Bruce E Rittmann and Perry L McCarty Homework Problem Solutions Environmental Biotechnology Principles and Applications PDF

Environmental Biotechnology — Principles and Applications Bruce E, Rittmann and Perry L. McCarty HOMEWORK PROBLEM SOLUTIONS Problem Solutions Listed by ChapterForward This manual provides the worked solutions to all the problems in Environmental Biotechnology: Principles and Applications. The solutions are presented in order by chapter. At the beginning of each chapter is a listing of the problems according to the major subject explored by each question. In some cases, a problem falls into more than one major subject. At the beginning of Chapters 3, 4, and 7 are summaries of "tools," which are the key equations used regularly to solve the problems. Due to the scope of the project, it is inevitable that some errors and inconsistencies are present in the solutions. The authors will make every effort to correct these problems over the years. If you find an error, please send that information to Dr. Rittmann (address below). In addition, we welcome new problems and solutions from the book's users. If you have a good problem + solution, please send it to Dr. Rittman, as well, Bruce E. Rittmann Perry L. McCarty Evanston, Illinois Stanford, California Dr. Bruce E, Rittmann Northwestern University Dept. of Civil Engineering 2145 Sheridan Road Evanston, IL 60208-3109 b-rittmann@northwestern.eduChapter 1 Basics of Microbiology Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Morphology and Taxonomy 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 34 Enzymes 1, 17, 38 Metabolism 2, 8, 9, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36 Genetics 4,5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 23, 24 Ecology 3, 18, 3711 » &) 1. Compet tise 2. Mam Comperitiv'e 3. Non~ specsPie (bd 1, Eeotegieis ~ popelation dyson = SHOT 1m predonsntnce 2. Enzyme (ndesres 3. Genetic Change (2) Constiteitice 2. Inducible 1.2 a eleauor Ke MG? ‘ste: [Esse [electron Donor] gepto NG Tie ee A 7 (metaronenssy| YES ORE AAS 5 B. | Aceiate Tres = -/0lF (Reduction to Yes = 243-284 Fea*) 2s sar . (reduction tot) | No Chas d_| Glucose HY as = Le (reduction to Ha) | ‘TES ay - --¢ | carbon dioxide ges Fangs BS = (methanogenesis) ~ Tip nia 22 399 = U2. (denitrification to SS ad 5 ROS = (fa 2-9 (oxidized to itrificat - 922 ee (Gentitcation to] (a b.| CH : a5 2 3F ‘ (edification | TES -922-* No) 7 NH S042 2055 + 14,8 (oxidation to (reduction to HS} NO 26) 20 NOx) +HS>13 ) CO, rediution To mefhune occors only with Hy pele — Here, 25-2 85% oF Hy comes Fron Coy redectron C28% Cypicsl of semaye slodye) 1.4 Peonyrt besa R. bese Hoek Pee Hoops base res i, Laeney, we a 15 RNA osaallg single strandeS PUB - v3aaly hebe stranded) 16 DNA Rr Bea Au Cea & Cee17 Dwh. + Ta formatein storage & replreatin EWA. » Productos 4 protems - Indsyvratec —preesivia, agparatis , ab 1s lof Both potentially butt donac réle i's obsorud) O, Accepher CO, Bccoplor Ae Dener Seg ecepor- bo; Bott: dere EMO. , accaphr A Me Nox fecepter me Doar Hy Dene Fe ~ Acceptor 19 Couple BRE: Eaa- Fan pth Kok BJA 676- C-0,42)* bIS ae D 4S/Oo, 0.92 ~ (-ezeyx 10 tees 4 Gy Nox On Ph ~ (0138) 212 3 how toye - (042) 12h ( 7b, 82> 0-H 00! 6 eRe (5 /{ NO. 0,44 - ¢0,20) + 0% s1.10 111 Th DUP polymernar Y Peis a nenegg— tre phphats Ard om S snd, oa ote Hole Mein on araclalle 3! tarton—6Hf ns HG LAAT cae 3 Peed he azoclekls Bate fF DUE polypereer . La mest ows, Ket ral be to uripack of Pe ROP prlyperee. slated om tare man ee aig oe elvry ego Aiarrtata at wall veer 4 & nal a med AUS ttle fat nee A fo ha 1.12 - For_eoeci folume> ae Par rods fra > yor volume > Lx V8 2 pi ork PPR ee em renga 3 YT ard zt Hsrr Bitz « aeened e 2 4 diambe 7 21.13 1.14 L 4 d ee 10 2 0, SuxK Cen) Cos Coens, Kod —— Volume 0.5208 sagan Osa Aye 4, tun” dun ashy 4 peofec fee oe aba 7H De mertrane 13s p. Lepib) bei- Ladraphebis wlorin ae oa ties Dro karyodre onel Evkargdotc DHA. L Bofk ane storage sf S f genetic inporinat tay 2, Use Ke same pases AT, 6 €© , Shue super uted 4. Conta ,PD Sherences L Probamptoe obo net Late a rmerctirens, enclosed nacteas, while qokargohes db, 2. Ceeargete DANN ao drounch by destinas, whl prchargh DAA as 20% 3, Gutcaryst Dui-e nemeyprescsel jtron rayon - 11S Bhacherophagee avin Fat mie a ese SS fate z, e Ka feCree epudace. 1.16 Organic mass of om cell: ov (22) *orfeaurit 3m (om) cas *( 7) = awe "y oa “el 4 pion ame ET Lg ey BY Pao Gurk (0.1940 3) wn el? ——— 9% Joon, _# , Jed pe pyj0 tll Le Jeong 21F _ —_—1.17 Cozn24ps 6 (fm Aa grew. A coergyme 8 a nem - pritum grmlcote Teh porta nite (a cofeclivownel net py fyb, Arend (pro Bhelic prop) Fe apeorgyymss pret vtthed Ke athctid yooupe. 148 Pacteu gaun 1.19 Bn ee Op Nm dmv. CUYh phetinn hia glee On, aw acuptn gn aortic Neopet, J Coll Volume = Aner? 2 $22 (0,4um)?~ 0,265.40" lWib Wdaight ~ 0, 268m! x WAL 1p’ Bly = 26k DoE 0 aet 4 Dig Orgpaie Wright = 4 bbb oe 0,28 Fa 09 BE =4 52x10 “ne arg. olny ast cel] Camccen nenolors eae ER yng 1930 IH Ds bchin ZS net - 6432 actite1.20 a) Chloreplylt — Yo, Algucan 7 Sum sormally 8) Ascony cet — Yor, Fonye me 75am nom 0) Winses —h Pll viruses ane 40.34 a) backerta — Dobby 4 FA same oho L Anlaa pr2 < O45 4M, °) archada. ~Vretetly yo. MW = 1axS 4 eH /ORR + Od tal £3) = Mel 9 fnole ge mile clk _ [eo malh Vp pretecd yl th mainmle= SGI0 jmmale cel 7 mipale B mg tt — DI nudel= &G)nio ae * [ormole TES I yoke H = /2/ mahW/L Ppuedul < Gblype'™ 01% 3) = aera123 4) Rephentisn occurs onty rag Aefoe hl hiprcor- Trmscuplisa peewra yhomorer fhe elt ratte 4) a VranaheLeine prrrlncsee He wergl - otarded Jiborucliplele | ee 124 MAMA ge transcribed grote cocle wel to ditch putin ayrHheers th Tk ago War pests Lon mie) nx oe 125 04 Regulates traunserphen Loammen) 2. Structured namber- J Hegel (tommon) 3, Sour po Commer) 4, PAS ealluall om s, Pu J OCW loyprucelialar copset) b, Suctocd bongia/ gt A5ame factivine FP Pere on onl prembiene g CC) breton, wi thitoren mm g. cor pr ppiueee 10. Pod J gee areca tr come dscyeh protege te:UN po dbo, Jee sh ~ oes Sn bv AdP + R. A forms atti aAcnr pa cee arcuate. (iM td we vi, pe #regy— Qo butane , 1 oes “epee Ape Arcos é) B= oxidation@ dehylr Ayploys CH, Ch ch cher 7 onc oh the nin@) MADR amore) — Eno, ta BofreTee 3 J Tor i | CO RTP equivalent of serobi repdatin , Substucte leuli 22 TCR TB Cfo actin tim QO reer WAM — az 2 a7 Fad = Bxa=_&_ BS ATP 4 / mote baton R 1.29 GAO, — faa 6 artorg fF OFY>24 eer @\ Lmslee EACDOP fate 40 4 2xPe/be— Need Loe Cf Fmme; The Alor forthe lesttwo C. Se, ot need Ws to yse Sa lr Ver, ©) ammee Lx L mele Prrperet (ACAI) pan SCs avel Feb4 T= fer“, lag nef oe 4 Ser Os CMe pha — pepth fo ore met Chy133 OnZ #z 6 alae, 134 trey 135 Gena Bfecton Darn, Flach Mme C-Soure M.Varecocus Ae Cb low Wstrrsolobus Way Ow COL Pseedom ones Che 2, We No- Cho Deslibononss yt 54,39,3° Chg Bic bacilli ne On co1.36 Aetivetzan CH, CH, Coon 7 YT Cl, CH CoS prertesh — pmprke +@ tlho FAD dehydrogenase hydroxy btein oHC CH COSCA y Ch CH COS Gah / Hor not bao cLohydrepona Lams % lerwaqe- CH,COSGA wre weod? ‘+ CO, egele DLO, + 6A ver + pre. . awpocrys Direct bore TH -2 FADE " VADB EL TE +\ het: —1 ead v4 axB=b 2x3 °F 11 1G pale prpinate © 122,137 | Alarphrrtcon theckarecina Cpanite (nose! Clee I, Selecstiie EnrecAmat a Echo pie Beg 1 Se pen 7 ner: a peony Colla, LN, eee 2, Exckorape — perhaps pornble wth 4p etinse os pb, utbok Ui Fines, pul fetid Zr) uy 0 *fliome gh and dorde. X Heep n- titChapter 2 Stoichiometry and Energetics Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Basic Half-Reactions 67 Energy Reactions 1,3,4 £2 from Energetics 2,5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 Stoichiometry of Overall Reactions 8, 14, 15, 16, 17Ww 2.2 Basar AG, leer Yes SAG 2 37 Yes P43 29.9 No BFF -2AGHLS tes aig - gre A tes ras 372th (denitrification ; Ny) aad Yes 90.2. B9P = M2 . ‘NOx (oxidized to i (denitrit (gent fication to Yes FL 2—-UL BAUS NOx (denituificati s ication to des ~ 92,2. -BESe - OF Nag S04? (oxidation to. _| (reduction to HS Nox) ons: fon to Hp! M gS -2O8S 2th Gt Dene Aecephr fa seure Mer Mbp AGre) s a Abe Ady AFre) A) S thanek On Wh” — -j09,9 3,7 IKE a5?| 0.64 a Nes j09,9 3.9 134 0.94) 0/70 CC Ahand SOP” wie Shey 29 18.8 6 | OS d Ethmt S840 Wt Pos 32 ite ©) @ ce — Propiordi (Oe Whi +A BS 188 198 00S & s , - oe hos wht -U4 38 It | fo | 2,20 Ne, i - : + * rn. MAY ase 134 168 \G0 | ad |23 (QN6EG= GM yee +4 More 5 Obi. - tM ef Neca, - hg, des =4 (-35203 ) +3 (-5%,8) +f (-340) “$(-36841) ~ b (346.02) -0 - © = -8816 — 14,71 — 5930 + U47/ +H, 51 -O-0 2 AIS k joule Je ~2g DG ~EbG5, & - Oe. - 65- 40) -0 ~0 =o byak/oneg ep sb 1295-0 12.45 K/e eg. (b) ph>F. Rafe = ~ 37.87 G/mule now. So, Nef > -1195-(- 987)2 +26 Khes AGL = O-(-31.57)> 37.87 kjfeeg AG, = te2b.52)- (39.62 - 12.95" kj Le pe eae CN Ate Ran: Lettoo” + 4 to, +H, = CACH Loe” « b Hea + ithe yey te) AG -ng54 5,310? ach, Lael a Kral * Cre?) [03) ror)" Bordo” ale Sb 2ag04 oad 2 Pda JO 212,954 24304,532 2 Glee. 21247 + 3434, All DE values mmx negate, amet besten Sheald gan cargy2.4 AGe EChanel Eon te Chy = 2383-2182 765k) + sot 2085-22902 -6,.55R) EThsbo! ee City gives more cell preaunteon JorvalenT becouse more energy 1% released, 2.5 A AGs RAG, AGs? AGe-AGy= 53.7% — 27 34% 26.58 BI ley. BGr® AGa- DG4 = 20.85 - 27.34% ~6.97 Bley, - —2tSe a (0.6) * 647) 138 a - ep. cells Fs* jra* 1+0.30° 0.08! ey dome ene, cede .Polusdga. 5 PY Ys 0.08! endowe (12 yam nvncmais O11 9 benoste 2.6 One e9. latote # one e7, 2? BI Oz Fez I~Fs = 1-04 = Ob C frac, order) Je Ox requires Fe (8)2 06(8) 7 4-8 go a on 27 (a) PyCCHCH CHM coe” + FHC —> a tet, > Dy Mint # Zy Hey tta.s Bat ren on 4 a Dy CHyei Cir CHM Be Com” + fie => a ty mate de keop theo. tutte” a = Ota +the > Tay rH te2.8 $ CHgoH* ... — tern Fem 0.3(tp Met 2-367 > 0.3 (2e)CgHyaue.n. 0.2 (EMes) +. we"? 7b) Mee 2 O0rMrt. £ cuyow + fo.stdeyrorc3]¢% (32) ease? (4) SB3Bg Clo 2 Mes-Y CHyo# mewn = 33 (a1) = 212 mg/l 5 i ; 29 Lr Ole ag => Ae oes exept og cells Az Balle rbbek DS, batt © bSIee Cito seurce) Mpg = 35107 — Petes 229 (Bretetra ( seme) 265 hry matt! a Mbpre Db = 5355 (eee) - a3¢ (ac) ~ - 90,95 kS/e Gus: - FbI/k 4 18,5/k . 268 J k(-¥095) yeas k ft2 0.06 ke 025 la Au whe)2.10 Zn generD, NG,746,-AG less) NG, + 2509-06, (WIE eey fp le,) Mbe HE pode, MAS for Woe, 1 df ly, $18 5 fan? Az Kee /k” - DGn/e - khé, $0 FBT Gn tele denar) y. £ creel Wael, Fe tone gus) ~ o aornecelh % 3800, Gen. 120 pit, $ fotos, 6 JrNG ant 3 fa M. Dene Aecephr C-Sourcee NSme po sG Moe AL Y Acetebe On Acekte VK toe 4% RE 069 959 O42. ge 24y — (-#892) NG,=239) yO, BI ass 064 O33 1e-25) W0,- IAS 058063 0.54 Me Wd 0650.6) 0,34 241 (Same pvttern ae 2,10) Benen fecepbor b-Sonne MSome Abr Mp Me A Se # glvesse. Or Glucose. Hy $120 3 088 272, O57 fib33) (78) gglhagd — Nos~ 13,4 O24 08° | | | wor 1457 82 0.98 2 Nz Hed 933 OFF a%2.12 For 00, ae C-source Cnorm) AG, ~ FA-III) = ~43,6 They Ae,= 3507 -L Java) > 13.8 kL Mbps > 18,8 Kherg fa WIStbt LOE 5 yee tente — O6(-446) ad oe ann ol Colt IS 45 ~demer eek 113 5cel darn OM ERD | 3 ycely | Fe" Po OU Taw” Gontcelt Agia ~ For Acckh, pA Kary io AG, = 3S O9— 247> FF Weg pa Riese ibhlok , g vieemenate Tele) LL eof 6 So ae * OP Te U3 12 3iuh Yeo 237- Gr goth, Q, a¢ BEV 4A) Aba paferial adivrthgel2.13 NG y = 329 Tey, CA) Mg 2 - FF fr 0, on +2085 fa SAP 113, 8 CawAednply) bop Noes 1h ¥ 113,8/0.6 +1566 — 2,6 MG) ~ Ye, 2-8, 6 MS fee for Oxae accaphr, Nb, -09+6-747) Ax 3H ox 39,920.85) ~ [Ror kieep 7 Pav Sty? 22 acco, 4 A-43 Thor Lo = 0.24 fr Oz = O05 fa Sa yf LE, ven My mn 8 £8BS LIL Go On 2 2,28 seelh [gh fo Se Acebte os Ms 4 2.14 fie 0,333, $2 2 667, —> o1sbK4o + 0,065 CO, 0, 067M, £0,125 Helos” F CMsloo 0145? + 0,14SMl, 10.019 CD2S Cy 5)/ Of W.fuly » Krecse, haemey copenhy —» 20°F r 0,4992ho+ 4 Qyls) #290, + Hw & a 0. Ce lh O,M He, 0018/0s + 9007200, 216 Wh) /01 10. juh, eect , f.-@a957 boy0,7 0.170 Nh’ + 0.0030 Ws + 0, 0/220, __» 0, $10 Hed p 0, 6 PWBY LO. 2300s, 0,33347 K 0, 0030 aN 2.47 Cb Cle/b5,/ SEY yy A= 03) Sozaep — 0,2S°CK, + 8.15510 + ©. 0/55 0h” OSH" + 0.01 Chow $0, 17250, bo. Ctssiftd,~ 7 10, 1%6lb, 7 QSC/~Chapter 3 Microbial Kinetics Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Delimiting Parameters 1 Influent Characteristics 10, 15, 16 Basic Chemostat Analysis 6, 11, 12, 13, 18, 19 Comprehensive Chemostat Analysis 3,4, 8, ns 2,3,4,8,9 Input Active Biomass 5,7 Acceptor Utilization 14, 23 Inhibition 17, 20, 21, 22, 24X, =X? +(1-fq)-b-Xq-6x K+s? +(¥-G-b)-K-b 1 Yoqab b Gaal = him Smin =K- Y-G-b design ogee Ce ee (08 him y.38 SXa . At at 1+b-0x 0 Axi _ AX} AX, AXE A tg): b-0y Xa at ay Efe) BOK ¥-(s° -s) Xv=[i+(-ta)-6-0x} oe (2) @) (4) 6) (6) @ 8) @ (10)3.1 Note that 6,"", [0,""Jim and Sai, are all independent of f,, so there is only one set of answers. nn, K+S° s"(v-b)-Kb Substituting the given values in the above formula, we get 0," = 0.42 days = 10.3 hrs Similarly, (0,°"}jq= << And, Sqin = K. 3.2 0 = 0, =2 hrs = 0.083 days a) First, calculate 0," for every 8°, to check for washout. After substituting the given data, we get the following: 8" (hrs) |S" (mg/h) 1.0 10,000 Ll 1,000 an | When S$" = 100 mg/l, 8,"" > 6,; therefore, we have washout. In that case, 00 mg/l. For S? = 1,000 and 10,000, the steady-state concentration S doesn’t depend on the influent concentration S°; therefore, $ is the same, and is computed as follows: ___1+b8, OXY4-b) After substitution, we get [S= 102.5 mgil b) As shown in part (a), for S’ = 100 mg/l, we have washout, and therefore no accumulation of active biomass, i.e. X,=0. S=K For the other two initial concentrations $", X, is computed as follows:Substituting in the above formula, the following values are obtained: X, (mg VSS) |S” (mg/l) 08.0 10,000 FST 1,000 0 100 c) SMP=UAP+BAP First, compute ry as follows: s°-s tN Substituting in the above formula, we get the following: Tu (mg/i-d) |S" (mg/l) “119,246 | 10,000 “10,8133 | 1,000 0 700 ‘The UAP and BAP constants are the following (Noguera et al., 1991): Guar =1.8mg COD, / mg VSS-d doar = 0.1 mgCOD, / mg VSS-d K yap =100 mgCOD, /1 K gap =85 mgCOD, /1 k, =0.12 g COD, /g COD, k, = 0.09 g COD, /g VSS-d The equations for the calculations of UAP and BAP are the following: ape ~duseX.0-} Kune + t8)+ [Guns 04 Kune hid) — aR yarn papa {haar + Gaar ~K)X.8)* V(Rane + Gar Fa )X0) 4 4K pk X03.3 Substituting in the above equations, we get the following values for SMP: S"Gmgi) UAP (mg/l) BAP (mg/l) SMP (mgil) 70,000 365 269 392 7,000 785 3.19 817 100 0 0 0 4) The minimum detention time below which wash-out would occur is 0,"" and was calculated in part (b). The limiting value of this wash-out detention time is [0,""Jim and is computed as follows: (0. = <>, oF 10,2 4Iyq = 0.042 day = 1.0 br Yg-b Perform parallel calculations to demonstrate the differences between the old and new bacteria. OLD Ww 0.185 day 0.182 day 5.56 days 5.4 days s-K — 1+ be. _ 0.73 0.44 mg/l oe ¥g0, —(1+ b8,) mpl ae bs _ | L+(1-fy)b0, 0.203 mg VSS/mg COD | 0.279 mg VSS/mg 14 b0, | COD re =S)Q 60.8Q 83.6Q 20; AX, 142 ee 2 gVSS_At 213Q | 181Q — 626mg CODI | 4.03mg COD/ 19.9 mg COD/L 29.4 mg COD/L 26.1 mg CODII 33.4mg CODA 26.7 mg COD/I 33.8mgCODA__| By comparing sludge production, we see that “oz =1.37; therefore, we would produce 37% more cell mass with the new cells. Most will end up in waste sludge. In terms of3.4 oxygen requirement, we can see that the new cells would require 85% of the oxygen required by the old cells. In summary, because the new cells do not decay very fast, we build up greater active mass (X,V). Since the f, is lower, we have less X,V. In total, X,V is greater with the new cells. With similar ®, values, the production rate of cells is greater for the new bacteria, but less O, is required, since more electron (COD) equivalents end up as cells. The new cells are more efficient in that they give a slightly lower $ value and require 15% less oxygen. However, 37% more sludge is produced, higher SMP is produced, and finally a higher effluent COD, Using the following relevant equations, we get the values that are tabulated below: 0-0 1+b6, Yq, —(1+b8,) y(S°-S) 1+b0, 2 + X,(1-£)b0, = Goss ,0+ K yan + kit) + VGuanX.0 + K yap t kity0)? 4K upon 0 ua. zi pape 7 (ann + (Guar —k2)%,0)-+ VK pan + Gage —ka)X0) + 4K papkoX,0 2 ° where, r= - 5 =8 @ P=UAP +BAP [ @, (days) S (mg X, (mg ]X, (mg P (mg S+P (mg conn) VSS.) vss/) copy) | cop” T 3a 172.5 35.2 23.9 29.2 5 a) m4 67.1 ~ 39.2 40.1 10 06 9 74 AT 3 30 05 363 327 37.6 383.5 For the first chemostat, 6 = @,= 10 days. 1+ bé, $=K——_ —=] 1 D/I Yao, (1+ b9,) 11 ™eCO _ ¥(8°-s) = 559 mg V: 1+b0, mg VSS,/L X\ =X! + X,(1-£)b0, = 54 mg VSS/I, since X,’ = X,° = 40 mg. X, =X, + X\= 613 mg VSS. The second stage is handled by incorporating X,° = 559 mg/l. Other input values are: 14 mg/l S?= 1.1 mg/l XV x % = to = =10d: ence QK GOK RxD PK, 559mg/1 subject still to $= K —_1+ > 10. 1+025-0, ¥q0,-(+b0,) 0.7-18-0, -(1+025-0,) ° and x, -92{ ¥S°-8)]__9,_[0.701.1-5) *e| 1+be, | 10days|1+025-0, Solving iteratively on these three equations yields: .008 days 00038 mg/l X,= 160 mg/l os Note that 160<<559, so we have a cell decay with 1=1/ 0, Then, X, =X,’ + X,(1-f,)b0, = \ really 6 = 54 + (1-0.9)(0.25)(10)(160) 94 mg/l X, =X, +X, = 254 mg/l Effluent Quality Soluble BOD = COD .0004 mg/l Total BOD, = 1.42 f, X, = (1.42)(0.9(160) = 204.5 mg BOD, /I Total COD = 1.42 X, = 360 mg/l a N&P Required IS stageLAN _y (x, -X!) = 0.124 ee (613-40) =71mgN/I mg Qa’ oat = EN required)= 7 7 = 14.2 mg PAL yn (X —X°) = 0.124 mex (254-573) <0. So weneedno new input of mg V' Nor P inreactor2, Cellsdecay,not grow. 3.6 Substrate mass balance for a chemostat, using the Eckenfelder relation: v8 9-6" -3)-k'x,sv de Active biomass mass balance: ve =0=Q-X,)-k'X,SV¥-bX,V fe TogetS, dividetheabove equationthroughby V : X, 6 Solvingfor $ (0, = 6): 1 at? 1+b0, 2 — Jors KY K'Y®, Tofind X, , use substratemass balanceand dividethroughby volume *4k"X,SY—bX, so eo -K’X,S,and (s?-s) kos ¥(S’-S) 1+b0, . PluggingS fromabove inthe denominata, we get :3.7 The first CSTR is simply a chemostat that can be analyzed in the conventional manner. - Vv 0=0, =~ =2days Q tb, 188 me copa Yd, -(1+b0, y(s?-s)] | =3.4 mg VSsVI. [ 1+b9, | 4m VSS X= X! +X,(1-£)b0, = 30.27 me VSS/1 STR is different because it has input of X,. In other words, X,° = 3.4 mg », X;’ = 30.27 mg VSS;/l and $’ = 188 mg COD/L, To solve for S, X,, and X; with input of X,°, we can define 0," as: —*.V____X,0_ i “OREN XX wy Since® = 2 days,and X? =3.4 mg/l, — 2% 34 . x ay So, we can solve for S with 0,°, 1+b9. S=K =. = 350 — a Q) Yg0,—(1+b0,) > 30, -(1+0.20,) 9. [¥s° “ol 1+be, | 2 8 To find S, 0,’, X, and X,, iteratively solve (1”), (2) and (3) by guessing @,’, solving for $ (from (2)), solving for X, (from (3)), and solving for 8,’ (from (1')). If the initial 0,” and final 0,’ agree, your solution is correct. Let’s iterate:3.8 S = 145.6 mg CODA X,= 14.6 mg VSS/1 X,= 30.27 + 0.2 x 0.2 x 2.56 x 14.6 = 31.7 mg VSS/1 0 days S,mg COD/_|_X,, mg VSS,I_|_X, me VSS/I_] CSTRI 2.0 188 34 303 CSTR2 258 15.6 146 318 Note that for a chemostat, 8,=0. s=kK— 11, 8 me cop) G0, —(1+b8,) og x, =|2E=9) = 453.3 mg VSS,/I. 1+b0, X,=X/+X,(1-£)b0, = 9.1 mg VSS/I X=X+X, = 462.4 mg VSS/I UAP= papa a(R nar + Gane ~Ka)X,0)+ V(Kgar + Gar where, ty. =~ vi 8 lex onk. 2k. pv wae = (GuneX,0 + Kune + Bi fu0)+ V(@uarX.0 + K usp + kn, 0)? — 4K yagkir0 2 2 2)X,0)° +4K pack: Substituting in the above equations, we get the following results: UAP = 14.8 mg/l BAP = 29.2 mg/l And, SMP = UAP + BAP = 44.0 mg/l COD ays). = SMP + S = 46.8 mg/l COD oui = COD aisse + 1.42 X, = 703.3 mg/l Removal (COD 4.) = (S°= CODjau)/S"= 29.7% BOD, = COD ine + 1.424X, = 562 mg/l Removal (BOD,) = (S’- BOD,)/S"= 43.8% 83.9 __K+s?__ Kb+S(¥g-b) + or 8," = 2.25 day "" * S.F. = 22.5 days V =0, Q=2.25 x 10! m’, Lebo, Ye, -(+bo,) 732! ¥(S°-s)] _ « [ T+b0, | 13.3 mg VSS,/L. X\=X! + X(1-£)b0, = 3 mg VSS//I X, =X, +X, = 16.3 mg VSS/1 Rateysspoa = XQ = 16.3 kg/day. = (GuarX.0 + K van + ki F8) + VGuarX.0 + K yap + kyr0) 4K yank tye r (K sap + (Guar ~k2)X,0)+ (Kuan + Guar ~ka)X,0)° + 4K park 2X0 2 UAP= BAP: 0 0 Substituting in the above equations, we get the following results: where, r= - UAP = 15.8 mg/l BAP = 49.1 mg/l And, SMP = UAP + BAP = 65 mg/l BOD, MP + S = 67.3 mg/l cb BOD gui = BODysusse + 1.42 Xf, = 82.4 mg/l BODaauaie + 1.42 X, = 90.4 mg/l SMP+1.42(X,-X,)]. 4) COD, Since each gram of §(s) produced consumes 1.5 grams of oxygen demand, y= 1/1.5 = 0.67g Sig COD. Also, X,'=0. Substituting in the above equation, we get: Tatessg = 273 kg S(s)/day.3.10 S72 BoD, (or) t BVrcpers = SSF? = 75 mH B00, fe = -22): my Xi 20- Fes) 2°" 2e(! #): B.6 my/) 3.A1 Nee tf #2 te —> 1r20-S¢— G-EKrd ig iz —> 7k+lgo 2% qkr igo = 20(LK+ 4) -Pk =-00 k= 443 aagfl q? ee 154 mg/day om geells 3. . cy thE ey tal) ; = asm 14 0.203) ge. ~C14y®.) % go8-e(4)-Ci+0.21'2) Ler IEF - (a7) 1 2F mg COD/Y AV} 255 Xe YS 0,65: (20% - 4.24) : #8 mg y53/ C1 be LOE Kip = Ka (It C-A)SB) + Ki = Joe (jro.2-02 4) +20 %02 me VSS Ki Karke my Nyt XK + W2- FFB* 124 re VSL KX Kegrrg = 7 oF now . + = for mg le Ss ¥ = \ 8is oH > Ss 7 3130 nee PS B=P Oe St Pe BKHISR SF set 7ssssZ acktz = SKAIS= 1S (acnrs) Ks 75 md oa Gx OL(2S)+3 hs O75) = 830d = 75/d a —~- —An_ 314. Op fete = Fe@(s™s*)z Fe@ses Sv00 Ly id (Oxe4 (sme S*€0.015°) Fogo Feag bosszo4r @se: 2 a ES Lta.2 bx + 40% Ba Fae Fs 1+ box 4 Fete 2uslirecs). 9, 5 ue 140.260.0814) Foca) = onsg {#22le-08)00) 9, 59 1+ 0.0866) Feo) = J- 0.372 a6! Op Production = 0,6) (9,010) = 5540 id (B28) — 315° ge evel b4o m/e a Xr= gas see exes guorgsr ae” . B00, ese: ° xirs (1 See) ky 167 74/! 0S U5? - a(p~ elie ans = EE ezeo3.16 St 620+ 360 = 780 my Sor. /) Q= @ = 150,000 m4} Xe= x . 350 mg/I ° BD, sods) 2 (p— Seb esehds) yy Xi f CoD (sets) MK 620-360 : A e(I- $20-38° to ua my Vorioss Formelas can be ved bere, ore of 317 in Fellow ¢ : Le -b 2 ya. BY b Se Thes, ve cebu: Hatelne Topeesty t=yfFs Ox ees E WF (OVS _ 2 StF 4g 2 oS lels , 22 25 74s 25 7s Cress multiplying leads Po . a pordnte epustion 05 Lollows From which, astrbsteso sa btvita Sz 1Ebry/e From whe $= 1.26 10) “HL CMe mses Lg di Fberece } H2omy/t 1s vole of Interrsr (lol mglt 9 an UF bend Ben Whiek Le C5 Mhedezrys ) nF, cos ae Yh _,: YR" XeS_ 318 o a s? (apr) (S225) = O44 mg/l ozs (4)™ —>- 3.19 Operating Characteritics 6 Sludge Oxygen Variable J Production | Consumption (aays) (kg/d) (kg/d) y - a - g@ - + + se = + + b + - ~ x? = + ~ 2 Ss 3.20) % 2 seat y 5 (For competitive mhsbetion ) Th vs: Seth —S—,, = corer vg 7 steCF) o.3 InTully: = oe @ - _s . se After Badd = Se) © se 175 @® EqusTing Aad B, and Soleing Fee S ques $2 _0.53 mal! ' +b) 3.21 see SRA «sng (A) Sime mo interaction, SEs bY mg/l! (bY EFfectwe KCK ope) = Cir bed Gideon . 2% Spt CHET ES 2 1 Gtleny? Re Zteed OeGgay-1©) EFfetn F (en) £ z e Lio) Siler, fer OT (NF-b)~) ° © aasg-07 Oe fag-b)-1 Appors we need more imPormstion here- Siwe derobic Sergime, [eT assome Ty puce! cochfieren ts Pe feb: o(o4S(z2)-02)-1 Zeb 8(0(3E)-0r)-y) 37 (Sa Dneveon 2 2014) = 2 tae G) Has no cbt? unless SubsTesh B is. Tome To erp Bo IE meh The See yay! th iT ts, The we cameemdeTiv ame chlece wate Fema a varlables S322 Since te vate olecrenses attigher 5 we haw substiate inh biton. Use Haldane. Kinetics. Xx UE ze = GXS dé Nat st kr 3.23 @ [ein =e 2.2 doys 3 Oy = 5.7 Joplns ioe.) + 22 dae i BD, 2B(1+0.1Ct))s b gg, Ket) oe Be os n : * BY a1” axfoomuo-oft oan EH, = 10-2)» IG2Z 140.2b6e jre.z (orX2e)) | Fes Oe 2 o.07e/ ee = O,0324 a: (Fa 1rboe Tre. (2y Fe =I-o.032¥2 0.16% Ra: Fe™ are ren24 Re! 0.00648 Cort O.00162 HO” . ieee enecse ae erence fe oe seestctt errata o,00 . 0.0324 e 09636 Re: o.eurortomnste = 0.4838 Hee 9676 C~ Fe’ +0,2419 0, tock MAY = Fe ecole Cob s Fo.colr meas + HT + ONY Ho 0.00648 Cor, di. 2241030) + sue ON gO /y Fe’ @, eerer(iy) | O.eoe4t 9 MATH /g Fett SH LE 7 S +k {1 2a) Tee EF ode) ae [Dey dé G4 rise Ys) © dSs_ ostes)(ree)_ L TE Epa scnh) ~ myllyChapter 4 Biofilm Kinetics Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Basic Steady-State-Biofilm Analysis/Design 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 28 Reactors in Series with Normalized Loading 7,8,9 Nonsteady-State Biofilm and Deep Biofilm Analysis/Design 10, 11, 12, 14, 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31 Steady-State-Biofilm Model Analysis and Design 13, 15, 16, 17, 18, 21, 22, 23, 24 Comprehensive Steady-State-Biofilm Analysis/Design 19, 20TOOLS FOR SOLVING BIOFILM PROBLEMS. ‘The equations shown here are those referenced in the solutions that follow. ‘+ Definition of non-dimensional parameters Shin = —C— = b+ Per ) mn Y-G-0 ¥-G-(b+baa) s = @ xv -2 K @) L Y¥4-X¢-Dp * Steps for using the steady-state-biofilm model @. Calculate S'mn, S', and K’ from equations 1, 2, and 3, respectively. b. Compute a =1,5557-0.4117-tanh(log}0 Sin) Q B = 0,5035 - 0.0257 tanh(log10 Srin) ® 6 Solver S's (implicit equation) gt — -1) i } {2 [8-00 =) ® 4 Calaiate y= K*.(s* 83) we e. Calculate y = IK-G- Xp Dp @) “J a © f£ Caleulat aleulate bean 9. Calculate (10) 1) * Snip b+ baer s se o mK Y-G=(b+ baa) D K ® L VaXp Dp K Jp’: use the value of Swi,’ to determine it from the Cannon curve Jp =JR:K-4- Xp Dp (12)+ Miscelaneous B= b+baed13) Steady-state mass balance: Q-(S°-$)=J-(a-V) (14) + Steps for using the nonsteady-state-biofilm model a. Compute «_$ K-Dy L «Ly «_ Dy See 1/8 L eee pp= Pt K (2) a Xp (16) ra (17) t Fa (18) f D (19) b. Estimate a starter value for the effectiveness factor n. Ifthe biofilm is very shallow n approaches to 1. For deep biofilms Eq. 20 can be used. Rittman and McCarty (1981) suggested Eq. 21 Dy-(K+2-Sg) _ 142-8" tanh(U7) n= = oy al 1) f Le rH * ean 7 pe Compute §-05( Slab “Lp Den) + (s -1-L-Lt Dy-n) +4.8 ] (22) 4. Compute J* = 14 -Df-n-S8, (23) 1485 e. Compute Sg'= S"-J"- (24) f. Compute (25) 9. Forest, compute wor 8) (8) co) fs For $2 1, compute ot) ( i = 27) > Le (tanh($) h. Hf nis close enough to n go to step i. Otherwise, use n! as the estimator of n, and go to step c. i Caleulate J* = L¢-DF-n- SS (28) 1485 «KD k. Calculate J=J - [ (29)4.1. Key in this problem is that the influent (200 mg/) and the effluent concentrations (5% of 200 mg/f= 10mg/) are given. Therefore, known the flowrate, we can use the CMBR mass balance (Eq. 14) to find a relationship between the steady state substrate flux (J), and the required surface area (aV), (av) 1 mg 1,000. 200 - 10) = aay C= 1Op On the other hand, the effluent concentration and the kinetic parameters determine J, which is estimated from the normalized loading curves. Using Eqs. 11, 1 and 3, we obtain the value of the normalized loading curves Parameters: Spn=0.191 MgBODyI, Smin =0.0191, K'=0.913, Jp'=0.053, and Jn=0.058 mg/em? day. Using the set of Curves for Smn =0.01 and Spin =0.025. K* =0913, and for Shyin = 0.01 interpolating for Sin J 8-7 mg ——— -(0.01-0019) = 7.4 > 3 = 0.430. ose PS * Do1-0ms ya 24 om? -day em? day Finally, using the value of J on the mass balance, we obtain: 1 1007em? 1000 (200-10) = 0430 @v) 2 =>aV = Reg. surf. area = 44.2 m? lf we consider a typical value of a of 100 m”, this biofilm process needs less than 1 m® of reactor volume to decrease the substrate concentration from 200 to 10 mg/, with a flow of 1,000 Uday. 4.2 We follow the same strategy of Problem 4.1, but calculating J with the steady-state biofilm model. The influent (200 mg/l) and effluent concentrations (1% of 200mg/=2mag/) are given. Using Eqs. 1 to 3 we compute 0256, $=0.2, and K'=1.0541. Following the steps of the steady-state bioflm model (Eqs. 4 to 8), we get 9359, 8=0.5272, Ss'=0.1044, J'=0.1008, and J=0.0956 mg/em® day. Finally, using the value of J on the mass balance (Eq. 14), we obtain: ' o 6 gy) Wem gy eq sunt, area = 207-4 m? 1 mg 1,000. (200 -2) 8 = 0.0956. Gay COO- 27 ‘em? -day This means that we require 4.7 times more surface area to reduce the effluent concentration from 10 to 2 mg/l. 4.3 The relationship between the steady-state effluent coricentration can be easily visualized with the appropriate normalized loading curve. In this case, the parameters are Spic=0.111 mg/l (EQ. 11), Syin'=0.111 (Eq. 1), (Eq. 3), Jz =0.3 (Cannon curve), and Jp=3.0 mg/om*day (Eq. 12). Analyzing the curve for Spin'=0.1, and K'=10, we find stable S/Smn approximately for J/Jn<0.2. This means that for J<0.2*350.6 mg/cm*day the steady-state effluent concentration is insensible to loading changes. 4.4 The parameters for the turbulent biofilm system are Smin=25 mg/l (EQ. 11), Smr'=0.25 (Eq.1), K’=1 (Eq. 3), Jx=0.6075 (Cannon curve), and Ja=6.1 mg/em’day (Eq. 12). The parameters for the immobilized system are Smn=11.1 mg/l, Snin =0.11, K'=10, Jp'=0.29, and Jn=0.29 mg/cm*day. Both systems cannot achieve the 10 mg effluent concentration since Snin values are greater than 10 mg/l. However, immobilization has an advantage because it has a closer Smin. Using the appropriate normalized curves, it can be found that for effluent concentrations of 1.000 mg/l, J=31.6 mg/cm*day for the turbulent biofilm, and J=3.8 mg/em*day for the immobilized bed. Therefore, for 1,000 mg/l the turbulent system is advantageous due to its higher J as a consequence of X; and D;being higher. 45 2 __Smins Snin afd dg depend only on kinetic parameters, which are given. Using Eqs. 11 and 1 we find that Snin®0.119, and Spin =0.238 mgN/. Je can be computed with Jn and Eq. 12. We find that Jp'=0,583 using the Value of Spin and the Cannon curve. Alternatively, Je'=0.616 can be computed from Jq'=[2(Sq-in(1+S_)}°°, finding Sq =0.749 from f=0,99=tanh{ai(Sa/Smq-1)"], with a=1.784 and B=0.518 (Eqs. 4 and 5). Considering Jn =0.616, we compute Jn=4.77x107 mgN/(em*day) from Eq. 12.b. Having Smr=0.238 mgN/ and calculating K'=1.49 (Eq. 3), we anticipate that the desired curve should be roughly similar to the normalized curve corresponding to Spin =0.25 and K'=1. To get a better approximation, we interpolate using the values of the four curves corresponding to the combination of Spie'=0.1, 0.26 and K'=1, 10. Alternatively, we use the steady-state biofilm model (Eqs. 4 to 8) to calculate J from different values of S, and therefore, generate pairs Jip VS. S/Spin to construct the curve. Both curves are shown in the following graph. 10 0p 2 a 2 Normatznd eating cuves| 7 -#~-Steady.stato bof Slim 102 te4 1040 tert In c. The steady-state mass balance is (Eq.14): 'S [mgN/em’]=0.03 [mgN/em’] - J [mgN/(cm*day)] * 1 [em] * 6 [day] d. —_ Superimposing any curve from part b and the plots of the mass balance for each 0 (plots of the steady- state mass balance normalized dividing by Jz Snir), We find the intersections representing the points that satisfy both kinetics and the mass balances. This is represented in the following graph. The values found for S are shown in parte. | 4, 10) Slim te-2 te4 tes tee tex oh .@,f The plot of S vs. @ derived from the last graph is the following. The same plot shows of S° vs 0, and its linearization (on the secondary axis). The first-order degradation rate obtained by this method is 2.9, with a correlation of 0.996, which suggest linearity. It should be noted that for 0=0 h, S'/S=1 30y 90 257 - 1 52° ————— | 60 z o i e ow 28%) - 6 R=0.998 | 55 am ° ° 4 8 12 16 20 24 o@ 'S (mg) So/S— Linear (Se Alternatively, the points derived from the application of the steady-state biofilm model (part b) can be used directly to generate the same type of plot. The first-order degradation rate obtained by this alternative method is, 3.5, as shown in the next figure. 4 oy S (mgNi) ° 4 8 12 16 20 24 ee “8 (mgW/I}° So/S— Linear (S These results show that S°/S vs 0 follow an apparent first-order relationship, with an intercept different to zero. 46 The effluent from each module must satisfy the mass balance (Eq. 14). The flux within the mass balance depends implicitly on the effluent concentration; this relationship is given by the steady-state biofilm model. To solve this problem we iterate. First we guess S, the effluent concentration, then calculate J with the steady-state biofilm model (Eqs. 4 to 10), and compute a checking $ with the mass balance (Eq. 14). The following table summarizes the iterations made to find $=128.8 mg/l.eration 7 2 3 a 3 6 7 Some (al) 5 50 700 i) 125 730 85 Seas (MM) wat | 257 [Wai | 900 | 1044 | tara | 1293 4.7 The effiuent from each module must satisfy the mass balance (Eq. 14). The flux within the mass balancé depends implicitly on the effluent concentration; this relationship is given by the loading curve. To solve this problem we can iterate or use a graphical method (superimposing the loading curve with the mass balance for each reactor). We must add new modules until we calculate an effluent concentration of 1 mg//or less. The normalized curve parameters are Sqis=0.3825 mgN/I (Eq. 11), Smn'=0.3826 (Eq. 1), Je =0.8874 (Cannon curve), and Jg=0.3069 mg/em’day (Eq. 12). We don't have L to calculate K’, but L is so small that K" is large; for practical purposes we can use the normalized curves for K'=100. Using the curves for Smin'#0.25 and Spin'#0.5 to interpolate for Snin=0.38, and concentrating in the range of 1 to 100 for S/Smun (since S should be less than 50 mg/l), we get the curve shown below (plotted for convenience in J vs. S axes). This figure also shows the mass balances (Eq. 14) for the first and second module. The effluent concentration for the second module meets the effluent requirement (S=0.5 mg/< 1 mg/l), while the effiuent concentration of the first module is 5.5 mg/l. Therefore, two modules are needed. tet: ve Lil “CEE lil 1e-3 1e-2 fe-1 1e+0 te+t J (mg! Cray) Loading curve: MB. module 2-—— MB. module 4.8 The three concentrations wanted must satisfy simultaneously three mass balances, one mass balance per reactor. The flux within each mass balance depends implicitly on the effluent concentration through the steady- state biofilm model. Therefore, the equations must be solved by trial and error. The following procedure can be used to find the desired concentrations:ove sth | (@)Caleulate JS.) (5) CaleulateS, Ifthe caloulted S, is cles to cfflunt fiom the steady. fiom the muss | 400 mg then stop. eoncentition of state biofilm model balance for the Otherwise goto seo (1 y a a = ee (©) Calenlate JS.) (© Cateuate 18,1 | (Caleulste, fiom the steady- | fiom the mass fiom the steady) from the mass sae biotin mode! | | _balaee forthe state biofilm model balance for the frst ‘The next table show the iterations performed to find that Sy= 96.02 mg/l, $2=19.37 mg/, and Ss .72 mg/l. 709 Tas 45 0205 7.19 ae Ta 150 0088 771 OATS wae zi024 | 18578 250 0788 7308 O75 3590 3375 78078 370 O24 927 7148 e658 £580 390.19 4.9 The process and its main variables are represented by the following diagram. $5000 met 8 Say) Somat Teron wancTons |_$:_[azxcrons L$! aanorona |S 1009 _ Area A Fin Ama A Fh) Arca A Fh As A Fie ‘The required area must satisfy simultaneously four mass balances. one for each reactor. The flux within each mass balance is given by the loading curve. This gives a total of 4 equations and 4 unknowns (A, S1, S2, Ss). Since the kinetic parameters are the same for all four reactors, the same loading curve (J vs. S),is applicable for K all of them. To find the appropriate loading curve we must find first Sjy,=8.333 mg/ (Eq. 11), Spin =0.0417 (Eq. 1), .667 (Eq. 3), Jn'=0.1142 (Cannon curve), and Ja=0.4568 mg/(cm* day) (Eq. 12). It is also worth to note that we are interested just in the range of S between 100 and 5,000 mg/l, or S/Smix between 10 and 600, approximately. Interpolating between the normalized curves for Snin'=0.025 and Sin and converting S/Snin VS. Jidr to S vs. J, we obtain the following curve. tee 1e+0 J (mgs *dey) (05, with K’ and K'=10, teaFrom Eq. 14, the mass balance equations are: Q-(S-S)= 35) (1) Q(S2-8)=fS]A Qi -S2)= 2} Q-(Ss-S4)=YSa}-A (4) Where Sp=5,000 mg/l, S4=100 mg/l, and J[S,J=1 mg/cm’ day) (from the loading curve). It is clear from the structure of (1) to (4) that the best option is to guess S;. With Ss, J[Ss] can be readily computed, which allow us to calculate Sz from (3) and (4). Similarly, S: can be computed from J[S2], (2), and (3). With S;, a checking value for ‘So can be computed from J[S, (1), and (2). If the calculated value for So is near to 5,000 mg/l, then S:, Sz, and S3 are correct, and A can be easily calculated (e.g. adding (1) to (4), and solving for A). Otherwise, a better Ss is Needed. The following table summarizes the iterations required to find A=76,000 m*. This means that we need approximately 304,000 m’ (four times A) to achieve the treatment goal. & | J | & | Ja | & | wa | & | A mgt mgfem* day mg mg/em'day mgf mg/em*day mgt at 600 6 3100 8 72100 : E : 200 z 400 36 760 65 | 140 = 400 36 1480 04 wi | 28 T1410 E 300 27 340 75 2340 15 5340 E To verify the result we can apply the same trial and error strategy, but using the steady-state biofilm model instead of the loading curve. This approach gives a total area near 290,000 m* 4.10 The nonsteady-state substrate concentration S must satisfy the mass balance and the nonsteady-state biofilm kinetics. This suggest a trial and error procedure. Since the influent concentration was reduced from 200 to 20 mg/l, we can start with S=0.1°2=0.2 mg/l. We also assume that Li=0.0318 cm (calculated from Eqs. 9 and 10) remains constant. With this information we use the nonsteady-state biofilm model to find J=0.00973 mg/(cm’ day). (n -0.25043. $s*=0,01027, J*=0.00769, Ss""=0.01027, $=3.9904, n'=0.25043), Plugging J into the mass balance (Eq.14), and solving for S, we obtain 000973 lterating we find that S=0.1965 mg/, with J=0.00956 mg/(cm* day). 4.41. Starting with S=0.4 mg/l, and applying the same strategy as in problem 4.10 we find that $=0,3830 mg/, with J=0.01912 mg/(om® day). 4.12 Using the nonsteady-state model (Eqs. 19 to 29), we obtain the following results. 7 F 7 |mglem*de 7000 | 0012 | 0018 0900 | 0116 | o.17e 0745 | 0.352 | 0527 008s [0.355 [0502 4.13 Having the methanol effluent concentration and the kinetic parameters we use the steady-state biofiim model to find that J=0.0733 mg/(cm’ day), with a=1.9167, B=0.5260, Ss =0.0727, J'=0.0642. Knowing the flux, we can find the required surface area using the steady-state mass balance (Eq. 14). However, we need to find first the influent concentration.The influent concentration should be enough to provide the required electrons to denitrify the 30 mgNOs-NI. This relationship is given by the stoichiometry of the process. 1d 1 - Rg: 2+2120-+200) +Ht +e a Gt gHa0 > FC02 ty 3 eee N21 +3420 NO; + SH +. To 25 SNR SH te L u 1 Nor 4 5.0, 42H ee" fe! 2 CsH70.N+1H,0 > No; +200, +28 +e iad al 2? 23 38 2 “38 and 12 [Etta b-0y The overall reaction is given by: R=Re-f.R--fRe, where f+ [86 +b a typical value. We also need to convert ¥ to f° by: We assume f=0.8, #2 =0.27BVSS__32gCHjOH 28 4y gy yccg gp . ECH,OH Ge, ‘113 gVSS The overall reaction is: 0.05 day"! soe. 1 (1=0.8)-0.05 day“!.33 day 140,05 day *-33 day 0.1791 R 0.1667 CHjOH_ +0.1706 NO} + 0.1706 H* + 0.0064 CsH702N + 0.3963 130 +0.1347 COp + 0.0821 Np ‘Therefore, to remove 30 mgNO3-N/I we must consume: 30 MENOF=N _LmmoINOF_ 0.1667 mmolCHjOH _32mgCH,OH__ ,,mgCH,OH 1 "T4imgNO3—-N 0.1706 mmolNO; 1 mmolCH30H T Finally, from Eq. 14: my em? 1000 Er BECHLOH gory BEPC Gy) Pe? ag grt ara = 81.4? 3 ory OO 4.14 Using the same procedure of Problem 4.10 and the results from Problem 4.139, we find Lj=0.01237 cm. Starting with $=2°1=2 mgCH.OH/I, after some iterations we get S=1.99 mgCH,OH/I, with n 0.66642, ‘$s*=0.14539, J*=0.10111, Ss"=0.14539, =1.31509, n'=0.66642, and J=0.1444 mgCH,OH/(om*day). 4.15 a. Using the steady-state biofilm model (Eqs. 4 to 8) we find that kg/m? day (Spin =0.102, K'=1.007, and $'=0.4). 5573 mg/cm’ day, or b. The influent COD concentration must provide enough electrons to reduce the effluent concentration of sulfate to 1 mgS/. The fraction of electrons going to the electron acceptor is: 1 1 (-08)-004 day"? (0 EAU) 8-0e gg 18008) 004 tt rg f= 1+b-0x 140.04 day"! da a 0005 The influent COD should be equal to the consumed COD during the process plus the effluent COD: 3 ge - 8? =4+(00-1-B8S 8:10 esutfae _lscamte _32 mgCOD__, 5 _ agg mgCOD 1 32mgS 0.977 exuttate 4-10 7 c Using the mass balance (Eq. 14), we get: 3 2 em? Es 1 mg mg ot ay 100% em 2 1,000,000 (206 ~ 4) E = 0.5573 22.100 m“!-v = V= Reg. volume = 362.5 m day 00S 005-7 Sa day nm : ‘The hydraulic retention time is =V/Q=0.36 days.a. Using Eq. 9, we get the total biofilm accumulation X*L~=0.6997 mgVSS,/cm’. Considering that this biomass distributed in reactor volume we get: 3 xy ELEY tae 067 ESS 00 won 00058 = enn HEE The effiuent concentration of active biomass. mgVSS, 3 ena ° eS ee eer bs, = = a 1,000 day f. We use the normalized curve for Spin =0.1 (Eq. 1), K'=1, and S/Spic#4, to realize that J/Jg is not in the low load region, and therefore, the process Is affected by transport resistance. Quantitatively, we can calculate 1=48 um (Eq.16), L1=1.63 (deep, Eq. 17), and L'=0.92 (not <<1, Eq. 18). Therefore, Ly shows internal mass transport resistance, while L’ shows external mass transport resistance. 4.16 To solve this model either by the normalized loading curves or the steady-state-biofilm model, we need to calculate the non-dimensional parameters. We have all the required kinetic parameters, except bye. To estimate ‘ae in a fluidized-bed reactor, we can use the equation relating bye and the shear stress «, which can be estimated from the fluidization process. 2 8 om (op - Pw) 1-e)-@_ 25D 5 1-046) 980 yng Tyo tm SS A 3.2401, em m 1000m Hf we assume that L‘<30 jum, then beet can be estimated as (note that this formula requires « to be expressed in dynefem’): bbyg = 84207 Yr = 0.5383 day”! Therefore, b'=b+Dsa=0.08+0.5383=0.6183 day”. This gives Snn=5.2 mg/l (Eq. 11). Considering that the effluent substrate concentration is 1.0 mg/, itis then clear that this system cannot sustain biomass in steady state (S 50,4 rey/f Y= 36 omy /l (T= 4.96 ma lemdeg, with ‘ Se OUtF4 m4 (emi) 4.23 — aa otee mts Oy = 50, Ft mines Ka = OS 1 my /p Xe = 0. 2 0g LL Ky > 8.8 m9 L04.24 @ @ as Zemem? S°= 50 mg/h S= O.0x(s0) = 2 myst of 2 mle VF OS my /em*ad Q@(s*-s) = mats removal pure ~ ae, Ja mts removal pate Q(s*-s) = Jav w= &0S*5)_ jeom' (0-2) wf cat oe Se AF etiy9” eat hee 4.25 Jz *> L =~ 2:205Cm mB ,toc0en! S = BITS = Semi Baal pt IS mel) = (S ris )ry/) = 20 me//4.26 For deep biofilm aul mp leTemIX Sy £0.0%my/1= M610 nylon? SS 5 ke yh Jo0. Soe Je 8H, De os +e ntena))] (40 5, . sok O88 2aNee)co.b)(ss 0.0008 In( oor =) os) 0.0064- 1605, = [ez0 (Sst 0.0006 hn( Pron (Teration » Ses h2xioS Laanct) . 0.8 (YHOU LIKE Tes, J 50.8 peak F C004 me fy ty 1s es (5). saan = Po 2 PESESY, 10% my (usom yive a A a As), Vv JA 1 S000 m/w tad ited Peelvig S.F.g 2, Yo 2(33000) = 2 66, 000 ™ == 4.27 Ga) Fs- OSS Fes In fy2 Inass = ys B Chaco” + Fe (Emoy)+ 6 (dmer)e,.. > Fa(Se CstoOob)* Felt pron BOS) + Custer oss tay] ee) ABZ + 6.80 2 nitrate secrete, 738 Aeelate repuireds = GeelOS) = 20,5 2g/) deeTate6 Assonnny sce bre Film with Sutor Donor: Acclole We (4) = [28 (55-5) = fe RXaDp (Sst ks ln . ala [ew Gos) XeOe (Ss Cir) OF paso (0708-55) = usxnre.s¥on(sg 2101 fy (se) “ From which Ssy= 0,009 mg// OF &) * Spo (010708-2.007) = 0,40 m3 lend Acceptor: My Trate @ ears Sanus Sau} fe for £4) eyomansaromui2e) Fron which, Ssa> 0,001 ira && he £2 (oees-o,0015) = 0,297 my lem Covvesperding donor Plugs (0.297) = 21322 mare) O,d2% rKs (Is>72) Grr. Si ‘ top ee (Ps s(B)S a Ober war deep biofilm (O.00% 4 (1 # (20K Dp (o.01r rene of 2) “as Xehet (pSaio? ing CH) 8 (2eer19N(e.050 red, (2HE=)))* 10 malend J mg/emtad4.31 = Bons, wind a. keer oe Seemed “os Ss - Ss sax )\\er ie \ Salt kK Deep «Shallow + Fully PeneTeated b Sry Xz 30% lom* Ses Spe Je-D. = Zyl) # c 2.002-0.005 2 ars alk 1 :0.01em = 0.225 my lem*d 4. Ja Obs = 0-6(0.225)2 0.135 mg lem-ol wa 0.435 Coot) Bo eG Meni eeeeeccecees Sure” Diggs Seed 15(orsy * °O°8 = 0,003-0,0012 = 0.0018 od B gtChapter 5 Reactors Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Safety Factors or Chemostats 1,7, 10, 9, 10, 11 Solids Recycle Systems 2, 3,4, 5,9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17 Batch or Plug-Flow Reactors 6, 11, 16, 17 Influent Quality 8 Biofilms Systems 1,175.1 First find[o™>] bee]. = Yg-b 1 = = 0.204 d, 6, = for"), -SF= 6.124. Caleulate § for 0,=6 days. 1+ b0, Yg0, —(1+b0,) Since there is no input of X,, X, will be: S=K =0.72 mg COD/| X, Sor fa)b0, =13,and = 3077 mg VSS,/I. Ys? — i = 4.68 days. Since @ ~ 0,, it is not practical to treat this high-strength waste by this method, as we are not taking advantage of solids recycle. 5.3 System A System B 1+ bo, S-K— = _ Yoo, —(1+ b8,) 0.566 mg BOD/I 1.2 mg BOD/L 0, [¥(S° -S) 6 | 1+b0, 4664 mg VSS/1 3729 mg VSS/I SMP X, = X,(1+(1-f)b8) XP=X¢ xX, Total BOD = S + SMP + 1.42 f, X,° 63.52 mg COD,/I 56.76 mg COD,/I 6530 mg VSS/I 10.71 mg VSS/I 76.3 mg 4102 mg VSS/I 13.64 mg VSS/15.4 a) b) d) First, find Y: 5.65 g cells, vais ge’ cells 565 B VSS BgCOD/ gCOD Je donor 1+b0, a g CODA Yq, —+b0,) 2 First, we need the stoichiometric ratio, which is f, fo] LEG =f0. | _ ogy e cells oe 148, © donor £ 0.062 = 0.94 & acceptor/e" donor. AS _ 94 €°S_ 3288, te donor_y 47 eS _ ACOD e COD 8eS 8gCOD gCOD (00-9 FE (COP = 211 mgCOD/ 0.47¢5 S°=211+4.1 +215 mg CODA AS) | = 84.3 mg VSS, /. a =x! +X,0,(1-£,)b = 6.7mg VSS,/1 X, =X, +X, =91 mg VSSA. =A = Land XS = S mg/l. ee Q’ X\"= 41 kg VSS/day to waste line, K g x0-%,) R_X. or, “Revo (very small) 75.5 f) ape —GvwX.0+ Kune + hits0)+ VlduaX.0* K uae thm OP aK gash 9,6 7 pap= (sar (dnao —ka)X,0)+ V(Raan + (dan 2 where, ty Substituting in the above equations, we get the following results: UAP = 10.6 mg/l - A BAP =7.0 mg/l And, SMP = UAP + BAP = 17.6 mg/l 2) ‘Yes, the problem is that X, is very, very small, which means that Q* (and @) is too small. This condition occurs because Y is small, while 0,/9 is not especially large. We really will not get good thickening and will not achieve X,* = 5000 mg/l with any realistic settler, The only solution is to make V (and @) much smaller. So, we can save a lot of money and get better performance. Another problem is that the S.F. is small, about 4.6 {([0,""]ia=2.24 days]. So, we could increase @,, too. » oF (0, ]ig, = 0.74 day a) (6 hin = ole Ya-b (0,""]jn * SP. = 7.4 days 1+b0, b =x —_1+b0, y Yd0, —(1+b0,) ° 7 _ ~ XV oS One xPoKe? whereX} = 8,000 mg/I, and X$ =15 mg/I Q* = 0.863 m'/day Eos & Q or, R= 0.14 Q*= 140 m'/dayd) Set up mass balances on UAP and BAP: For UAP: 0= Q(0-UAP) +kyt,.V ) where, Qand k1 are given, V was calculated in part (b), and UAP is the unknown goal According to the following reaction, H,S + 20, -> $0, + 2H’, we have 64 g 0/32 g8=2gCODyeS. Therefore, r4.= 616.4 mg S/l-day x 2 ™8CO! 3 meCOD, 1-day Then, from equation (1), we get, For BAP; 0=Q(0-BAP) +k, X,V Q) where, X, = X, [1+(1-f,)b0,.}' = 931 mg VSS,/I From equation (2), we get BAP = 13.6 mg COD,/I SMP = UAP + BAP =21.6 mg CODy/. Effluent Organic COD = SMP + 1.42 X, = 42.9 mg CODA (Note: S is not organic!) a 1Q§° ~s]-QoMP-Q°x® 1.4 (Q-Q")Xé x142 56 Por bohch growth wlth anton ted dubnbrt, ! be au vy - bk Ike 79 y-a)¥, Berane a inte ~teal A Kglt) > Xlejexp ee tg cel Ngle) = pomg/l va tek cram, Hor, , Gea a8 x vg-4 Al 53 Ger 938 (eo wapeyen3 (1212, 200 BE aH 18,6 46 Xlertdy) 12/00 2,000 wale .5.7 Tn aU can, Qe SOm [fay , 8°: /2.000 my /G, k= 200ml, 6 20 ox/tlag, f= 0 saris, YE n2 etn Yfmyer), 9 ~ Fm CoO/mg VSS/cleg 1460 Se fe e.g te FORO {40 -C/108) 2062 oy Vol. removed nate EAD 1e.000- Sra v AY xt Leg Odap > 4 45 5 2s Smyfl Jomo fifo tf re HF -ASmyl Jeo? 0 FAS 747 958/ Yo). Rem Fadl, ) ps0 yn7e fest 472s nso malty , 4 pesimu pete par an it volume 15 near O> a rhye,5.8 S*% ¢ze+ 3000 = 980 my £00, /} Q°= @ 5 150,000 m4/d X°= Xx + 350 mg/} oe BD, croted: Xr= (1- See eretdy ‘ ( COD (souds) ) Xr = (;_ S20 >360 . ( sie 3 Jato = 9 mg/l 5.9 Tn eiler cat, Se pelahel to Be by I4+b& . ; se A ee 7 - Gq 4, — 11GB) ue a3 gsQr Ito ~/ oes-/ vary dhe 15" for PSR remord, S=ajsxbo~ Irall, Se -equaden above for 3% Torgt gry Oe? 13 Lege. So, for a C8TR, Vr OQ=Exa= 1 adays sonldag* btn’ For a CIRY recgcle xO 1/4 V+ @aQ= \eeoe Lon LG Ss recluce fo git WR perroved, 2 0.02x60 ~1279 Salvin os dhe Same $eshan gives ae 2 2,240yr- Vier = 22x50 * Yen? Vom recy > Uo =n?wy Ub. / 1 S10 Gl" Fb > Gayagena * Bee M/S Wilh SEQ Ox Sceg Lt OMX / OS ME —Lip0xbis) ~ 0, 95x81 Ss 1B = ofl mall fora CSTR, O= Gee UF day. > S0W Ax ide, = 590m" for CSTR with rncych # X-/020 mg VILE Xe [920 = Ze? Fas |prrod}i A483) = MEPS rongye 40,3402ON)] O~ OVW dag V- 04 bx50 ~2¢m?5.11 ‘Reactor Type CSTR with Fixed-film CSTR | cell settling | Plug Flow | Completely- Factor with and recycle with mixed Increased| _ recycle @ kept | recycle with constant) recycle g + ° + + se ° ° + + Xie oO oO oO ° XP ~ 2 ~ ~ Recycle rate) ° ° ° Y > 7 7 ~ 5.12 Effect on Variable Reactor Increased Size K F 4 eS g pb so i Xo cal Xe = ie AU SCeady-STate, mass oF Xf 15 resetor 5. = Okt Oes 100% (a0 Nod 0% onto)? Rl) ms, 3 DV MITE Xe ree rg = BOE powrine (es) = gon Me muh use? & [x? +b] 2 % RR Initially Then . Solve Fron whieh Vunit be solve For For & wilt XU" a Vi wilh Xi? = 200 my) few 7 egal Bont5.14 ye ea" ox VOs%s9 oO: & [xis aes (ase.206)] Oy "Sele "Jie ® +l 5 a) lent seuteo-az] 480d or (4-804 \eeccr eta (200-3). (440,2(002064-88) a 20009 12,2 (4.880 V= 633 m> Sa nyt Brst (o.r-sti(arse) = 10.025* Le wzssense™ = te02s® sete iesese-l > © gee wESEE foarte IOS) | ~e.s2el2t wees EU 5.15 _ [oz], * Be Of = 5.4 (OP),= 2olerys Wd west) ast eos Precipitated Fe 2 Sees hess t sae nc 2 forse imi] = o27d ® v2 @@= z200(0277) = SY 2 16g Sains Qos THY Complere A> m: Qs*oT ont @ Stoo Sunt: GSKo Tene vor vas: @stor-@stor - BS Ks yar tse 2 Gistst) - Ese =e Beaks ord o.5-s© g.05 S* (1200) SaShe whch Xqt 122° does pet Ahoy, id on prbh kYpse 9 fx xa Se Ranrrargirs girs a Ske qht | -Ae For plug beet gre Ploaging 2" : sn20e ce PGB ME /4 5 aay: p- Preteed _ 2,33 = bn @4005) po yoo S* 0, O76F- Meee p oooodnyl — A. Either Simm = K A 5.17 s Line iE Tb) K dO gb * ee" ane aayg-ay! J” ago)” ¥9-b (es abwe) (e.2) Smn? 5 0.9(B)-02 Att matt B. Veriovs possibihitees : 1, Pluy-Flow reacTor, High benzene conc, aT mPluenT end Supplies energy For orpamin growth; nese eCbleesT end, conc, Of benrene reduced below Smun while orpumnzs 1m wel decay, 2. TwesTaze system. EPFtseT Prom CTR enters 2nd reactor To whi We added, Benzene ores as secardacy subsTout, redery Cont, A greeny subsTosle (such as aceTaPe ) 3. Twestope alleemaiy Peed syTeny cack eter dispeses or duly systent Pericd 1S” Simin 0, but itis practically bad on two grounds. 1. Vol. Load = S°0 = 8.8 kg BOD/m*-day. ‘This is a high value for activated sludge (typically around 6 kg BOD/m'-day, suggesting that O2 supply may be limiting 2. é 8% * eg yr xs +2 yk Q Solving weger :2~ = 059, Q So, 59% of the flow is waste sludge! Clearly, this is a poor situation, Ata minimum, it Will require solids separation for a large flow, but with no reeyele of sludge, The conclusion is that activated sludge cannot treat very high concentrations. As S° TRE sss, the system approaches more and more a chemostat, which is the limiting case, The system could operate as a chemostat, if O2 supply is OK.69 X.Vy =—— ay = 138 days. !) EON lays. (long!) y, 8 o =4.84days. (long!) ae =< = 0.786 large RS (arge) o/F=2~ 767 m/day (modest) (Q+Q)X, _ Gr= Qe 5.6 kg/m? —day (modest) ROY + a2 72 =62m/day (modest) b) If keep the 0, the same, then X, will not change, and itis a reasonable value, 1 note that Gr is quite a modest value, while SV1 is for a good settling sludge. ‘This Suggests to me that the settler is significantly underloaded. I should be able to improve Xy" by reducing Q® and U. For example, if T cut Q* to 550 m'/d (from 1100) then ws3.1 m/d, K0.395, Gr=43.3 kg/m’-day, and most importantly, x2) (0393 = wo Substituting inthe aboveequation, wecan solvefor X® : XI =13,800 mg/l(ora 57% increase) So, X* goes up by 57%, Q” goes downby aboutover50%, and Q goes downby 50%, Although the average conditions are fine, the treatment plant experiences non-steady 6.10 loading. The clarifier is particularly overloaded during high flows. ‘At the peak loading, the overflow rate is: QA = 69 mid. This overflow rate is near the top of the permissible range for peak loads (70 m/d), but only for short duration, However, the solids flux (load) is also a problem. First check the following: FUXjoy=39 kg/m?-d (OK) Ry Note: G, = ae =120kg/m? ~d. So, G,3000. It could be as high as 3 Miss<300me/1900m!/d _ sp 7sg/1, 900 +1500m?*/d When high flow comes, (9000 + 4000%0.3)4875mg/I_, kg-l igh = 193 “8 Fl a 130m? mg-m? 24 =15.9kg/m? —h. This is way too large, and we are probably getting a thickening failure and loss of solids in the effluent, with at least a clarification overload, and still poorer effluent quality! State point analysis probably will show us a state point above settling curve. Also, high Vol. Load at high flow might cause O» depletion; if S° is fairly constant, 9000 Finally, check al: wi-8 —— = 227, Sil . nally, check also Brom 22m/d — (OK since < 400) 611 The first things to do are compute the overflow rates and mass fluxes: Area = Vol/D = 230/5 = 46 m’, Overflow Rate Ave: 1400/46 =30.4 m/d=1.27m/h. — (OK) Peak: 2800/46 = 61 m/d = 254 mv/h. (high, but not out of range) Mass Flux, assuming 2950 mg SS/ at all times. Pf 2.95K8/ Ave: 400% 74229519 295 Zon’ = 1g9 8-7 Stef ° 46m? m’— m 3 kg 14003 // «2.95 2 ok Peak: Lm? _ 11 2kg = (4624) m? Yai -t Both mass fluxes are too high. So, we'd expect some thickening overload. ‘Next, we can use filamentous data to assay with flux theory, First, compute settling velocities and settling fluxes from the following equation:10.9869? (avy = 10.986 141.1710" x (4,57)he bm where, X isin g/land Ly, isin pm/mg. Here, let X vary and Lg = 10"°. Then, 10,9865 0336x van) =a = 496 X, g/l kg/m vy m/h Xi kgm I 3.54 3.54 2 2.52 3 18 q 1.28 [~ 5 0.915 _ 6 0.65 _| 7 0.465 3.26 8 0.33 2.66 9 0.27 2.13 10 O17 17 125 0.072 O91 This can be plotted on a flux vs. X curve, as shown on next page. Then plot the overflow curve and find the state point for average and peak conditions. QAave = 30.4 m/d = 1.27 m/h. QVApeak = 61 m/d = 2.54 m/h These plots show that the peak flow conditions will cause clarification overload, and thus we have high effluent SS then. During average load conditions, we are underloaded. To prevent overload during peak flows, we would need to reduce Xi to less than approximately 2000 mg/l. To do so, would require a reduction in 0, by about 1/3 (e.g. from 6 to 4 days). The feasibility of this depends on other process goals, not yet defined here. Mass balance on solids would give a very low X, with lower Xig, unless we seriously reduce recycle ratio, So it'd also reduce recycle rate from 1400 m°/d to about Unew = 3.1 kg/m?-h + 10 ke/m’ = 0.31 m/h= 7.44 m'/day, or Qa = 340 m*/d, for a recycle ratio of 24% on average flows. If able to meet the ®, goals, this strategy should mitigate clarification overload and should give a better underflow solids. There will be some thickening overload at peak flow, but it shouldn't be a problem if peaks don’t last too long Asa second approach, we could try to alleviate the sludge bulking. If we reduced the filament lengths to 10’ um/mg, the flux at 3 kg/m’ would go to10.9869 ky F=X— — = 8.04 K& . 141.17 10% x (4.57) Te wh This should just barely keep from having clarification overload. To get lower filaments, we need to diagnose the problem. a) low D.O. with too high U b) too long 0, with CSTR c) S* input We have no data to tell. So, we need more information to decide how we could reduce bulking. Asa default, we might try to chlorinate sludge at ~ 5 mg Cly/mg VSS-day 125 [tm eee 7 p ny : QI =1.3m/h=30,5mid 0 Aut 3 Ras 7% 125 66.12 First analyze original and altered conditions Check if low D.O. was problem it \ up = 2 {any o.77_meBOD._ Y\0, mgVSS- day Based on graphical representation of low D.O. bulking in notes, with D.O. = | mg/l and U=0.77, we are in the low D.O. bulking region, Check if low D.O. was problem under altered conditions (0, 1 days): ) tf 1g) 0.49 -meBOD._ Yo, mgVSS- day Based on graphical representation of low D.O. bulking in notes, with D.O.=2 mg/l and U=0.4, we are in the no low D.O. bulking region. Therefore, low D.O. bulking could have been a problem under th and the change in 6, and D.O. should have solved it. I conditions * Check original operating conditions with respect to clarifier operation using state point analysis: Overflow rate operating line: Slope = Q/A = 40 m/d Need another point to plot; when X = 5,000 mg/l, G=QX/A=200 kg/m?-d. Plot line on attached plot. Draw vertical line through MLSS=1500 mg/l, and get state point, From curve, Gy=60 kgim2-d. Recycle operating line: Slope = Q*/A = 10.9 mid. Find X,: =B _ O-Gi) 5, “A X,-Xi," X,=Xi,+ c.(4] Plot line on attached plot. ,000mgSS/1 The initial conditions were OK with respect to clarifier operation,- Check altered conditions with respect to clarifier operation using state point analysis. Overflow rate operating line and recycle operating line slopes are same as before. Draw vertical line through MLSS=3,000 mg SS/l and get state point. From curve, Gin = 120 kg/m?-d. Find Xu: ( Xy = Xin + Gia oe =14,000mgSS/1 “la Plot line on attached plot. Clarifier is overloaded with respect to thickening. Second, device an improved strategy The original strategy was OK with respect to low DO sludge bulking —the sludge settling characteristics improved; however, those corrections caused the clarifier to be overloaded with respect to thickening. A simple approach is to keep the same changes for eliminating low DO bulking, and increase Q* to eliminate clarifier thickening overload. Looking at the settling flux curve for after the changes in 0, and DO, draw the recycle operating line for the critically loaded case. From the graph, X,* 11,250 mg Si Calculate Q®: R Qs Qa =1,450m3/d, or 36.3% of Q. Calculate” : 0 = © (Q-Q*)X, + Q"XY Since(Q- Q*)X% = 0, a Q OX" = 50m? /d = 1.29% of Q(lowbutOK) Summary of improved strategy Change 6, to 7.1 days and D.O. to 2 mg/l Use: Q® = 1,450 m'/d and QY = 50 m*/d.250 QiA=40 ma 200 = 150 3 , = > Gin, \ © 100 | + ao sin Gra 50 SY ° Sonne s ta ° 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 X (mg SSM) ‘Afer opefators changes] | — Original operating conditions 6.13 a) The oxygen demand will be reduced if we use the units of kg Ov/day, This occurs because a lower ® means more biomass is wasted, while less is endogenously oxidized. Using a typical set of parameters: yom _ y| L4(-£,)b6, ] 1+b8, | 0, = 6 days yo = 0,254 0, = 3 days Y= 0.315 0.315 ~ 0.254 = 0.061 g Ov/g BOD.So, there is a 6% savings based on influent COD, or a roughly 6/0.75 = 8% decrease, However, when @; is decreased, U goes up roughly proportionally. This means that it might be necessary to increase the D.O. The implication is that the > requirement in KWH could go up! b) The MLVSS concentration will drop by just less than 50%. The main cause is the halving of 0,/0. If X;° were zero, then the exact decline would be from 6 (0.254)=1524 to —-3.(0.318) = 0.954 or to 62%. With X;’, the drop moves closer to 50%. ©) If the recycle ratio is the same, then the clarifier will go into thickening underload G,= (0.5 100.6) x G, SPs has X (0.5 to 0.6) x Xi Xe= (0.5 10.0.6) Xu, X,2 will be roughly 50 to 60% of Xu1, due to ma balance. So, we pay a price for underload: a dilute underflow. 4) I'we decrease & to regain critical load, we can increase X, to greater than it was. This may take substantially smaller o.6.14 contgetank sae rearatontat 2500mg/1] 10x10x5 +5x 28? xx/4 fm? +7600] 10x 30x 240)(20) 240m* /dx 8000mg/ I + (12000 Ta ffl. _ (1200+ 6000)m? /dx2.5kg/m°* 28? x74 m* = 73.1kg/m? —d =3.0 kg/m? — hr. So, the contact aeration process has satisfactory values for conventional loading and probably should be OK. Could reduce Q* a bit, perhaps to get better X" 6.15 ultimately want to determine if sludge bulking is occurring or not. Ifit is, then I want to learn the cause. If it is not, then I want to determine what other clarifier problem exists, I also can expect to receive only certain types of “practical” information. Things to Learn/Ask 1 To ascertain about bulking a. SVI— Vg and MLSS (known) b. Microscopic exam for extended filaments 2. If bulking appears to be the problem, then a @ > I must ask for Vr, Ve, Q, Q", Xv. Xs", Xv" (7 items). b. U~> I need 8°, S, Xv, Vrs Ven Q ©. _D.O. (know range already) 4. Input reduced sulfur €. Optional, input N, P, and industrial waste streams. 3. Whether or not bulking is implicated, I need to a arifier loads. a. Overflow rate > Q, Aci, Qpeak- b. Solids Flux > Q, Q®, Xy, Acts Queak | _ Note here that Qpea is likely to occur at 10am-2pm. We could just have a clarification and/or thickening overload for high flows.. 1 6.16 So= Bos (gas) * BD acpee* ssr20s 75% Bed, 202 20[1-22): 8.6 mz!) 20> Ze ier (32h 6.17 es = 9S mgt eyo m/e xr gerne! me XK 64038 = ese - B20! ese: ° i's (1- Sgn ) Ke 0825), - gl! e(1- 1S y7ofti-E Daas = ier 4 ezo 6.18 i Operating Characteritics Effluent Sludge Substrate Oxygen 6 Production| Concentration | Consumption Variable | (gays) | (kg/d) (se) (kg/d) Y - + + [= 4 ° Qo - ° ge | - + + + se = + + + b + - oa + K ° L ° = ° xe oO = jo 2 xo oO + oO6.19 AU) Ox bored open [OTS ,,, + S.A, say 23On50 Bia = 5 LOR Tiim = 5 (ypn3)= - a 7 30 Gayo )* $0 (0u9) = S37 days (2) Oy dered pon eFFloent JimiTalions Ls MES, th t1)l0.0%) | Be ie ts Oarooy Se 0107 Ox = 7.33 dors Certicck yatue ) IE Cake 425.6, eselect lover SF. 21 Ot 2.0432) = 19d a 20d 122 = Aswen b, Awe Xys 2e00 my/I (ar befuen [20048 Sdory 1) se, SE MSG? crresay] = 22 Mas (1$0-0.02) 2oe0]] > o1Sen are Ite scented] 2 O.3bd Ve O@% 0.3¢C101) = 3 600m" 6.20 xX, & «Westen Lenles) r Shree 1tbes Ye atly: Vesey ful bs] = TK tes : tym + 295 (asee- te) erected ey wt Nee ® ste ST) iby wi 2 2us (ot) Belt ~—» + ~6.21 Operating Characteritics Total Biological Iudge Oxygen . Xy Producti ‘i Variable (mei) ae Consumption 4 + + - ps + zs = * + + i % z + : K = = + x? Fs é x Og, Consumption = Fe Q(S*-S*) 6.22 Ql stot)m/d $%2 123 80, /) es KiCirsO ) _ cool 140.2061) S&: Shiai) * aoartay-atya = 9/4 Fee I-F: / pe. be = 2,63(steutee) D) co.g2. Fee (ee Tren, Fes /-0.12 2 068 ae ZV pe A Oz Consenp = 0.68 (SXto4 Sy ane: E\e leis = Yo, 00 By vd6.23 N red 2 0.12 Feyp Yeop = Ckasiy (iu0) ve OO < Nath = Byes" wer)] From Table, Ys 04S bp bea2d~ wens Sl ann S20 yd Ite.2(0) 5207 eep = nae: Qs 2 Fwy (i) = 2t,000 Be i waty M vegid = O12 (2eeee ) = ZBI B ld Oa” Oxfye, WS, vi] a 2x; * Thea, OF y wi) tT 6,> sFler'],. = 40] eq] [anata 408d Ve ihn lu.sed [pwr ent2 (200-5). 2 createarren] re ~ "A ge0emyl4 1#e,2. (4-88) 6.24 V= g33_m*6.25 ReaTor; 9°S° @est WasTe mesTly soleble andl C00 % SS7% Cod Therefore Bod, = Cop, ok Te asrvne This, or can be Semenhst move precise! BoD, tratal)= EEE 2 Fy 21 00 mpl , CreTa l= 77 eon ha Gee) re) Bods tse) BoD, esol) = Beet = 1, Thome? G-e") Ziee-I762 tues ae BOP. (paeT) = o,f, Bebeieet)_ vye X= (0 ene ad ie) ee = bomgél Fie sont Z, 100 lI S° = BbercrTt) me [ep] je ent dar (Creat aerobi), SP = SO Ceenservative) , Thes Oe se ler")... = solol) = & dars Ke L032 mg/} (probebir good Fm wise wastes) K C1tbO&) _ toolie e268) Bligh) FG0-I 5 4, 1g BOAT 5 WOR" Jim Bod, rem. rates Q Q*sr-s* Je 1007 2 f2100- onesie) = 3140 600, / ; st: sé 30m Bode)F522 0.63 (Type! acrobe ) Fs= pe (ic ter), ons (tnentenK) ItbBy 20,34 Fee I- Fs3 I> 392 awn selve Foor Vv 2 . eco Wteeebh X= Shy + Y(s*-S°) Heb y Trane Ye 250? wll 2 O,Jye ° ace 110,2.bOx vz x [ee eXi + Vises ae >, 2 ys00%(Sd) - wees) ay Lee LE tamer steroar toe ET 4 = 2.180% op conseny + Fe (BOB rm Meg te sive) = 2,078 To) glosge Prod = Vi = XV 2svo(cise! am JoTs] store chp Gr a oro hid , Buologusl Satuds Prod = (vise se1(eeenisP) ae e (os )esoo-n) (eAHER 180) = BAIA gid pret), 0.12 (B47) = 102 eld = 1sse (jerirdte) = 33k add = 102-43 = btbeld preyl = ove (844) 2174 Pavel. = 12 (82) = 7B bgld > 17h po addtional P nected!6.26 sits aap? 2 OE (140.26) “~ ovcie-as} = 6 mpBon, /1. —= b. SF . 6° ia) + Gfourqarat]= 3) ze: XyF ols soe WES) ioabg) | 2600 m> Oo a Seomiid = S24 Xy= shes ERO sonsasxe] 402s) 2us4 [iso+ 97 + 36 = 3870 my/L (xa) (Xd |. Slotye Prod. = ay, sEze teen, yerzwoegid = 1677 Rell i 2 im e. x atts = G7 my Bones Ste ™)+ Y08 Ke (1-e*) + S(0.28) sere MN + 192 (0. 06 7)0~ a Nenseies amg (ironies Fre Fsza eLeestO s2(os) tree) op (irar Gaver) | Speetny 7 Beir a = bt Cone) Feu . Fs 03 Fete) Fs, 7 0.28 Since (SUSE DH (st SK) % tnereme = 13% = 0.28 = LIS (132% beter) e Decrease. CPsig < Fee fren above )6.27. Actuated sludge wo primey Cretmenr — XF=X7¥ 2400750 Pps Se zrng/) O: Sx + aoaxj+ VS ie § 2 ro-249)] S©0.02( 2000) * Yeo mg/h eee = S2G[ 152 toouesey+ saclaene te Core sours ] = Sa lsor S++ O24 (11)] = 174 day v= 174 (10%) = 1.74%10% m? Coss 179x008 (Bo) = 41359 Patios J yeoe Aetwaled Stedge wilh pemacy CreeTmenT Peymary TredmenT ! ve Hye) = 1.67 G0) m?* Coss 10700(%0) = %o.33 mithien Jyere Actuated Sledge: Xi°s SEF) s S27 mall Xf = 0.35 (250) = 67.5 ml So = O.3F(400)= 140 mg) @- sBi[ ce sroelore) toasy(Worueo—ve)] = sh [sesr ie + vse) = 130 day V= 1310S) = 163¢40)" m? Core 1.3 (10)* (80) = roy rites ToTsl Cos = 7044 0.33 = Fe 7 rites Cheaper wife Primary TresTnerT —_——_Chapter 7 Lagoons Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Aerated Lagoons 1,2,3,4 Stabilization Lagoons 5, 6,7 Wetlands Lagoons 8,9, 10, 1171 Note that for a chemostat, 0,= 0 = I day. =0.976 BOD,/1 = (1+ b8,) ae = 833 mg VSS, X/=X,+X,(1-£)b0, = 33 mg VSS/I, since X,= 0. X,=X,+ X,= 866 mg VSS,/l uarX 0+ K unr +18) + YlduseX.0 + K uae + hit8)? 4K yank UAP= 2 —(K par + (Gna —ka)X.0)+ V(K nar + Goan ~k2)X.0)" +4K parks X,0 BAP= ~~ ———eereeweseee—=se ; 2 oe 0 Substituting in the above equations, we get: UAP = 17.4 mg COD,/1 BAP = 45.8 mg COD,/1 SMP = UAP + BAP = 63.2 mg COD,/1 Total BOD, = Soluble COD + 1.42 8 Se Xf eV: =s+smp +142 BOD: x ¢, 5 VSS, Total BOD, = 1010 mg/l, not meeting the desired effluent quality of 1000 mg/l. Aerator capacity needed AS, =7,Q[s° -s-smP+1.42(x? -x,)] At wherg 7, =1 stoi Thus, Qinm’ / day. 8 Ee 29.4K) }om* ie eon? day’ gO, 24br W per 1000m? tank volume KW __ 1000 m? tank volume7.2 ‘The first CSTR is simply a chemostat that can be analyzed in the conventional manner. v 6-0, = =2days Q 1+b9 S=Kz = 188 mg COD/I Yg0,- (bo) ¥(S° -S) | =3.4 L. * we me VSS X= X/' + X,(1-£)b0, = 30.27 mg VSS/I The second CSTR is different because it has input of X,. In other words, X! VSS,/. Also, X,’= 30.27 mg VSS/I and §° = 188 mg COD/. 34mg To solve for S, X,, and X, with input of X,°, we can define 0,” as: @ Since® = 2 days,and X? =3.4 mg/l, 0, = 2% X,-34 a) So, we can solve for $ with 0,", __ 1+ be, Yg0, —(1+b0,) 140.20, 20, -(1+0.20,) Q) aoe @ 0, [0.4088-s)] 2| 14020, | 8% (8° -s) be, To find S, 8,’, X, and X,, iteratively solve (1”), (2) and (3) by guessing 6,”, solving for S (from (2)), solving for X, (from (3)), and solving for 0,” (from (1°)). If the initial 8,” and final 0,’ agree, your solution is correct. Let's iterate: Try 6,'=2.5 days; 50; Xe131; 7=2.7 Try 6,'=2.7 days; $=140; X=169; 0792.5 Try $1445; X=14.9; 2.58 daysS = 145.6 mg CODA 4.6 mg VSS,/l .27 + 0.2 x 0.2 x 2.56 x 14.6 = 31.7 mg VSS Summary __ 6", days S,mg COD |X, mg VSS/1_|_X, mg VSS ] CSTRI 20 +I 188 34 303 CSTR2 2.58 145.6 146 318 73 (®) Aner = ae. Le,000m Meg 10 dee yy oo gy @ Bom Ta = UaBNT, ET Oe/d 10M asm) PPE HIS ht) + @/Q; [o.S1fes) + 122 hgeae — gage F IS . a7 Te = 23% . ar( (oS -efesDES ga Tun = ari aie Al - ee Z 1sdmglh —_ ea. Bed, J+ho Trap 2 It? = Ira Q (0 sO < /3 FY © cont: 1 Dh * Fy wer a Sum mine S eoee , Xie fA ) B : 0, Pig, (- 2ayfararetin) 2 oF UN Apes 2 AIS y HV * 6, 7K gse-13. rf aur aer 0) = 65 Fargh K CD Y a @ bo, be e a QABOD fais - 4420K,Sam mor 3 h-8 AQ, 3p 190-3 os a ooo [ PE 1 153) 1° may = 4480 Merde by, pA “Bo | 1SOAB,F 23, Fate” a 10,000 [PO 14 , ~ 1100 kg0, (das é) KW) needed = Sh f00n’ < 104,008 > = 3e0 AW A fess Prulanee en aetiic promess > -71a-Q’) 4—S_ %V~- o-ta Kat 1§ ep ta dK phe rs solved in fhe usual manner Fr S* 1+ be” oa s-k (ge. ee) whoy 6" -@-0) V = Wile-@) 6= Ox hee, Ke mas balance on substrate 0 = aS~ (a-a)s -¢ BSL KES From 8B, om Pramas; we gt fAk jp tasv_ (@icte rbhY hrs Snboh bubs apd soliirs * Wee gives? Ker (BSS , when O78. | +be* > Xa_probrbly increases duc $0 YO", p oush cleia ss larger, Crete Ore -V%e) 1 S declan vben O76,15 Design a stabil reten prt dr a cold seesonel china, Tbe & 4 provielis PR bey gudence (4) Dep 1 te 2m — Select 2m - . O) Arve Soi = Pit elgr 02 taln Oe. Bo by POR (Aa ~cg mit emerge Ve ler. = 253 Keto (2, 534407777) © Volume od ktenhin Tine Yol = Areaxclepdd 2, FROM 2m = Steg OA? o- % Seeueee = 1334 ‘Ya ~ 3, 840 pn Yolery ~ A) Vol Lent = as. 6:5" (33dege) - 0.24? 2 hemo? A/n-Le 2 1s ky POPs/1000m 76 Ga) Dept = IS-20m, ee Lm, Co) Arun = * Fale? Oy HG hate > Zoro om? 120 G@ Volume > goxjote 15> 1744/2 SmI (1910s S010 32 30 Fp Opes O70 = b Reo by fetch 2 Fb BDy 000 may)7-7) Depth = | m - 3, (b) Aree = ae 3 oe fore = Bx10tm™ @) Volume = B00 = Bx10t mw’ Cr 3x1 0tgno?> AIdag- a) VL, = 9/89 0,025 y/m hey * 25k BR /h000 0-day 78 Fn aagdahe, macrophyte treat rad, P uptake can be by bechamel syntbsis ancl plavh—tesus syndheais, Xe, if #& pleats gre eval one harvested, FR MOMb6eD ptr con weed Stet fo normal achirated 3 ekg, 19 Stare 13 base om «@ Surface eactirey of up Fo 22.0 thy B0D-/ ha lag, We choose /50, Pren = D180 kaP0R Aw) (Ho0m Yetay) ee 220 ky /Aa dag (3,300 m) Choose » ph 4 LS. 3 Volume = 3300 °- 1 S79 > f 750M _ HID 0 Tom = 12.7 lege7.10 73te? BOD, lading 0 2.000 people -0,0T +s 8°%]person dy ~ 190 by BOP flag Suleha surdee loadiig: /S0 ky BMSha ag 186 ty 8Ds, z Preea = ei 7, > L2ha ~ /4e0er Select dpfp. 1m. Volame = 2 L0x1Z,080~ /§ 00077 18 000 fie00-0,5)- 18 Says. Uk lenM-b-wrt rahi 48! l Zovon®= Wi 3W= 3W™ We 632m @- = Bab3a> $740" TAL The short abpth Za 05m myth be Superior Fm onli cathe du fy Heir shirk bA- desse rook, whek wld abot 0.5m Aus, fli rood sytem can wvfead fhrog& mosh q Se water Calum mel fe alfos Nea removal BOD oe N/, eo well ao polled ff fatto, fe. shorter Lyf f fywere, uns a isk f sidjmevpatiah aol shart ciresi pig ,Chapter’8 Aerobic Biofilm Processes Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Trickling Filters and Biological Towers 5,6,9 Rotating Biological Contactors 1,5, 10 Granular-Bed Filters8.1 See solution te Problem 48. Si = 7@ mg; S22!F mg/Q 5 Sat 3 FH 82 See selubin + Problem 4, % Tote Area = 290 c00m* 8.3 See solusart Prblem 4/8. Vese= Fom* — Vinexe = 3h rm, BA gy The Teeter ee) p« dey hodbhn ance when 3: ¥ we S10” mg fern, ep = | 24 DS, +k, 6é—))]* C4 W) viene a a [0 way 0./rg Vo ~dag, x0. 6 op, > Sse [rg 0% -clg Shoe Kg * 40 my VSefeme Dg" 0.%Ab2E> LO cm Zag. ke 03 ral = sao lmayem™ = uo” Pony One m3 so75 y aapeo> * Ernie Be x10" he (ree ood Vy + 1679 0s/em ey @ oe Ax Ty, = 3,38 mg BD. (ein-day. = 34 ke Br lorem das ©) Iho compubed numben clo te the ste rranmam surdct led for a roughing biter, 4S byban, 000m diy, Hovey, Te. surbee loads Ke apple” Bod. Load, netHe remerd BED. Pl, MASe Ish, Se pis imphes we might ge abowh fsh remeyel85 For ee trcklny filters, < typreed Agdicandic Loatl 25-m/day Cans 10-40 wmfelas), We assume 00% recycle, so thet 3 Plan Views Area = B2nCC® MABE By 4™ day Por dhe BE Aipread Lyplaauliz dead 2 0,/20/be Crange O08 2 ferr/day). Jhon. Brodln fren = (220%ME §33.0 m™ OM] dlay Jktwe arena ore bl dedferent be caure 7X ALLA oe bi Dict lig dl ter Aydrutie Louk < Is plen—vieed surace aren, oO (radius) Oe On te oer hon He aun po AO F806 Je bodln arty, Based om peo lumetrre Loads , KE pelumea are * Se Trveklng biter: Vo lune = soorglla [ooo tly 10 sig? 0.02 by /pn”-hag. Dae be = 670 pm? fC: Ualure = tovextooe to” BG F kg/m hey AK MBC Polire & fess because ss speedic surdce ance (7 bot/n ener Jy acter volume) 26 greater,8.6 4) WRC formula. foo Z removal He = i \> 1 + 0,s0s( He) Shy-k 7 W,=Q3 ~Hooomy «bow aos “OBE |, pp? 2S & wan > 2720 bg BoPs/day Vit 2A: flon*s5m = Seom? = Kp yooo Felt Oe =/+ 8 So, B removal: —122 7.2 SSR 146, sos (AP ) * Basoe S= FOSHABP LE IPS rg BONS /E baller Cotas rode, K (BS, + @%Sgy)" Sage R) oe ack Cre’) ages 1p)? Ke She” | _ ost oar 2B ae apg ab > air ~ GI Ty (Hey. 0s) oe ooo we g ONBS (Soy *1000KOE + Fx S, ff = (288) a305 array the reg ashes : terethen, oo ae pwd rr bh aide. obralon 5 Sy > asomy BDs/e , ph conver A 367 arn BOSE, d) ae DES 19% fer day 'g. Bod. “Paes h42 7 49D Flay — From mass belance, yTaw, Ve @raAs As= eae - ape < /oon x 56" Ore 13, 000m Wey x10 ok, = 20% my BP ML ws fom Qree Contertns Yh b be trmemdatin fire 8: e207 = QGee0-sh 12;000 «207 = food ~(1et0 -S SH 37% mg/l 80d, ©) Supdere Loadl = es. Yooon they VABOLA 9p fy Bode __ SOM > «/06n" Joee day very hig ( Canven habe) bagsrale? 2-Gb Hydraulic Lod = oe. 1ge0om beg nomfhe [0bn& high | Lenk, keg rail 2 10-42 Volume Load as? = Ma? fovom leg. 5b, G0, S200 eee igh . typrents £45, Se, fhe sgx'tn a avert, verg Ag” Jad sy om bled ww wth Ler apceed ing te 0,—trexhr ape. Paxhlons tL Jow De, Voughis, odors ae epeted,8.7 Risclor Volames 6 Om? 3 meu (6 1o'™ Arex f Particles = OO * Om? (gam)* 2 + Hhooom caver) From a pass balance pr ome CmER 0% 5 pb volume ¢ anrbe g. se. a 0. Timgten?des) 18000073 Lowel g ~. = a 700 ho. Mlle le 258 66FT | Te slew *lles) teyet Using the pormalized Joaderg cure od fh Sonu = 057 Ye +O, CNC hy = On mg/m dey, Fain = ey ae CFT oe eh160° = (40, Sos [Pons aS eratbry Ti ye = 506% remo mH WOn* Km x2 BeD,#. 250 x ones = rgb /0 BoD,- PSSmy Lp Galler —Gotass SF Kegan * ost evened Shor onrp(box 250x065 + bednioas)) Se 0) (2,308) Cia = Israfl Bode - ssumed, BeL= 7Hger- dor le xe Stak mS 4 get 3 = 2ng Abd: eb 16 gh OD, ) ee 497 ae Yor 4 Boom 33 12000" fey xp covet a QO Cmuertiry + a, (irc00mY) 83910 =(b2000 tales] (25%, - S) Sz 302 my BVP 2 205 rg B00/L 000 x 0.2576,68 bor. ce) S62 Gexaag 7 27S Rig PP ce ale WL, = eee = /20 mMheg ve 6.257.68)(G0°0) it BAY dy ame val extremely Aap!0° B10 Yse a surduce Joadiny criberiaa LZ Sky BoD fy ley fo ache 0 solu Be 5 amg /l -3 FSO ts 6005. _ Becomtiley OM EY py? Vai) Ano Brig > 5 30,800m” I 103 200 34. M. > 1300 m* per shaft, S30,0000- He shes = ee ca shafts tote T, 300 m Yphadee We much ansure pad te firet wshege 6 nat vedoade. 4S coop dog * Ars fr 2 ¥4000m™~ Qo, naech aol least Jo stedb x 2% Sat shige;Chapter 9 Nitrification Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Activated Sludge 3,4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 14 Biofilm Processes 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 15, 1691 a Snn, min, and Je depend only on kinetic parameters, which are given. Using Eqs. 11 and 1 we find that Sqis=0.119, and Spin =0.238 mgN/. Jp can be computed with Ja and Eq. 12. We find that Js =0.583 using the value of Sm, and the Cannon curve. Alternatively, Jn =0.616 can be computed from Jr =[2(Se-In(1+Sz))]"*, finding Sp =0.749 from f=0.99=tanh[a(Se /Snin 1}, with a=1.784 and B=0.518 (Eqs. 4 and 5). Considering Jn =0.616, we compute Jn=4.77x10 imgN/(cm’day) from Eq. 12. b. Having Spi, =0.238 mg and calculating K’=1.49 (Eq. 3), we anticipate that the desired Curve should be roughly similar to the normalized curve corresponding to Smn =0.25 and K’=1 To get a better approximation, we interpolate using the values of the four curves corresponding to the combination of Spi, =0.1, 0.25 and K'=1, 10. Alternatively, we use the steady-state biofilm model (Eqs. 4 to 8) to calculate J from different values of S, and therefore, generate pairs JiJa vs. ‘S/Snin fo Construct the curve. Both curves are shown in the following graph. 10 Oey apg —0— Normalized loading curves 1 | 9 Steady-state bifimmod a a 1 103 102 te te+0 tert In ©. The steady-state mass balance is (Eq. 14): S [mgN/em*}=0.03 [mgN/em] - J [mgN/(cm*day)] * 4 [em"'] * 8 [day] d. _Superimposing any curve from part b and the plots of the mass balance for each 8 (plots of the steady-state mass balance normalized dividing by Jp Smin), we find the intersections representing the points that satisfy both kinetics and the mass balances. This is represente: the following graph. The values found for S are shown in parte. Slim@,f The plot of S vs. 6 derived from the last graph is the following. The same plot shows of 'S? vs 0, and its linearization (on the secondary axis). The first-order degradation rate obtained by this method is 2.9, with a correlation of 0.996, which suggest linearity. It should be noted 30y 90 — bee ° 4 — a S/S = 2%) - C 4 | F=0998 | 4, refed fone g ° 4 8 12 16 20 24 oe -#--S (mgWI)° So /S— Linear (S that for 0=0 h, S°/ Alternatively, the points derived from the application of the steady-state biofim model (part b) can bbe used directly to generate the same type of plot. The first-order degradation rate obtained by this alternative method is 3.5, as shown in the next figure. 309: 1 760 S/S = 36Th) - | R= 0.997 'S (mgNfl) 4 8 12 16 20 24 oe ofS (mgWi}° So/S— Linear (These results show that S"/S vs 6 follow an apparent first-order relationship, with an intercept different to zero. 9.2 The ettuent rom each module must satisfy the mass balance (Eq. 14). The flux within the mass balance depends implicitly on the effluent concentration; this relationship is given by the loading curve. To solve this problem we can iterate or use a graphical method (superimposing the loading curve with the mass balance for each reactor). We must add new modules until we calculate an effluent concentration of 1 mg/ or less. The normalized curve parameters are Spin=0.3825 mgN/ (Eq. 11), Sma'=0.3825 (Eq. 1), . Jp =0.8874 (Cannon curve), and Ja=0.3069 mg/cm*day (Eq. 12). We don't have L to calculate K’ but L is so small that K’ is large; for practical purposes we can use the normalized curves for 00. Using the curves for Smin'=0.25 and Smye'=0.6 to interpolate for Spn'=0.38, and concentrating in the range of 1 to 100 for S/Srin (since S should be less than 50 mg/l), we get the curve shown below (plotted for convenience in J vs. $ axes). This figure also shows the mass balances (Eq 14) for the first and second module. The effiuent concentration for the second module meets the effluent requirement (S=0.5 mg/l < 1 mg/), while the effluent concentration of the first module is 5.5 mg/. Therefore, two modules are needed. LE te 10-3 1e-2 te-4 1¢+0 te+1 J (mg! Feta) Loading curve - - -M.B. module2—— MB. module]9.3 {0,2} for ammonium-oxidizers and nitrite oxidizers is 1.54 and 1.18 days (Eq, 5), respectively. Using SF=20 we oblain 8.1.54 -20 31 days (Eq. 7). For 6,=31 days, the sludge production rate for each species would be: + Ammonium-oxidizers 2-0 AXE? _ 9 sKEVSS. 557 kBN 1 sp kovss a keN day 14.0,05-.31 day day . day Saxe? kgVSS kgvss = (1-0.8)-0.05—-31 day 7252058 - gp AVES Tar 08) -0.05 531 day 72 I day 14_kgN kgVSS Thenivogen sssmiatdino he ammoniumoxdizrsbomassis: Taz ag (72422)— 5 The available TKN for the nitrite-oxidizers is: 367-12=355 kgN/day. Therefor n-0 AXE _ 9 KEVSS, ges heN : =1gkOVss a kgN day 1 40.05.31 day day day faxre 1 kgVSS = (1-0.8)- 0.05.31 day 14. * At ( ) day " day Active cells = 72414 kgVSS/day. 6 kgVSS/day; active cells= 22+4 = 26 kgVSS/day, and total biomass = 86+26 = 112 9-4 Using £9.1 wecan calculate the § values for NH.2N and NO,-N for S, 10, 15, ad 20°, as shown in the following table Parameter ad Ox K Y gq b Ss mgVSSimg | mgVSS/mg days mgNA A Nien day |__Vs2¥ mgNf 0.18 0.96 0.045 0.098 0.32 1.30 0.060 0.134 ce 0.57, ee 1.70 0.082 0.206 1.0 23 0.110 0.303 0.15 44 0.045 0.073 0.30 5.5 0.060 0.115 oe 0.62 ed 73 0.082 0.202 1.30 88 0.110 0.361 For each temperature, X,*° can be written using Eq. 10 as a function of 8: ano ano se0Lfiefeaqsy ore og Gs an) a 1+b?°.0, Since there is a fraction of the nitrogen used for the synthesis of ammonium-oxidizers, X,"* can be written (using Eq. 10) as a function of 6 and X,*° (unknowns):— 14 many: 113. mgVSS 1+b™?.6, ‘The other relationship available is the mass balance for the biomass: Ae exe «2,500 2S ‘Therefore, we have three equations and three unknowns, which can be solved using a trial-and-error method, The next table shows the resulls for each temperature. 2249.71 2249.85 9.6 Sui70.47 meNM (Eq, 6) and Sygini“0.05 ' 50 mgNJl= 2.5 mgN/ > 0.47 mgN/, so itis acceptable respect tO Syn The N and NOD fluxes are : 3 0.95.50. BBN, 194 B. 193 6 ke 4 10 RB k iN In — MB - 1.9.10? $8 Le 500 m™- 500 m° m?-day cm? -day Inop = 19 4,57 B02 _ g 6g_™ cm? -day mgN The required oxygen flux i: a mg0p =INop-|1~ Yobs - = Yobs 68. Yo, = FNop |1~ Yous gop ~ Yobs oe as kgN = 792802 wit 2Y-/1- fy 8s a Beta eal with Yans = a ox= Since the required flux of oxygen is greater than 2.85 mgO./em’day, the system would be severely oxygen limited. To relieve oxygen limitation we must increase the volume by a factor of 7.92/2.85=2.8, that is V=1400 mr95 ithe tow. valumere lead, boA na a biditation, the SRT may be lect. Fink in heck. © Na 1,25 xdla « }.2 by fy Oe” Ge OKE > © Go" 100) 0 29» 950° BaP = 322d. Thus, He Sandamentep priblem s + pnereare Ee. We can determne Sh. nd Conch ton. Yo com eit AL Wh de Ke Ay Considnmns batteratraphs, a & 2 X= Ld KV fps EE GL a Ua O.- 32d ez \eswfoe (rsh Ke a4 is/bon, 4 oth, Sp=ok, Ss 4 UT0,0F= OFF & BHD, fn, sxe Plast Har velucs omvl aalving on ee ay A345 LaVst p03 45 oe 5/0) do, = f o CO Gi)b ° Ms GS ee + 2 Q (B45 (368) eet a3¢3 ]jo? batters = FEC 4 2450 = 4206 Gg VS/p AX, = % 4] (od x aonss) Le vant ot [hooey > OAL (6136) (4663) = e226 bo(ax). & Lhe xy 0%) - i (esac 2) 2 Sov WS? — (Form SIP) West BA (O"), assum PeXS=/9,000 ( ) essa 5, WL Ce gh X& Be 42321 ff = GQ « Obyn’ 1 (1g2%0-8°)(0:0z lfm} Oo” 358 07h oe 1) Recgelt Flor Rater, R. pe Mia sont) KX, 0 = GON 2 69s (952)Q-So A =—2S0__ 9.7 The area for BOD removal is; ABOD removal = 565 jpag ‘The area for nitrogen removal is: AN removal = a8 oo 080,000 m? loa The total area is 216,000+1,080,000=1,296,000 m*, 01.86, 400 250 Tearea for aload <4kgBOD/midayis: A kgBOD, a 540,000 m? (0 m'day ‘000m? day Therefore, for this high N wastewater the N step controls area, and requires = 1,300,000 m’. 98. © Oxygen transfer SOTR=110kW "2kgOkWh 24h/day= 5,280kgO,/day; FOTR=SOTRO™a(fCs"-Cl/(Cs"")=3, 116 kgOr/day. + BOD oxidation a0, 2] = 2-292. win: AXVB- ABODE y 1 op BvSS a at Typ ey gVSS__ABOD,_ 1g9-£VSS_, ABODE. gBODL At : tes . 40, oe melt : ‘BOD «Nitrification (eon) B02) 2 4.57802. AN AXVN |) g.802. at aN at at gvss Nit ° with ane AXVB 9,124. gN 1 -ABODL _ 9.189. ABODL 9.124 =0.0766 ABOD aa at GVSS 10 at Be ao at VN BV' LL and Bey. — [14 (1-fy)-b-0,.]=00153 25S SBOP at At” Tb Oy (-fa)-b 9x gBOD, At (40,) 2)202) 2457-00766-ABOPL _ oorss.ABOPL 1 42. 0 328-ABODL, at at at at ‘Nit4 va = —2-So_ 9.7 ‘The area for BOD removal is: BOD removal = 555 jpad ‘The area for nitrogen removal is: AN removal = 250 ‘The total area is 216,000+1,080,000=1,296,000 m”. ‘The area for a load < 4 kgBOD,/m*day is: A oad. <4 S2BOD, —————eOOOSS~S ‘Therefore, for this high N wastewater the N step controls area, and requires = 1,300,000 m’. 9.8 © Oxygen transfer SOTR=110kW’ 2kgO,kWh 24h/day= 5,280kgO-Jday, FOTR=: }OTRO™™a(BCs"-C)(Cs™) 116 kgOwday. + BOD oxidation {20,) (| oA SB 14282: wih yp - ABOPL yy. eon 1+b-B5 tgp -£VSS_ BOD, gBOD, At 42802. eVSS SBOPL ~0.189-ABOPL. 0.124 = 0.0766, POPE, t it SVSS_, ABODL ODL at 0153.alae acne faa {40,) $02) ) 22) 4) 802) 195 ABODE a} (a at a ‘BOD Nit ‘Assuming 0 limitation, we have: 1.06 (ABOD//At)=3,116 kgOz/day => (ABOD,/A1)=2,940 kgBOD,/day. AX VSS AX: Trertre, (RE) =11-( SAVE SEWN) «gor ABYSS 5 toutmass = SEE ox =19a20kevSs + Considering Vr=Viador*Vsertx=2,000+750=2,750 m’ => MLSS=19,820/2,750 kgVSS/m'=7,200 mgVSSI. + Considering V1=Vrescir=2,000 m® => MLSS=19,820/2,000 kgVSS/m*=9,900 mgVSS/, which is high. Adopting a target of a normal MLSS of about 6,000 mgVSS/I, the maximum practical BOD, load would be between 2,940 °6,000/9,900=1,780 kgBOD,/day, and 2,940" 6,000/7,200=2,450 kgBOD//day. ‘+ The maximum flgw rate is determined by the clarifier mass load, which for extended aeration should be < 5 kgfm*h=120 kg/m‘day. 3 mg m3 1 6,005 -(1+R)-Q——- 10° 7 +R) day R Therefore: ray, e+e Areaclarifier 300 m? R can be estimated assuming that X*=10,000 mg/, and using the mass balance: 6,000 mg Q(1#R)= 10,000 mg => R=1.5 From the previous equation, the maximum flow rate is Q=2,400 m’/day. 99 A. First stage of the two-sludge system 1. The BOD, in the effluent from the original substrate is 1.2mgBOD,/ (Eq. 1). 2, The total BOD, removal rate is: AS S09 3. The VSS production rate for the first stage is: ( os8#8904 nn 8#890) 8004, m m day: AS y 14(I=fg)-b-Ox 167 gkeVSS sage At 1+d-Ox, day Nz) AXy _ldmgN__, keN ; = Sky me _ 5 KN 4, The nitrogen incorporated into cells is: (& P Paige is ia VES ae a 6. The oxygen consumed in the first stage is: (402) =0-(s9-3 Cat) sage B. Second stage of the two-sludge system 41. The concentration of nitrogen in the effluent is 0.1 mgN/. 3 J-(22), vom’ (00128 ont) - rte I*stage day m 2. The TKN oxidized is: a 3. The VSS production rate for the second stage is: (22) “ ‘at )>stage AC 17b-0q4. The oxygen consumed in the first stage is: (402) ean CBO am gage at gn AN gs7802 (8%) 9p 802-9502 a ss" ay Second Stage 1, The BOD, in the effluent from the original substrate is 0.57 mgBOD,/ (Ea. 1). 3 2. The total BOD, removal rate is: ~AS=0. (69-3) =1.000.(04#889PL 0 95788200 | 390.4 K@BODL ‘at day mm m day res AS y 14(I-fa)-b-Oe _ 5. 5 kevss ‘at 1¥b-0, day = (2%) 14 mgN__,, keN Bop 113 mgVSS ~~ day 3. The VSS production rate for the first stage is: (22) - BoD ANY heterotrophic 1422802 (AK) = 2658802 mgVSS\ At Jpop day tex) IBN _ 7.9 HN ™ vy day aN wiv bas 170-0 D. Tabulation Parameter => Heterotrophs 95.9) 167.5 Bs g = Nitrifiers 74 50 2 Total 703.3 1725 => Heterotrophs 263.2 161.0 SSE |_Nitrifiers 113.0 76.4 =2 Total 376.2 237.4 Therefor, the two-stage treatment increases sludge production by =70%, while decreasing Ox consumption 45? 60%. 9.10 s, 5, s, Qq — a [> h ors ‘SEGMENT 1 SEGMENT 2 In this problem we know the desired effluent concentration $2 (mg). Therefore, we can estimate the substrate flux on the second segment, J2. Coupling the mass balances for both segments, we can get a relationship betweenJ; and S;. But J; and S; must also satisfy the biofilm kinetics. Consequently, we have two unknowns and two Independent equations that we can solve for S; and J; by trial-and-error, or graphically. Using the equations from the Tools for Solving Biofilm Problems, we get Smn'=0.32 (Eq. 1), Spn=0.485 mg/l (Eq 11), K'=1 (Eq. 3), Je 0.432 (Cannon curve), and Ja=0.432 (Eq. 12). For S2=1mg/l, S/Spn=2, which gives JJg=0.32 (using the normalized loading curve for Spi, =0.25) , or J20.1382 mg/cm*day. ‘The mass balances for each segment are: a'V'J;=Q"(So-Si) and aVd2=Q (S;-S2) => dalla= (So S:)/(S3 ~S2), OF Jy=0.1382(100-S;)/(Sy-1) Given a set of values for S; , we can calculate J; by using the previous equation and by using the normalized curves. That procedure is shown in the graph below for values of S; ranging from 5 to 20 mg/. The intersection point S,~10.6 mg/l and J,=1.25 mg/emday satisfies simultaneously both the mass balance and the biofilm kinetics. Plugging these values on the first mass balance we get that V should be around 4 m’ for each ‘segment, or atotal of~ ” ak co > [ 10 == 1 — + 5 10 5 20 5, [mot [Fe Wasstalance —o- Loading cure 9.11. Considering the shape of the typical loading curves, we realize that for the low load region, S is similar to Swi OF S/Spin is near to 1. Using Eq. 6 we get that mg a sry 19,33 M8785 9 7_meN mgN | mgVSS%day = 0.2.08. Sag = 0.277 Calculating b, as b,=bt -0.146-0.082=0.0637 day", we obtain Ox~1/bs=15.7 days. 9.12 3 600 MEBODS ,_LmgBODL 9 g99™ 19-3 srlsiage _ 1 "0.68 mgboDs ay * First stage BOD, load: “BOD, = 2 7-13 m3.200 4 + Overall 80D, toad: SL Overall _ BOD, _ 13 7_KeBODL _Overall _ gy Overall + Overall TKN load: SUTEN ~S“BOD, 3 . 2-10, 000 * Hydraulic load and O/F: HL = (R=1) 162 * "4 + Acceptable values for the BOD, surface load for this type of system are up to 7 kgBOD,/10,000 m*day, so the first stage and overall surface BOD, loads are high (27.4 and 13.7kgBOD,/10,000 m*day, respectively). Recommended values for the TKN surface load are up to 0.8 kg7KIN/10,000 m’day, which is lower than the overall TKN load for this system (1.55 kgTKN/10,000 m‘day). The hydraulic load is quite high, but it would be acceptable for a roughing filter (100 < 200 m/day). The O/F is within an acceptable range (25<48 m/day). Consequently, this system should not work since the organic and TKN loads are way too high. w 9.13 knowing the kinetic parameters and the desired effuent concentration (0.1 mgNH4'f), we can use E4.1 to find tnat 0x=23.7 days. Using Eq. 2 we can calculate X,=215 mgVSSV/. (On the other hand, for a reactor of volume V with input of active biomass X,”, we have that: 21s MEVSSa 5.106) Biomass inthe system ___Xq-V 0 _ 1g. MEVSSa 0x = 23.7 days = —— SE Se Tet fcc yd) aS: Production of biomass ~ Q-(x,—x2) 0° (e15-x8) a day VSSq 196 1 49-6 kVSSq S jg, 188 EVSSa 961. 19-6 BVSSa__ 99, = 18,800. ‘Therefore the cost is: i ey mgvss, raves, ~ *® y 9.14 The influent oxygen demand is BOD,+TKN=250 mgBOD,/l +100 mgN/ °4.57 mgBOD,/mgN = 707 = 707 mgBOD,/|. The output of OD is given by the OD of the dissolved substrates (BOD,, NH.") and the OD of the VSS. + Using Eq.1, we find that Sretssropts=0.5 MQBOD,/N and Snusen=0.25 mgNH,, which gives a soluble oxygen demand of: 0.5 mgBOD,/1 + 0.25 mgNH," 4.57 mgBOD,/mgNH,"=1.64 mgBOD,/. aty} 1+(1-0.8)-0.15-15 __, | mgvss . ic — = (250 - 0.5) -0.45-—+——+_—— = 50.1 Theheterctopnstiemassis: (SY) 50-05) aria : es 1+(1-08)-008-15 +The nivfers biomass i (A) = 00 025~s01-0124).041. 2E=E8 08 ‘The total VSS is 50.1+25.2=75.3 mgVSS/. + The oxygen demand from the VSS is: (1.42 mgBOD,/mgVSS+ 0.124 mgNimgVSS 4.57 mgBOD./mgN) °75:3 mgVSSA = 149.6 mgBOD//. Therefore, the required oxygen is: 707 - (1.6 +149.6) = 555.8 mgOy/. 9.15 + Hydraulicload: yyy Soo (0-40 » ok A 3 moj me yy -6 ke 403] 350— .600—= 10° — -10° mi 3 kgBOD; * BOD, surface load: So ee er = 0 1 SL Bop. ="{ (§-5 -10)-200 im 19,000 m2day accaphit < a-&3 350 2.508 10-6 KE. jg3 1 day 1 kgBN © TKN surface load: gy, = — ym? 935, io TEN =A "Gs 10) 200 7 Ef m2day OK, <8 below, bf newer init flex . We note that the BOD, surface load is, nitrification’ processy so this process should be-gwfeasible, ‘The hydraulic load and TKN surface load Bre within acceptable range for this type of process. 9 L652 rages of the same size, We surface loads are directly proportional to the influent concentration to exch stage. An influent BOD, concentration to Stage 1 of 400 mg/l produces a surface load of 66 kgBOD,/1,000 m’day. Therefore, Stages 2, 3, and 4 should have a BOD, surface loads of 22.3, 8.3, and 4.1 keBOD,/1,000 m*day, respectively. Since successful nitrification is produced for BOD,, surface loads < 6kgBOD,/1,000 m'day, Stage 4 should be the only one active in nitrification. ‘The NH,"-N surface loading for Stage 4 is: 4.1 kgBOD.!1,000 m@day "(50 mgNH,"-N//(400 mgBODvJI) = 10.3 kgNH."-N/1,000 m’day To have an excellent nitrification we need the NH."-N surface loading to be < 0.6 kgNH,’-N/1,000 m*day. Consequently, we won't have an excellent nitrification. We would need 1 or 2 more nitrification stages. EE ee fe nan LlChapter 10 Denitrification Problems According to Major Subject Addressed Tertiary Denitrification 2, 6, 18, 19, 21, 24, 25, 26 Predenitrification 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 13, 15, 17, 22, 23 Biofilm Processes 1, 8,9, 11, 12, 14, 16, 20, 2710.1 Having the methanol effluent concentration and the kinetic parameters we use the steady- state biofilm model to find that J=0.0733 mg/(cm® day), with a=1.9167, B=0.5260, Ss'=0.0727, 0642. Knowing the flux, we can find the required surface area using the steady-state mass balance (Eq. 14). However, we need to find first the influent concentration. The influent concentration should be enough to provide the required electrons to denitrfy the 30 mgNOs-NIl. This relationship is given by the stoichiometry of the process. 1 a lvoe 5 owe Roi SoCsH702N+11H,0-> 1No; +200, +2 H+ +6 3g SION + 3 Ha 2gNOS +9502 #35 The overall reaction is given by: R=Re-fRe-fRe, where f:+f,=1 and f =f? We assume f7=0.8, a typical value. We also need to convert Y to f,” by: a 28, +0 a 19 =027-VSS__328CH0H 284g _ gy sseg 6 -0as00[! (1=0.8)-0.05 day7!.33 day. ECH,OH Gey ‘113. VSS 1+0.05 day™™.33 day ' [ists -b-6 1+b-0x 1791 ‘The overall reaction is: Rs 0.1667 CHjOH + 0.1706 NO§ + 0.1706 H* ~+ 0.0064 CsH10N + 0.3963 H0 + 0.1347 CO; + 0.0821 Np Therefore, to remove 30 mgNOs-Nil we must consume: 39 ENO} =N__1mmoINOF__ 0.1667 mmolCHjOH 32 mgCH,OH__ ,, mgCH,OH 1 14 mgNO} -N 0.1706 mmoINO} 1 mmolCH,0H 1 Finally, from Eq. 14: 1 gqtaClIjOH1 mgCHjOH (., 100%em? ; 1,000L. 67 SRECHSOH _ 9.07338CH2OH ay aV = Reg. surf area = 91.4 m! ay 1 eicoay es eat es10.2 a. We calculate the steady-state concentrations for each substrate using Eq. 1. The values are shown in the table below. . The maximum concentration of methanol depends on how much methanol is needed to reduce the available nitrogen, which is given by the difference between the influent and the steady state concentration of nitrogen. Therefore, we need the ratio of methanol to nitrogen consumed, keeping in mind that nitrogen is used for cell synthesis and as electron acceptor. + Nitrogen used for cell synthesis ch», Cas ,_ Se le 14 (1-4) b-8x Cans SNL MeOH MeOH 28eCells T+b-Ox J eMeth 28eCetls (, gCells 32gMeOH 28eGeys ) 1+(I~fa)-b- Sef (EMeOH “Sexson TBeCells)"— 1+b-0y 2eCells fy foar Cells Rete Hee) 0-08 0.05-8x SEN _ 9 9637,(1+0.01 *s) nN cea =o. 2 eon \ BMCOH Getjeor SeCells) — 1+0.05-0x — ZeeCens (1005-0) eigen * Nitrogen used as electron acceptor : 1+ (1-f)-b- +001. 7 yoy ger ap PHAM ta) 2-0 (on 2. B).(2 0.01 2s) ey oe T¥b-0, 6 113) \1+0.05-0x) exon * Total nitrogen consumed per gram of methanol consumed oN MEN Seieou aN (x+y) SN MeN, =0.525-(s+y) (hon sen 32eMeOH > MeOH Therefore, the maximum concentration of methanol that may be present in the affluent, So!" should be: ~ Swi 20 MEN — sri 0 *Nit — SNit 1 OH = + =S + "MeOH = SMeOH ‘mgN— = SMeOH men 0,525. (x+y) EN 0.525-(x-+y) SES +) eMcOH (+9) GeMeOH where Sy and Siu are the steady concentrations of nitrogen and methanol, respectively, with x and y depending on 0,.10.2 a. We calculate the steady-state concentrations for each substrate using Eq. 1. The values are shown in the table below. b. The maximum concentration of methanol depends on how much methanol is needed to reduce the available nitrogen, which is given by the difference between the influent and the steady state concentration of nitrogen. Therefore, we need the ratio of methanol to nitrogen consumed, keeping in mind that nitrogen is used for cell synthesis and as electron acceptor. * — Nitrogen used for cell synthesis xh =f Ces _ Se {pied +b-8x) eGetts CMON ee 2eCeIg TPO J eiyern 2Cels {ry sOels32eMeOH 28eGyyy ) 14 (bf) 0-05 SR Sei US aMeOH “Seijeou M3eCells)"— TF8-0x 2eeZeng cox 8K fy7 BCells328MCOH 28eTag ) 1+(1=0.8)-005-05 SEH __ goggy (zeae) i cieon ”eMeOH Geeon 1SeCells)—-1+0.05-05 Deere 1+005-0x) exteoH Nitrogen used as electron acceptor 49 Lx(1=fa)-b-0x [!-(02r 228} (1298 x} & T+ b-6y 6 1) \1+0.05-0y) |Steon * Total nitrogen consumed per gram of methanol consumed (cy) SRL MAN SeMCOH «9 595.6498 eMeOH Shy 328McOH @MeOH Therefore, the maximum concentration of methanol that may be present in the affluent, So" should be: mgN SMteon = SMeor a + me feOH * ‘me con HT 0525-(x +9) 0525. (x+y) BN mgMeOH ‘mgMcOH where Syz and Syox are the steady concentrations of nitrogen and methanol, respectively, with x and y depending on Ox.‘The calculations for each 0x are shown on the table below. 10.3 The influent TKN:BOD, ratio is very low (0.03), so we need to verify if nitrification/denitrfication is actually occurring, and to what extent. Assuming a common 8x=20 days for nitrification/denitrification and typical kinetic parameters, the stoichiometric ‘dBOD,/aN removal ratio is 3.88 mgBOD//mgN. So we can remove anaerobically at most 3.88 mgBOD,/mgN ° 150 imgN/ = 581 mgBOD,/ from the 5,000 mgBOD//. The remaining 4,419 mgBOD,M should be removed aerobically ‘The Y™* for the aerobic heterotrophs can be estimated as: yobs _y1+(L 5 MEVSS 1+ (1- 08)-0.1 days"! 20 days _ 9, meVSS mgBOD 1+ 0.1 days"! -20 days ‘mgBOD The aerobic heterotrophs consume: 0,21 28VSS. 9 y24—™8N_ sag MEPOPL — 1158 mgBOD agVSS 1 ‘That leaves a maximum of only 160-115=35 mgN/ to nitrfy/denitrfy, that is 3.88 mgBOD,/mgN ° 36 mgN/ =136 mgBOD//\ are oxidized anaerobically (less than 3% of the influent BOD,). That will produce very small changes in the oxygen demand of the 5,000 mgBOD,/l. The sludge production will be reduced slightly as well. Also alkalinity changes will be small. For larger 8,, the differences will be marginally greater. By decreasing the sludge age we can take up all the nitrogen into heterotroph biomass. We need a 0, that satisfies the following equation: 5,000 BD o 4s mgVSS_1+(1-0.8)-0.1 days“!-0x 5 ,54_mgN mgBOD 140.1 days! -0x mgVSS an =1508% 36x =14 days In conclusion, predenitrification is technically feasil worth doing. 10.4 1. BOD, removed by denitrification le, but reports little or no benefit, and probably i not m,mgN 770 2.25 8N [sos], <7 — a #1 ROT SRS 779 47,700 + 385 ay aay day From the stoichiometry table, we find that the stoichiometric d3OD,/dN removal ratio is 3.97 mgBOD,/mgN, for 0x=15 days. Therefore, the BOD, removal by denitrification is: Denit 3 BoD) me z Le 1728S (7,700 +385) 2.3.97 BEBODL 9-3 _KBBODL “I _ gg 7 KOBODL At 1 mgN m>.mgBOD,, day2. BOD, removed by aerobic heterotrophs Aer, eter, BOD, 3 3 ——L_—_ = nop!" _ pop Fi _ popPenit - 770 2.0.3 4 - 7702. 0.002548 69.72 = at day day m day 3. Denitrifier biomass production 4. Aerobic biomass production yobs. y1+(1=f4)-b-Ox _ 9 keVSS_ 14 (1-0.8)-0.15 days"!-15 days = 0.223_K8VSS 1+b-05 KgBODL 140.1 Sdays-)-15 days kgBOD,, (ax) v = 159 KEBODL, 9 593_KeVSS__ 95 5 KOVSS day keBODL day ‘Aer heter. 5. Nitrifier biomass production kgVSS_1+(1-0.8)-0.05 days“! 15 days Ken 1+ 0.05days!-15 days keVSS = (11.3 +35,5) KSUSS (is+sss) «yobs AL oon keVss ks (aN) Var Att het.biomass + (ay 770. oonst® sastf 13.448 KEN _ 5.g5K8N -0,125 oN kgVSS day Cat vig” day day day (axe, | = 0,27 KBVSS 15,4 KEN _ 9,5 KOVSS. at kgN day Nit 6. Total biomass production rate 19 HBVSS , 55 sKEVSS |, ,kBVSS _ 5 ,kgVSS day day day day (402) (402) (1soH#B00L — 35 sKEVSS. 1 9 x02.) Cat) go, at ate * ) Dia CaaensT Cay day igvss, KgN 4 5,ko02 _, , keVSS x02 (inal sarBO2 835 yO (402) sop, kBO2 4 54 18802 kg02 Cw Dot 108.6- day + 54.1 day 162.7. day 59 KBOD, day10.5 * Advantages: (1) less oxygen is required for BOD oxidation; (2) no external carbon and electron source is needed; (3) less sludge is produced; (4) Fewer reactors; and (5) discharge of nitrogen as NOs and has no nitrogenaceous oxygen demand. ‘+ Disadvantages: (1) high recycle can be expensive; (2) probably lower total nitrogen removal (2 stages); and (3) BOD removal and nitrification in the aerobic tank must both be at long 0. 10.6 ‘+ Stoichiometry 14(1-fa)-b-Ox et = 0.8) -0.08 days“! cee 1+(1~fa) = 06 Seells 1+ (= 0.8) -0.08 days’ B days _ 9 4) lls fy =1-f 1+b-Ox total 1+0.08 days”! -8 days eiptal 1 1 eel Rg: =CH30+—1 Ht =C0; a: {CH30 +7 H20->H* +e +100, 1 5 ager 6 Rey? SNOF +200) +2Ht + CsH70.N +S some aghs Pag C02 Fag HT Fe > og CsH702N +5120 fs Ra ~f5 Rey ~fe “Race : 0.25 CH20 + 0.133 H* +0.133NOZ > 0.059 Np + 0.265 Hy0 + 0.177 COp +0.0146 CsH702N Ivor «8 esr peneen Race: NOx +SH* No +2H: ace! GNOF + GH* +67 > ENp +240 + Syrup required ABOD1, _ 8 gBODL I molN _ , , sBODL aN 0.133 moIN 14 gN aN = ABODE _ogMBN 5 eBOD, _ 5, mgBODL at 1 eNOS -N 1 Using Eq. 1, we find that the residual BOD,=0.8 mgBOD//. Therefore, the total BOD, required is 421+0.8=421.8 mgBODv1, and the syrup required is 421.8 mgBOD/N (1 | ‘syrup(100,000 mgBOD,)=4.22'10" | syrup/ water=0.422 %(val). © Alkalinity needed The reaction consumes 1 equivalent of acid for each NO;-N mole removed. Therefore, if we drive the NO;-N to nearly, then all the mineral acid is gone. However, the reaction also produces CO2, a weak acid. At the minimum, we would have 100% evolution of CO,, with equilibrium being reached in an open system with atmospheric CO2. That means Alk=5.6 ° 10° M or ~2.8 mg/l as CaCO,, If all CO; dissolves, and we raise the pH~8, where all CO2 goes to HCO;. That means:(0.177 ‘moleOz)(0.133 moleNO;) "7 mM NOs" 1 eq/moleCO;=9.3 mM Alk or 465 mgCaCOy/l, The answer will lie between the two extremes, but probably closer to the maximum.10.7 We can try an activated sludge process to remove BOD,. For 8=6 days, using conventional activated sludge kinetic parameters, we get a sludge production of: 5 vl m Ky =¥ 5 == 04s —MEVSS__ 1+ (= 08) -0.1 days" 6.98.69 99 9) BBBODL, _ gp meVSS mgBODL, 1+0.1 days“! .6 days 1 1 Therefore, the nitrogen required is: 624 mgVSS/° (14 mgN/113 mgVSS)=77 mgN/, and the P required is 1/5 the N requiremer 5.5 mgP/. Consequently, we need to add about 77-(59+1)=17 mgN/I, and about 15.5-10=5.5 mgP/. The oxygen required is 2,000 mgBOD// - 20 mgBOD,/\ -1.42 (mgBOD,/mgVSS)624 mgVSS/ = 1,084 mgOz1. ‘An anaerobic process doesn't seem convenient because: (1) the high level of SO,” would produce H2S, which is Objectionable; (2) the influent BOD, isn't very high, so little N or P would have been removed, and little CH. produced; and (3) an anaerobic process may not get down to 20 mgBOD// by itself. 10.8 a, The fluidized bed porosity is: °F Hpacked ( 1 1-=.-(1- 0.35) = 0.567 Fay (Smacks) =1-F (1-035) 1 sf =13. om ‘The specific surface area ofthe fudized bed is: @= 6" g (2.65 1) 2 -(1-0.567)-980. pp -Pw)-(-er)-2 © 3 z tyne ‘The shear stress in the reactor is: ol Pune) gO eg Oe sa084 a Bom! on? b. Assuming L,<0.003 cm, the specific detachment rate can be estimated as: ia =8.42.210"* 253.86°* = 0.85 day"! The overall biofilm-loss coefficient, b’, is: +bset=0.05 day” + 0.85 day’=0.90 day’. Using Eq. 11 of the Tools for Solving Biofilm problems, we can estimate that for nitrate Smin=9.35 ° 10° mgNO;-N/, and for BOD, Smn=46.3 mgBOD,/l. Therefore, the process limiting substrate is the BOD, which must be added in excess of 46.3 mgBOD,/. ._An appropriate design parameter is the BOD, surface load J. In this case, Sman is greater than the desired BOD, effluent quality (5 mgBOD//), so we will design our system to work on the low load region; that is, with $ close to Shim OF S/Smn=1.1._Itis known that for fluidized bed biofilm reactors it is possible to achieve effluent concentrations ‘substantially lower than Spin. Using the equations from the Tools for Solving Biofilm Problems, we obtain Smin =0.93 (Eq.1), S=1.02 (Eq. 2), K=2.67 (Eq. 3), Ja =1.99 (Cannon curve), and Ja=4.45 mgBOD//(cm*day) (Eq. 12). Using the normalized loading curves for Sn =1, we obtain J/dR=0.1 for S/Sqo=1.1, therefore J=0.14.4520.45 mgBOD,/cm*day). . Combining Eqs. 9 and 10 from the Tools for Solving Biofilm Problems, we get Lj=44.5 jim > 30 um. Therefore, we must calculate bys as: 0.58 53,86 Toaeaa- 45-107 0003) The new b' =0.05+0.64=0.69 day”, and Smn=29.2 mgBOD,/. This decrease in the biofilm loss coefficient will improve our chances of getting our BOD, effluent concentration near the desired effluent standard for BOD. bet =8:42-10" = 0.64 day"! €. For baai=0.85 day”, we get 0,=1/0.85"1.18 days.

Bruce E Rittmann and Perry L McCarty Homework Problem Solutions Environmental Biotechnology Principles and Applications PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Bruce E Rittmann and Perry L McCarty Homework Problem Solutions Environmental Biotechnology Principles and Applications PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Potrebbero piacerti anche