

61-219 (Medium)

2-4 g VS/l/day

220-278 (High)

6-8 g VS/l/day

LOADING 4 g VS/L/DAY (MED)

This period represents the transition from the establishment of a flocculent

biomass to a commercially acceptable loading rate. Methane production in all units
varied from 0.48 to 0.62 L CH4/g VS added. The additional chambers in-an ABR
make a significant difference to particle retention. The ABR with five chambers,
having more baffles, is efficient in converting trapped organic materials to
methane.

Even with the same HRT, each ABR produces different

amount of gas.

MASS REDUCTION FOR

ABR (MED)

On a mass reduction basis, ABR

with three, four and five
chambers appeared to be
doing a better job of reducing
organic matter than ABR with
two chambers.

PARTICLE
DISTRIBUTION SIZE

The distribution of particle

sizes was quite uniform
for twoand
threechamber reactors, with
the exception of the top 10
cm of chamber 2 in ABR 2.
Here
a
rather
large
fraction of particles in
the 3.5-31 micron diameter
range was found.

NUTRIENT CONTENT
OF SOLIDS

However, this fraction

contained
little
potential methane, as
the nutrient content of
that fraction appeared to
be small.

PARTICLE
DISTRIBUTION SIZE

The
ABRs
were
trapping
a
larger
fraction
of
the
methane-containing
particles
compared
with
conventional
digesters.:
(i) the modifications of
the
baffle
design
reduce the movement of
small particles due to
flow velocity under
the baffle
(ii)
feeding
whole
waste into the first
chamber of each ABR
establishes
an
excellent
natural
filter for trapping small
particles.

NUTRIENT CONTENT
OF SOLIDS

These
small
particles
consisted
largely
of
proteins, lipids, and
cellulose.
These
chemical
fractions
account
for
greater
than
50%
of
the
potentially
available
methane
in
swine
manure.

CONCLUSION
The four- and five-chamber ABRs appeared to be slightly more
efficient in converting solids to biogas, compared with the two- and
three- chamber ABRs. Based on this study, the four- or five-chamber
ABR is recommended for the most efficient treatment of swine
waste and maximum production of methane from swine manure.

THANK
YOU