Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Process Safety and Environmental Protection

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/psep

Evaluation and prediction of membrane fouling in

a submerged membrane bioreactor with
simultaneous upward and downward aeration
using artificial neural network-genetic algorithm

Seyed Ahmad Mirbagheri a , Majid Bagheri a,∗ ,

Zahra Bagheri b , Ali Morad Kamarkhani c
a Department of Civil Engineering, K.N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
b Department and Faculty of Basic Sciences, PUK University, Kermanshah, Iran
c Department of Chemical Engineering, Razi University, Kermanshah, Iran

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper describes the effect of simultaneous upward and downward aeration on
Received 8 November 2014 the membrane fouling and process performances of a submerged membrane bioreac-
Received in revised form 23 March tor. Trans-membrane pressure (TMP) and membrane permeability (Perm) were simulated
2015 using multi-layer perceptron and radial basis function artificial neural networks (MLPANN
Accepted 25 March 2015 and RBFANN). Genetic algorithm (GA) was utilized in order to optimize the weights and
Available online 12 May 2015 thresholds of the models. The results indicated that the simultaneous aeration does not sig-
nificantly improve the removal efficiency of contaminants. The removal efficiencies of BOD,
Keywords: COD, total nitrogen, NH+
4 − N and TSS were 97.5%, 97%, 94.6%, 96% and 98%, respectively. It
Simultaneous aeration was observed that the TMP increases and the Perm decreases as operational time increases.
Hollow fiber membrane The TMP increasing rate (dTMP/dt) and the Perm decreasing rate (dPerm/dt) for the upward
Membrane fouling aeration were 2.13 and 2.66 times higher than that of simultaneous aeration, respectively.
Trans-membrane pressure The training procedures of TMP and Perm models were successful for both RBFANN and
Membrane permeability MLPANN. The train and test models by MLPANN and RBFANN showed an almost perfect
Artificial neural networks match between the experimental and the simulated values of TMP and Perm. It was illus-
trated that the GA-optimized ANN predicts TMP and permeability more accurately than a
network with a trial-and-error approach calibration.
© 2015 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction changing loading conditions and reduction of sludge (Patsios

Biological procedures to treat municipal and industrial
wastewaters using membrane bioreactors (MBR) have many
advantages over conventional activated sludge procedures
(Meng et al., 2008; Verrecht et al., 2010). Some of these advan-
tages, which have increased the application of MBR in the
wastewater treatment including superior treated wastewater
quality, improved process control, more stable operation for
and Karabelas, 2011). Two different configurations of MBR are
commonly used: side-stream MBR and internal submerged
MBR. Side-stream MBR uses cross-flow membranes, placed
outside the biological reactor, and were the first generation of
MBR (Artiga et al., 2005). An important development of this
technology came with the utilization of MBR in which the
membranes were submerged in the biological reactor (Ct and
Thompson, 2000; Gander et al., 2000). Submerged membrane

∗
Corresponding author. Tel.: +98 9181331137; fax: +98 2188770006.
E-mail address: bagherimajead@yahoo.com (M. Bagheri) .

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2015.03.015
0957-5820/© 2015 The Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
112 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

an SMBR for synthetic wastewater treatment using particle

Nomenclature size analyzer (PSA), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), con-
focal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM), X-ray fluorescence
MBR membrane bioreactor (XRF), energy diffusive X-ray analyzer (EDX), and Fourier trans-
SMBR submerged membrane bioreactor form infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy (Cho and Fane, 2002; Chon
TSS total suspended solids et al., 2013). They approved that the small particles in sludge
HRT hydraulic retention time suspension, bacterial clusters, polysaccharides, proteins and
DO dissolved oxygen inorganic compounds played a significant role in membrane
TMP trans-membrane pressure fouling (Meng et al., 2007; Zhu et al., 2011).
PSA particle size analyzer Generally, to reduce membrane fouling, several strategies
SEM scanning electron microscopy such as the pre-treatment of feed water, chemical or physical
CLSM confocal laser scanning microscopy cleaning of membrane, flux reduction, and application of tur-
XRF X-ray fluorescence bulent air sparging are employed (Chen and Kim, 2006; Judd,
EDX energy diffusive X-ray analyzer 2010; Sahoo and Ray, 2006). Membrane air sparging, in particu-
FT-IR Fourier transform infrared lar, is postulated to be a critical factor in controlling membrane
ASP activated sludge process fouling in an SMBR (Ueda et al., 1997). Air sparging produces
ASM activated sludge model effective turbulence and membrane movement, which results
ANN artificial neural network in scouring the particles and other deposited materials away
MLP multi-layer perceptron from the membrane surface. This produces an increase in the
RBF radial basis function air flow rate at the membrane surface which increases the
FANN feed forward artificial neural network flux due to an increased back-transport of deposited materi-
RBFANN radial basis function artificial neural network als on the membrane surface by turbulent shear (Liu et al.,
MLPANN multi-layer perceptron artificial neural net- 2009; Trussell et al., 2006).
work Usually, vertical flat sheet or vertically/horizontally
TDS total dissolved solids mounted hollow fiber membranes are used in SMBRs. Hollow
TP total phosphorous fiber modules are generally cheaper to fabricate, provide high
BOD biochemical oxygen demand specific membrane area and can tolerate vigorous back wash-
COD chemical oxygen demand ing (Chang et al., 2002; Liu and Kim, 2008). In hollow fibers
GA genetic algorithm SMBR the aeration is used for: (1) the oxygen supply needed for
Perm permeability degradation processes, (2) maintaining solids in suspension
RMSE root mean squared error and (3) to clean the membrane (Zarragoitia-González et al.,
R2 coefficient of determination 2008). Vertically oriented hollow fiber membrane modules, in
SRT sludge retention time which the dual header design has both top and bottom head-
MLVSS mixed liquor volatile suspended solids ers where membrane fibers are potted (e.g., Zeon’s Zee Weed
MLSS mixed liquor suspended solids modules), have been widely introduced (Cui et al., 2003; Judd,
TN total nitrogen 2010; Park et al., 2010).
RNN recurrent neural network Treatment process models are essential tools to assure
ESN echo-state network proper operation and better control of activated sludge pro-
F/M food to microorganism cesses (ASPs). Considerable effort has been devoted to the
modeling of ASP since early 1970s (Moral et al., 2008). Some
deterministic models have been developed basing on the
bioreactors (SMBR) have many advantages such as higher fundamental biokinetics such as activated sludge model num-
quality of effluent, absolute control of total suspended solid ber one (ASM1) (Henze et al., 1987). Parameter estimation
(TSS), reduction of hydraulic retention time (HRT), smaller size and calibration of ASM models require expertise and signif-
and lower energy consumption over other membrane systems. icant effort. Moreover, calibration has to be performed for
On the other hand, the SMBRs are not good at nitrogen removal each specific treatment system. Therefore, application of ASM
because of the high dissolved oxygen (DO) in the bulk liq- models can be cumbersome and problematic (Börger et al.,
uid which is hard to induce forming an anoxia or anaerobic 2000; Moral et al., 2008). On the other hand, understanding
area for denitrification (Dong et al., 2009; Wang et al., 2013). and optimizing a system as complex as a real wastewater
In addition, the problems of membrane fouling have limited treatment plant with membrane bioreactors is difficult and
excessive advantages of SMBRs in the wastewater treatment time-consuming (Geissler et al., 2005; Naessens et al., 2012).
processes (Martin and Nerenberg, 2012). This is due to the complex biological reactions, as well as
Membrane fouling, which results in the increase of trans- the highly time-varying and multi-variable aspects of oper-
membrane pressure (TMP) or the decline of membrane flux ation of a real wastewater treatment plant with membrane
dependent on the employed operational modes, is one of the bioreactors. Moreover, the determination of all model param-
major drawbacks for wider applications of SMBRs (Delgrange eters is an expensive and time-consuming process. Over the
et al., 1998b; Guglielmi et al., 2007; Zhu et al., 2011). During the past decade, the complexity of the simulating models has
operation of SMBRs, colloidal particles and macromolecules increased noticeably with the discovery of new processes.
tend to deposit in the pore of the membrane and on the mem- As a result the modeling of real systems became more time
brane surface (Park et al., 2008; Park et al., 2010). Hence, it is consuming with ad hoc calibration of the model parameters.
of great significance to understand membrane foulants prop- A real wastewater treatment plant with membrane biore-
erties and membrane fouling mechanisms (Delgrange et al., actors is composed of many subprocesses that are highly
1998a; Shetty and Chellam, 2003; Zhu et al., 2011). Previ- coupled. Next to the biokinetic processes for bioconversion
ous studies had been focused on the membrane foulants in of pollutants, the separation process takes place as well
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124 113

computers. As they work with a set of potential solutions,

Table 1 – Summary of researchers’ studies in ANN
modeling of membrane fouling characteristics. GAs do not easily get trapped in local minima. Furthermore,
since no gradient information is needed, GAs can deal with
The purpose of applying ANN ANN (s) Researcher (s)
discontinuous design spaces and problems with discrete vari-
Prediction of ultrafiltration MLP Delgrange et al. ables and non-differentiable functions (Rocha et al., 2014).
transmembrane pressure (1998a) In this study, a vertically oriented hollow fiber SMBR with
Modeling of ultrafiltration fouling MLP Delgrange et al. combined aeration/filtration was used to examine the effect of
(1998b)
simultaneous upward and downward aeration on the mem-
Predicting membrane fouling MLP Shetty and
during municipal drinking water Chellam (2003)
brane fouling characteristics including TMP and membrane
nanofiltration permeability (Perm), and process performances including
Prediction of flux decline in MLP, RBF Sahoo and Ray BOD, COD, total nitrogen, NH+ 4 − N and TSS removals. The TMP
cross-flow membranes (2006) and membrane permeability were simulated using MLPANN
Prediction of permeate flux decline MLP, RBF Chen and Kim and RBFANN models. The GA was utilized in order to opti-
in cross-flow membrane filtration (2006)
mize the weights and thresholds of the MLPANN and RFBANN
Evaluation of membrane fouling MLP Liu and Kim
models. As a result, the values of the root mean squared error
(2008)
Prediction of microfiltration MLP Liu et al. (2007, (RMSE) and the coefficient of determination (R2 ) for the opti-
membrane fouling 2009) mal models were deemed to approach 0 and 1, respectively.
Predicting the flux decline in milk MLP Guadix et al. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first research uti-
cross-flow ceramic ultrafiltration (2010) lizing genetic algorithm based MLPANN and RBFANN models
Predicting flux in oily wastewater MLP Nandi et al. to predict the TMP and Perm for an SMBR with simultaneous
using low cost ceramic membrane (2010)
upward and downward aeration. Moreover, separate models
Determining presence of dairy MLP Wallhäußer
were performed by writing real codes in MATLAB to determine
fouling using a new approach et al. (2011)
Estimation of water permeability MLP Barello et al. the effect and importance order of each operating parameter
constant in reverse osmosis under (2014) on the on the membrane fouling characteristics in the SMBR.
fouling
Prediction of red plum juice MLP Nourbakhsh
permeate flux during membrane et al. (2014)
2. Materials and methods
processing

2.1. Pilot plant configuration and operating conditions

as hydrodynamic flows that develop both in the bioreac-
tor and membrane module (Naessens et al., 2012). In recent
years, artificial neural networks (ANNs) have been used for
monitoring, controlling, classification and simulation of acti-
vated sludge processes (Chen et al., 2010; Guadix et al., 2010;
Han and Qiao, 2012; Nandi et al., 2010). Multi-layer percep-
tron (MLP) and radial basis function (RBF) are two types of
feed forward artificial neural networks (FANNs), which are
most commonly used in classification problems (Suchacz and
Wesołowski, 2006). The radial basis function artificial neu-
ral networks (RBFANNs) have been successfully applied for
solving dynamic system problems, because they can predict
the behavior directly from input/output data (Ferrari et al.,
2010; Han and Qiao, 2012). Many researchers have studied the
multi-layer perceptron artificial neural networks (MLPANNs)
(Barello et al., 2014; Nourbakhsh et al., 2014; Wallhäußer
et al., 2011), and recommend them for water quality predic-
tion for measures such as TSS, total dissolved solids (TDS),
total phosphorous (TP), biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),
chemical oxygen demand (COD), DO, ammonia, fecal coliform
and membrane fouling characteristics. In the recent years,
modeling of membrane fouling processes via ANN has been
received immense attention. A summary of researchers’ stud-
ies in ANN modeling of membrane fouling characteristics has
been presented in Table 1.
Utilizing an appropriate optimization paradigm in com-
bination with the process model is very useful and helps
designers to discern optimal process input parameters result
in maximization or minimization a specified-objective func-
tion (Badrnezhad and Mirza, 2014; Bagheri et al., 2014). Genetic
algorithm (GA) belongs to the evolutionary algorithms cat-
egory that applies the natural selection processes, where
selection results in better fitted species (Sarma et al., 2009).
GAs present many advantages that have led to a rise in their
use, particularly with the rise in the processing power of
A submerged membrane bioreactor was used in the current
research. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the SMBR.
The feeding tank was made of plastic measuring 0.8 by 0.6 m.
It was located 1.5 m above the ground to establish a continu-
ous flow. The membrane module was placed in the aeration
reactor to achieve simultaneous aeration/filtration process.
The vertically-oriented hollow fiber had an aeration reactor
measuring 0.8 by 0.8 m. It was attached to two tubes 1 cm in
diameter each, which conduct treated water to the effluent
tank. The polypropylene hollow fiber membrane had a nomi-
nal pore size of 0.04 ␮m and the overall membrane surface area
of 8 m2 per module. Table 2 shows the detailed specifications
of the hollow fiber membrane.
The upward aeration was performed using circular dif-
fusers placed at the bottom of aeration reactor. In addition,
two tubes were placed near the top of the reactor as a down-
ward aeration system in order to investigate the effects of
simultaneous upward and downward aeration. The maximum
permitted pressure for the hollow fiber membrane was about
30 kPa. A pressure gauge was installed on the suction path
to turn off the suction pump and open the backwash path
when the TMP exceeded permitted limit and membrane foil-
ing occurred.
On the whole, the experiments were carried out for 60 days
so that, they were divided into two experimental periods. The
conventional aeration from the bottom of the bioreactor, or
upward aeration, was performed for the first 30 days. The
downward aeration was performed simultaneously with the
upward aeration for the next 30 days. The air was continu-
ously provided 14 min for the upward aeration and 1 min for
the downward aeration during the simultaneous upward and
downward aeration phase. The temperature was kept about
25 ◦ C and the HRT was fixed at 5 h during the experiments.
The main goal of the current research was to investigate
114 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

Fig. 1 – Configuration of the submerged membrane bioreactor used in this study.

and temperature were measured using a digital pH meter. A

Table 2 – Specifications of the hollow fiber membrane
module. dissolved oxygen meter (YSI 5000) was utilized to determine
DO in the SMBR system. Biodegradability was measured
Description Value
by 5-day biochemical oxygen demand test according to the
Material Polypropylene standard methods (Andrew, 2005). COD was determined
Capillary thickness 40–50 ␮m according to the standard methods (Andrew, 2005). MLSS and
Capillary outer diameter 450 ␮m MLVSS were determined at Ekbatan wastewater treatment
Capillary pore diameter 0.01–0.2 ␮m
plant laboratory at the temperature of 550 ◦ C (Metcalf, 2003).
Gas permeation 7.0 × 10−2 cm3 /cm2 S cmHg
Porosity 40–50%
TN and NH+ 4 − N were measured using a spectrophotometer
Lengthways strength 120,000 kPa (the Hach DR 5000 UV–Vis Laboratory Spectrophotometer) at
Designed flux 6–9 L/M2 /H the wastewater treatment plant laboratory. Other operational
Area of membrane module 8 m2 /module parameters such as, permeate flow rate, TMP, and permeate
Operating pressure −10 to −30 kPa turbidity were monitored by sensors and gauges installed in
Flow rate 1.0–1.2 m3 /day
the SMBR. All sensors and gauges were cleaned and calibrated
weekly (Park et al., 2010). TMP values were normalized to
and model the effect of simultaneous upward and downward a standard temperature of 20 ◦ C according to the following
aeration on the membrane fouling and effluent quality param- equation (Caro, 1998):
eters. It has been proved that the costs of aeration and energy
consumption are the most important issues for the wastewa- TMT = TMTT × e0.0239.(T−20) (1)
ter treatment plants. The rate of air flow was constant for both
the upward and simultaneous upward and downward aeration where TMPT is the trans-membrane pressure monitored at
systems. Therefore, the performance of simultaneous upward temperature T (◦ C), and T is the temperature of mixed liquor
and downward aeration was examined at a constant rate of air measured in the membrane basin.
flow for both proposed systems. Membrane permeability is the ability of certain substances
to pass through an organic or semi-organic barrier. The
2.2. Characteristics of municipal wastewater concept is broader than this, though, and does have some
applications in industry and scientific experimentation. A per-
The pilot plant was located in Ekbatan wastewater treatment meable membrane isn’t usually open like a sieve, but is more
plant in Tehran, Iran, which has been operating since 1988. or less penetrable by certain substances under certain condi-
Analysis of the wastewater treatment plant influent was car- tions. Cell membranes have selective permeability, meaning
ried out for a four-month period. Based on the results of that they will allow certain substances to pass while forming
raw wastewater analysis, the maximum values were selected
as critical design parameters. Table 3 shows the critical
Table 3 – Municipal wastewater characteristics in the
values of the influent wastewater characteristics for the critical conditions.
Ekbatan wastewater treatment plant.
Parameter Value Parameter Value
◦
2.3. Analytical methods Temperature ( C) 25.8 Org-N (mg/l) 16.8
DO (mg/l) 0 TN (mg/l) 39.9
BOD (mg/l) 180 TS (mg/l) 810
Temperature, pH, DO, BOD, COD, TSS, sludge retention
COD (mg/l) 380 TDS (mg/l) 630
time (SRT), mixed liquor volatile and total suspended solids
NO3 − –N (mg/l) 0.96 TSS (mg/l) 180
(MLVSS, MLSS) concentrations as well as, total nitrogen (TN), NH+ − N(mg/l) 23.1 TP (mg/l) 16.54
4
NH+ −
4 − N and NO3 − N were measured in this study. The pH
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124
a barrier against others. Permeability is an important feature
because it facilitates continuous but controlled traffic in and
out of the cell. As a result, cells can extract all the amino acids,
fatty acids, sugars, and vitamins they need to carry out their
daily functions. The permeate flux on the applied TMP can be
described by Darcy’s law as the following equation:
TMP TMP
J= =   (2)
 × Rt  × Rm + Rf
where J is the permeate flux (LMH) at time t,  is the dynamic
viscosity of mixed liquor in the membrane basin, Rt (m−1 ) is
the total resistance at time t, Rm is the intrinsic membrane
resistance, and Rf (m−1 ) is the fouling resistance at time t.
In the current research, a statistical software (Minitab) was
used in order to evaluate both the trans-membrane pressure
increasing rate (dTMP/dt) and the membrane permeability
decreasing rate (dPerm/dt) by analyzing regression of trans-
membrane pressure and membrane permeability.
2.4. Artificial neural network modeling procedure
Modeling of a process covers a broad spectrum (Shokrian et al.,
2010). At one extreme, lie theoretical (or parametric) mod-
els based on fundamental knowledge of the process. These
models are also called knowledge-based models. At the other
end lie empirical (or non-parametric) models which do not
rely on the fundamental principles which governing the pro-
cess (Vaca Mier et al., 2001; Venayagamoorthy, 2007). ANN is a
non-parametric model which utilizes interconnected mathe-
matical nodes or neurons to form a network that can model
complex functional relationships (Sha and Edwards, 2007).
So far, different types of neural network architectures
and their performances have been studied for the purpose
of neuroidentification (Azmy et al., 2004; Park et al., 2005;
Venayagamoorthy, 2007). It includes MLPs, RBFs, recurrent
neural networks (RNNs), and echo-state networks (ESNs). In
order to achieve the objectives of this study, it was decided to
employ two types of FANNs, which are most commonly used
in classification problems, namely MLP and RBF (Suchacz and
Wesołowski, 2006). Simulation models of operational parame-
ters were established based on the theory of RBF and MLP using
the mathematical software program MATLAB. Experimental
data obtained over 60 days were used in ANN modeling. The
statistical characteristics of the measured parameters have
been presented in Table 4.
Fig. 2 – Topological architectures of the neural networks used in this study: MLP (a), and RBF (b).
115
Table 4 – Characteristics of measured parameters used in
the modeling process using the MLPANN and RBFANN.
Input Input variable Value Output Value
parameter variable
no.
1 Time (day) 1–60 TMP (kPa) 14.3–21.5
2 TSS (mg/l) 90–150 Perm 1.02–1.65
(LMH/kPa)
3 CODin (mg/l) 230–285
4 SRT (day) 30–50
5 MLSS (mg/l) 3800–5400
The structure of the basic RBFANN consisted of one input
layer, one output layer, and one hidden layer (Fig. 2). As
its name implies, radially symmetric basis function is used
as activation function for hidden nodes. The transformation
from the input nodes to the hidden nodes is a non-linear
one, and training of this portion of the network is generally
accomplished in an unsupervised manner. The training of the
network parameters (weight) between the hidden and output
layers occurs in a supervised manner based on target outputs
(Kashaninejad et al., 2009). In this study, the RBFANN applied
newrbe function to the input data. The newrbe function cre-
ated a two-layer network with biases for both layers. The first
layer followed a radial basis transfer function (radbas). Con-
sequently, its weighted inputs were calculated with Euclidean
distance weight function (dist) and its net input with prod-
uct net input function (netprod). The second layer followed a
linear transfer function (purelin). Consequently, its weighted
inputs were calculated with Dot product weight function (dot-
prod) and its net input with sum net input function (netsum).
MLP normal feedforward artificial neural network was used
to predict the performance of the SBMR treating the munici-
pal wastewater (Fig. 2). The networks were trained by different
learning algorithms (including incremental back propagation,
batch back propagation and Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm).
The developed network consisted of three layers including
input layer that comprised five nodes (including operational
time, TSS, effluent COD, SRT and MLSS), one hidden layer con-
sisting of several nodes (which were open to change in order to
obtain the best model) and the output layer that had two out-
put nodes (which were TMP and Perm). The transfer function
determines the input/output behavior and adds nonlinear-
ity and stability to the network (Lipták, 2010). The transfer
function of the hidden and output layers (sigmoid, hyper-
bolic tangent function, hyperbolic tangent sigmoid, Gaussian,
116 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124
linear, threshold linear and bipolar linear) was iteratively
determined by developing several networks. Each network
was trained until the network average RMSE was minimum
and R2 was equal to 1. Other parameters for network were
chosen as the default values of the software (Pendashteh et al.,
2011).
The performances of the ANN models were measured by
R2 and RMSE between the predicted values of the network and
the experimental values, which were calculated by Eqs. (3) and
(4), respectively (Pendashteh et al., 2011).
n  (i)
2
1− i=1
y∗i − yp
R2 = n  2
y∗i − ȳ
i=1
 mal solution (Liu et al., 2007). Selection is the survival of
 n  2
 1
(i)
RMSE = yp − y∗ i
n which chromosomes are preferred for generating the next
i=1
where ȳ is the average of y over the n data, and y∗i and yp are
the ith target and predicted responses, respectively.
In order to obtain convergence within a reasonable number
of cycles, the input and output data should be normalized and
scaled to the range of 0–1 by the following equation (Sahoo and
Ray, 2006; Xi et al., 2011):
xi − xmin
xni =
xmax − xmin
where xi is the initial value, xmax and xmin are the maximum
and minimum of the initial values, and xni is the scaled value.
After the training and testing of the ANN, the output data
were scaled to the real-world values through the following
equation:
xi = xni (xmax − xmin ) + xmin
2.5. Genetic algorithm optimization procedure
GAs are procedures based on the mimetic of mechanics of
natural selection and genetics. Theoretically developed by
Holland (John, 1992), genetic algorithms emulate the biolo-
gist evolutionary theory to solve optimization problems. This
method can find optimal solutions in a large solution space
by evaluating only a relatively small number of potential
solutions. It works directly with the fitness of each solution
instead of derivatives or other auxiliary characteristics used
with traditional deterministic approaches. Also, GA searches
for the global optimum solution over the whole solution space,
instead of focusing in a part or boundaries of solution space
that may lead to a local, rather than global, optimal solutions
(Kurek and Ostfeld, 2013). The main advantages of Gas are the
possibility of solving every optimization problems where the
solutions can be represented in chromosomes, the possibility
to solve problems with multiple solutions and with large num-
ber of variables, the absence of requirements regarding the
availability of mathematical knowledge of the optimization
problem (Mendes et al., 2014). Basically, a GA is categorized
into four main steps: (1) Creating population: The numbers of
the initial populations are generated in this step, (2) selection:
The solution for creating the offspring is chosen in this step,
(3) crossover: This section is dedicated to creating new solu-
tions by considering the solutions from the selection step, (4)
mutation: A sudden change in a step of the solution’s feature
is called mutation (Enayatifar et al., 2014; John, 1992).
Algorithm is started with a set of random solutions called
population (Kurek and Ostfeld, 2013). Population initialization
is the process of generating initial parameter sets for the first
population of the GA run. Two methods, namely random and
heuristic are used to initiate the population. The commonly
used random method generates parameters randomly with-
out any prior knowledge of the likely ‘optimum’ parameter set.
The heuristic method, on the other hand, requires some prior
knowledge of the likely ‘optimum’ parameter set, and there-
fore, provides the ‘optimum’ solution faster (Liu et al., 2007;
Mendes et al., 2014). The number of variables, population size
(3)
and generation gap in this study were 5, 30 and 1, respectively.
The initial set of strings will generally not provide an opti-
the fittest within the GA. The selection process determines
(4)
population, according to their fitness values in the current
population. The key notion in selection is to give a higher prior-
(i)
ity or preference to better individuals (Rani et al., 2013). There
are different selection methods as stochastic uniform, remain-
der, uniform, shift linear, roulette wheel and tournament (Kılıç
et al., 2014). The tournament method is preferred in this study
and the selection probability is equal to 0.5. The tournament
method can be described by the following equation:
Fi
(5) i = Nk (7)
F
j=1 j
where  i is the weight of ith individual within population.
Moreover, the sum of the elective probabilities of all the
individuals within population is 1 as is determined by the
following equation:
Nk
(6) i = 1 (8)
i=1
The crossover operator is used to create new chromosomes
for the next generation by combining randomly two selected
chromosomes from the current generation (Rani et al., 2013).
Once the surviving individuals are determined, the population
is completed with new individuals obtained through cross-
over mechanisms performed on two parents randomly paired
in the whole current population (Montastruc et al., 2004).
There are several crossover methods available for reproduc-
ing the next generation such as single pint, double point,
multi point, uniform, random and arithmetic crossover. The
crossover procedure adopted here is the uniform permuta-
tion operation Single-point and multipoint crossover define
crossover points between the first and last bit of two chromo-
somes to exchange the bits between them. Uniform crossover
generalizes this scheme to make every bit position a potential
crossover point. In uniform crossover, one offspring is con-
structed by choosing every bit with a probability Pc from either
parent (Rani et al., 2013). The crossover probability equal to 0.4
was chosen in this study.
Mutation is used in support of crossover to ensure that
the full range of allele is accessible for each gene. Mutation
is applied at a certain probability, Pm , to each gene of the
offspring, xi (t) to produce the mutated offspring Xi (t). The
mutation probability, also referred to as the mutation rate, is
usually a small value, Pm ∈ [0,1], to ensure that good solutions
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124 117

are not distorted too much. Given that each gene is mutated
at probability Pm , the probability that an individual will be
mutated, taking into account that the individual contains nx
genes, is given by the following equation (Ordóñez Galán et al.,
2011):

Prob (xi (t)is mutated) = 1 − (1 − Pm )nx (9)

The mutation technique chosen here consists in replacing

a randomly selected gene by its binary complement (Kurek
and Ostfeld, 2013). In binary and gray coding systems, a chro-
mosome mutation is performed at randomly chosen genes by
flipping bit 0 to l and vice versa (John, 1992). The mutation rate
should remain rather low in order not to disturb too much the
algorithm evolution. However, a too low rate value should be
inefficient to introduce new individuals in terms on genetic
codes in the population (Montastruc et al., 2004). A commonly
used value of 0.1 was chosen in this study. Fig. 4 – Changes of effluent TN and NH+
4 − N (a), and
effluent TSS (b) during the upward and simultaneous
3. Results and discussion upward and downward aeration systems.

COD concentrations meet the discharge limit for municipal

3.1. Effluent quality
The results showed that the performance of the hollow fiber
SMBR in effluent quality was high for both upward and
simultaneous upward and downward aeration systems. The
efficient removal of contaminants in this study is supported
by the findings of (Park et al., 2010), that confirmed a stable
performance in removing particulate, organic, and nutrient
matters by the SMBR with simultaneous aeration, even though
the concentrations of influent were fluctuated diurnally and
daily. The hollow fiber SMBR indicated a stable and suitable
performance for the removal of the organic matters, nutri-
ents and TSS, although the influent wastewater characteristics
varied during the experiments. The average influent BOD con-
centration was 160 mg/l and decreased to 4 mg/l with removal
efficiency of 97.5% (Fig. 3). The results indicated that the efflu-
ent BOD concentrations meet the discharge limit for municipal
wastewater (BOD < 30 mg/l) and the BOD removal efficiencies
exceeded 97%. The average influent COD concentration was
270 mg/l and decreased to 9 mg/l with removal efficiency of
96.7% (Fig. 3). The results demonstrated that the effluent
Fig. 3 – Changes of effluent BOD (a), and effluent COD (b)
during the upward and simultaneous upward and
downward aeration systems.
wastewater (COD < 60 mg/l) and the COD removal efficiencies
exceeded 96% for all measured experiments. The results indi-
cated that the hollow fiber SMBR can obtain efficient BOD and
COD removal. The effluent BOD and COD concentrations were
significantly lower than the discharge limits (Trussell et al.,
2006). As a result, there was no significant difference between
upward and simultaneous upward and downward aeration
systems for the BOD and COD removals.
The average influent TN concentration was 28 mg/l and
decreased to 1.5 mg/l with removal efficiency of 94.6% (Fig. 4).
Furthermore, the average influent NH+ 4 − N concentration was
20 mg/l and decreased to 0.8 mg/l with removal efficiency of
96% (Fig. 4). The effluent NH+ 4 − N concentration met the strin-
gent discharge limit for municipal wastewater (NH+ 4 −N<
1 mg/l). The removal efficiencies of TN and NH+ 4 − N for all
measured experiments exceeded 93% and 95%, respectively.
The average influent concentration of TSS was 110 mg/l and
increased to 150 mg/l in some days. The TSS removal efficiency
exceeded 98% so that the effluent TSS concentration was
1 mg/l for both upward and simultaneous upward and down-
ward aeration systems (Fig. 4). The results showed that the
effluent TSS concentrations met the discharge limit for munic-
ipal wastewater (TSS < 40 mg/l). Fig. 4 shows that the hollow
fiber SMBR system is capable of efficient TSS removal. The
effluent TSS concentration was significantly lower than the
discharge limit. As a result, there was no significant difference
between upward and simultaneous upward and downward
aeration systems for the TN, NH+ 4 − N and TSS removals.
The hollow fiber SMBR performance for the removal of
BOD, COD, TN, NH+ 4 − N and TSS in the municipal wastewater
was highly efficient and there was no significant difference
in removal efficiencies between upward and simultaneous
upward and downward aeration systems. The differences
between upward and simultaneous upward and downward
aeration systems were not visible due to high performance
of SMBR in the municipal wastewater treatment (Guglielmi
et al., 2007). In other words, the influent concentrations of con-
taminants for the municipal wastewater are not high enough
to ascertain the differences between upward and simultane-
ous upward and downward aeration systems. We concluded
that the performance of SMBR with simultaneous upward and
downward aeration system as compared with conventional
118 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

upward aeration system in the industrial wastewater treat-

ment is more noticeable (Artiga et al., 2005; Pendashteh et al.,
2011).

3.2. Membrane fouling

The effect of upward and simultaneous upward and down-

ward aeration systems was examined on the membrane
fouling of the vertically-oriented hollow fiber SMBR. The avail-
able flux was lower than the critical flux for both upward
and simultaneous upward and downward aeration systems.
The average MLSS concentration was 4600 mg/l and varied
from 3800 to 5400 mg/l. Furthermore, the average MLVSS con-
centration was 3700 mg/l and varied from 3100 to 4300 mg/l.
The results showed that the TMP increases as the opera-
tional time increases. The TMP varied from 14.3 to 21.5 kPa
during the operations (Fig. 5). The TMP increased from
14.3 to 19.2 kPa for the first 30 days of operations with
upward aeration system. In addition, the TMP increased from
19.2 to 21.5 kPa for the second 30 days of operations with
simultaneous upward and downward aeration system. The
results of this study indicate that the changes in TMP for
the vertically-oriented hollow fiber SMBR with upward and
simultaneous upward and downward aeration systems are
in good agreement with the results of earlier studies (Park
et al., 2010). Similar to the approach proposed by (Le Clech
et al., 2003), and (Park et al., 2010), TMP data was used to
determine the TMP increasing rate (dTMP/dt) as a parame-
ter for membrane fouling. Fig. 5 shows that the (dTMP/dt)
increasing rates for the upward and simultaneous upward and
downward aeration systems were 0.16333 and 0.07666, respec-
tively.
The results indicated that the membrane permeabil-
ity decreases for both upward and simultaneous upward
and downward aeration systems as the operational time
increases. The membrane permeability decreased from 1.65
to 1.25 LMH/kPa in the first phase of operations with upward
aeration system. Furthermore, the membrane permeability
Fig. 5 – Membrane filtration perfomnace of the submerged
membrabe bioreactor during the upward and simultaneous
upward and downward aeration systems based on TMP (a),
and Perm (b).
decreased from 1.25 to 1.1 LMH/kPa in the second phase of
operations with simultaneous upward and downward aera-
tion system (Fig. 5). The membrane permeability decreasing
rate for the upward aeration system was more than simul-
taneous upward and downward aeration system. The Perm
decreased from 1.65 to 1.25 LMH/kPa for the first 30 days
of operations with upward aeration system. In addition, the
Perm decreased from 1.25 to 1.1 LMH/kPa for the second 30
days of operations with simultaneous upward and downward
aeration system. The results of our study demonstrate that
the changes in membrane permeability for the vertically-
oriented hollow fiber SMBR with upward and simultaneous
upward and downward aeration systems are in good agree-
ment with the results of earlier studies (Park et al., 2010).
Similar to the approach proposed by (Le Clech et al., 2003), and
(Park et al., 2010), membrane permeability data was used to

Fig. 6 – Train (a) and test (b) models by RBFANN, and train (c) and test (d) models by MLPANN for TMP.
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124
determine the membrane permeability decreasing rate
(dPerm/dt) as a parameter for membrane fouling. Fig. 5 shows
that the (dPerm/dt) decreasing rates for the upward and
simultaneous upward and downward aeration systems were
0.01333 and 0.00511, respectively.
It has been demonstrated that other factors such as MLSS
concentration (Psoch and Schiewer, 2006), food to microor-
ganism ratio (F/M) (Trussell et al., 2006), and SRT (Bouhabila
et al., 1998) have also been known to affect membrane foul-
ing (Park et al., 2010). Thus, these parameters as well as
air sparging configuration might affect the TMP increasing
rate and the membrane permeability decreasing rate in the
SMBR operation (Park et al., 2010). This study demonstrated
that the (dTMP/dt) increasing rate for the upward aeration
was 2.13 times higher than that of simultaneous upward and
downward aeration. Moreover, the (dPerm/dt) decreasing rate
for the upward aeration was 2.66 times higher than that of
simultaneous upward and downward aeration systems. The
results showed that the SMBRs with simultaneous upward and
downward aeration systems are more efficient in reduction of
membrane fouling compared with conventional SMBRs with
upward aeration systems.
3.3. Modeling of membrane fouling
The operational time, TSS, influent COD, SRT and MLSS were
the network inputs in order to model the TMP and mem-
brane permeability (Perm) using the RBFANN and MLPANN.
The RBFANN applied newrbe function to the input data and
the spread of radial basis function was considered equal to its
default value, namely 1. A large spread results in a smooth
function approximation, but, by contrast, a large spread can
cause numerical problems (Pendashteh et al., 2011). The
newrbe function selected 70% of normalized data to train
and 30% to test the RBFANN models (Çinar et al., 2006). The
RBFANN was designed in a loop that applied newrbe to the
data for more than 100 times in order to minimize error.
The optimal network was chosen on the basis of the mini-
mum average error. The MLPANN applied newff function to
the input data and, created a feed-forward back propagation
network. The newff function selected 70% of normalized data
to train, 15% to test and 15% to validate the MLPANN models
(Çinar et al., 2006). The MLPANN was trained by different learn-
ing algorithms for maximum 1000 epochs. Nevertheless, the
Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm resulted in the most accu-
rate models for training and testing data after less than 40
iterations. Based on our research, the optimal models were
obtained with the hidden layer consisting of 8–12 neurons.
The best transfer function for the hidden layer was found
to be hyperbolic tangent sigmoid (tansig) function while the
best transfer function for the output layer was a linear one
(purelin).
3.3.1. Trans-membrane pressure models
The training procedures for the TMP models were success-
ful for both RBFANN and MLPANN. The train and test models
by MLPANN and RBFANN showed an almost perfect match
between the experimental and the simulated values of TMP
(Fig. 6). It is obvious that a careful verification is required
for the proper use of models in practical applications. In the
current research, the model is verified by evaluating its per-
formance in propitiously simulating the statistical features of
the observed data. In particular, the observed high quantiles
are compared with the simulated ones (Weiss et al., 2012).
119
Fig. 7 – TMP models by RBFANN (a), and MLPANN (b) for the
submerged membrabe bioreactor according to all data set.
Then the autocorrelation functions of the simulated values
are compared to the observed values, and the performance of
the one-step-ahead predictions are analyzed carefully. More-
over, another criterion applied for judging the validity of the
model is the assessment of the goodness of fit according to
different available criteria. The RMSE values for train and test
(verification) models by MLPANN were 0.208 kPa and 0.312 kPa,
respectively. Moreover, the R2 values for train and test models
were 0.97 and 0.98, respectively. The MLPANN simulated TMP
so precisely that the mean average error for train and test mod-
els were 1% and 3%, respectively. The RMSE values for train
and test (verification) models by RBFANN were 0.352 kPa and
0.329 kPa, respectively. Furthermore, the R2 values for train
and test models were 0.97 and 0.98, respectively. The RBFANN
simulated TMP so precisely that the mean average error for
train and test models did not exceed 3%.
The results indicated that the MLPANN has stronger
approximation and generalization ability than the RBFANN
with regard to our experimental data in the modeling of TMP.
It was observed that the precision of MLPANN and RBFANN
models is determined not only by the number of input vari-
ables of the network but also by correlation of these variables.
The high correlation of the input data affected the precision
of the MLPANN models more than RBFANN models. On the
other hand, the number of the input data affected the preci-
sion of the RBFANN models more than MLPANN models. Fig. 7
shows the TMP models by MLPANN and RBFANN according to
all experimental data for 60 days.
The TMP was modeled separately by considering different
single variables as inputs of MLPANN and RBFANN in order
to investigate the effect of each variable on the changes of
TMP. Similarly, separate models were performed in order to
show the effects of joint input variables on the changes of TMP.
These inputs were used to train the networks in groups of two,
three and four variables. The results indicated that operational
time among single input variables, and operational time and
MLSS among groups of two variables significantly affected the
TMP models. Furthermore, operational time, MLSS and TSS
among groups of three variables, and operational time, MLSS,
TSS and SRT between groups of four variables had the most
significant effects on the TMP models (Table 5).
120 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

Table 5 – Effects of different single and joint parameters on the trans-membrane pressure (TMP).
Input parameter no. Radial basis function (RBF) models Multi-layer perceptron (MLP) models Importance order
2 2
R RMSE (kPa) R RMSE (kPa)

Train Test Train Test Train Test Train Test

1 0.96 0.98 0.367 0.281 0.98 0.99 0.281 0.273 1

2 0.38 0.40 1.513 1.597 0.44 0.58 1.691 0.844 4
3 0.04 0.16 1.996 1.698 0.19 0.45 1.624 1.761 5
4 0.86 0.76 0.748 0.848 0.86 0.94 0.733 0.681 3
5 0.95 0.93 0.411 0.531 0.96 0.98 0.401 0.424 2
1–2 0.95 0.95 0.452 0.375 0.99 0.97 0.218 0.181 3
1–3 0.91 0.94 0.639 0.508 0.97 0.96 0.318 0.418 4
1–4 0.96 0.99 0.394 0.278 0.96 0.99 0.361 0.231 2
1–5 0.97 0.99 0.323 0.243 0.98 0.99 0.238 0.242 1
1–5–2 0.98 0.98 0.341 0.311 0.99 0.99 0.224 0.223 1
1–5–3 0.98 0.98 0.343 0.344 0.98 0.97 0.283 0.224 2
1–5–4 0.95 0.96 0.443 0.401 0.97 0.97 0.286 0.348 3
1–5–2–3 0.95 0.99 0.421 0.205 0.96 0.99 0.401 0.259 2
1–5–2–4 0.97 0.99 0.379 0.175 1 0.99 0 0.222 1
1–5–2–4–3 0.97 0.98 0.352 0.329 0.99 0.98 0.208 0.312 1

The numbers 1 to 5 refers to input variables identified in Table 4.

It has been proved that the model fit statistics are not a
good guide to how well a model will simulate and predict a
time-series phenomenon. High values of R2 do not necessar-
ily lead to a favorable model, although it can be a sign of a
propitious model. Additionally, a way to measure the predic-
tive capability of a model is to test it on a set of data not used
in simulation process. This has been described in literature as
test set and the data used for simulation is training set. As a
result, to verify our models, a set of the TMP and membrane
permeability data was used to examine the predictive ability of
models. Furthermore, sensitivity analyses (Saltelli et al., 2008)
were performed to determine the sensitivity of TMP and mem-
brane permeability to changes of input variables. The effect of
each variable on the RBFANN and MLPANN models compared
with the other parameters was determined by its importance
order. Table 5 shows the importance order of each single and
joint input variable for the TMP models. The variable with
higher rank of importance showed not only an almost perfect
match between experimental and both MLPANN and RBFANN
models but also less RMSE and more R2 values. The results
of modeling demonstrated that the variation of the TMP is
influenced by operational time, MLSS, SRT, TSS and influent
COD. The current research shows that the operational time
and MLSS significantly affect the TMP predicting models as
they have been examined experimentally in earlier studies
(Park et al., 2010).

Fig. 8 – Train (a) and test (b) models by RBFANN, and train (c) and test (d) models by MLPANN for Perm.
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124 121

3.3.2. Membrane permeability (Perm) models

The training procedures for membrane permeability (Perm)
models were successful for both RBFANN and MLPANN. The
train and test models by MLPANN and RBFANN indicated an
almost perfect match between the experimental and the sim-
ulated values of membrane permeability (Fig. 8).
The RMSE values for train and test (verification) models
by MLPANN were 0.016 LMH/kPa and 0.031 LMH/kPa, respec-
tively. Moreover, the R2 value was 0.99 for both models. The
MLPANN simulated membrane permeability so precisely that
the mean average error for train and test models did not
exceed 1% and 2%, respectively. The RMSE values for train
and test (verification) models by RBFANN were 0.05 LMH/kPa
and 0.028 LMH/kPa, respectively. Furthermore, the R2 values
for train and test models were 0.95 and 0.99, respectively.
The RBFANN simulated membrane permeability so precisely
that the mean average error for train and test models did
not exceed 4% and 2%, respectively. The results demonstrated
that the MLPANN has stronger approximation and generaliza- Fig. 9 – Perm models by RBFANN (a), and MLPANN (b) for the
tion ability than the RBFANN with regard to our experimental submerged membrabe bioreactor according to all data set.
data in the modeling of membrane permeability. Fig. 9 shows
the membrane permeability models by MLPANN and RBFANN that the operational time and MLSS significantly influence
according to all experimental data for 60 days. the membrane permeability predicting models as they have
The membrane permeability was modeled separately by been examined experimentally in earlier studies (Park et al.,
considering different single and joint variables as inputs of 2010).
MLPANN and RBFANN in order to investigate the effect of
each variable on changes of membrane permeability. The 3.4. GA optimization outcomes
joint inputs were used to train the networks in groups of
two, three and four variables. Table 6 shows that opera- With the increasing concern over the impact of fouling in
tional time among single input variables, and operational membrane bioreactors, many membrane fouling models have
time and MLSS among groups of two variables significantly been developed in the last decade. An important obstacle in
affected the membrane permeability models. Furthermore, using such models is how to determine the values of the
operational time, MLSS and TSS among groups of three vari- model parameters. This is especially true when a model has
ables, and operational time, MLSS, TSS and SRT between a large number of parameters, which makes a full range of
groups of four variables had the greatest effect on the mem- calibration expensive in terms of computing time (Liu et al.,
brane permeability models. In addition, the importance order 2007). The MLPANN and RBFANN are strong tools in interpo-
of each and joint input variable for membrane permeabil- lation without adequate accuracy for extrapolation. Based on
ity has been presented in Table 6. The results of sensitivity this, determination of lower and upper limits of variables is
analysis for input variables demonstrated that the varia- required for optimization. This paper presents an attempt to
tion of membrane permeability is influenced by operational calibrate a membrane fouling model using a GA. The favorable
time, MLSS, SRT, TSS and influent COD. This study shows limit is established based on MLPANN and RBFANN training

Table 6 – Effects of different single and joint parameters on the membrane permeability (Perm).
Input parameter no. Radial basis function (RBF) models Multi-layer perceptron (MLP) models Importance order
2 2
R RMSE (LMH/kPa) R RMSE (LMH/kPa)

Train Test Train Test Train Test Train Test

1 0.96 0.96 0.035 0.037 0.97 0.98 0.027 0.035 1

2 0.40 0.58 0.140 0.114 0.48 0.99 0.118 0.137 4
3 0.11 0.22 0.180 0.138 0.48 0.92 0.128 0.154 5
4 0.85 0.90 0.071 0.062 0.85 0.96 0.064 0.067 3
5 0.96 0.96 0.035 0.043 0.95 0.96 0.044 0.030 2
1–2 0.96 0.95 0.041 0.030 0.97 0.97 0.033 0.023 3
1–3 0.92 0.96 0.049 0.026 0.96 0.97 0.038 0.025 4
1–4 0.98 0.97 0.025 0.027 0.97 0.99 0.033 0.023 2
1–5 0.97 0.97 0.028 0.027 0.97 0.99 0.029 0.009 1
1–5–2 0.96 0.98 0.044 0.033 0.97 0.99 0.028 0.013 2
1–5–3 0.96 0.95 0.041 0.044 0.99 0.95 0.018 0.050 3
1–5–4 0.96 0.97 0.033 0.033 0.98 0.99 0.026 0.015 1
1–5–4–2 0.96 0.99 0.040 0.015 0.97 0.99 0.033 0.032 1
1–5–4–3 0.95 0.97 0.045 0.018 0.93 0.97 0.044 0.033 2
1–5–4–2–3 0.95 0.99 0.050 0.028 0.99 0.99 0.016 0.031 1

The numbers 1 to 5 refers to input variables identified in Table 4.

122 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124

Table 7 – Effect of applying GA on the precision of TMP and membrane permeability models.
Type of ANN model R2 RMSE (kPa) or (LMH/kPa) Percentage of error (%) Rank of model (accuracy)

All Train Test All Train Test

Trans-membrane
pressure (TMP)
models
RBFANN 0.95 0.97 0.98 0.497 0.352 0.329 5 4
RBFANN-GA 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.267 0.251 0.283 2 2
MLPANN 0.98 0.99 0.98 0.293 0.208 0.312 3 3
MLPANN-GA 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.256 0.214 0.202 1 1
Membrane
permeability
(Perm) models
RBFANN 0.97 0.95 0.99 0.041 0.050 0.028 4 4
RBFANN-GA 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.026 0.019 0.029 3 2
MLPANN 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.037 0.016 0.031 3 3
MLPANN-GA 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.016 0.011 0.014 1 1

(Soleimani et al., 2013), and it can be seen that the esti-
mated TMP and permeability values, that were achieved by GA,
corresponding to optimum operating parameters are almost
greater than those observed in experiments and also it can be
observed that some estimated TMP and permeability values,
that were achieved by GA, corresponding to optimum operat-
ing parameters are almost near to the minimum quantities
those observed in experiments.
In the current research, the tournament selection method,
a mutation method consisting of replacing a randomly
selected gene by its binary complement and uniform crossover
method were used as genetic operators. For the GA operators
investigated in this study, the selection probability was ini-
tially set to 0.5; the crossover probability was set to 0.4; the
mutation probability was set to 0.1; the population size was
set to 30; the generation gap was set to 1; the maximum num-
ber of generation was set to 10 and the stopping criterion was
set to either exceed the maximum number of generations or
stop after 6 generations without improvement of fitness val-
ues. Like any stochastic procedure to solve a given problem
(Montastruc et al., 2004), the GA has to be run 90 times in this
study with different initial populations. It was observed that
the fixed percentage of individuals that survive in the new gen-
eration and mutation rates do not have a significant influence
on the method convergence which is confirmed by 60 runs of
GA.
Based on the result of this study, the optimum models are
obtained with the hidden layer consisting of 10 neurons com-
pared with the results of previous studies, which varied from
10 to 20 neurons (Badrnezhad and Mirza, 2014; Bagheri et al.,
2014). The residuals of the models attained by the RBFANN
and the MLPANN when GA applied for train and test data
sets showed an approximately normal distribution. A normal
distribution of variation results in a Gaussian curve (specific
bell-shaped curve), with the highest point in the middle and
smoothly curving symmetrical slopes on both sides of center
(Chamkalani et al., 2013). Gaussian curve reveals our results
are symmetrical and their axis round around zero (Ratkovich
et al., 2012). The effects of applying GA on the RBFANN and
the MLPANN in the simulation of trans-membrane pressure
and membrane permeability have been presented in Table 7.
The results showed that the precision and accuracy of all
ANN models increased when GA is applied to the models. It
was illustrated that the GA-optimized ANN predicts TMP and
permeability more accurately than a network with a trial-and-
error approach calibration.
4. Conclusions
A vertically oriented hollow fiber SMBR with combined aera-
tion/filtration was used to examine the effect of simultaneous
upward and downward aeration on the membrane fouling
characteristics and process performance of the system. More-
over, TMP and Perm were simulated using GA based MLPANN
and RBFANN models. We concluded that there is no signif-
icant difference in the removal efficiency of BOD, COD, TN,
NH+ 4 − N and TSS between upward and simultaneous upward
and downward aeration systems in the municipal wastewa-
ter treatment. It was observed that the TMP increases and
Perm decreases with any increase in the operational time. The
TMP increasing rates (dTMP/dt) for the upward and simultane-
ous aeration were 0.16333 and 0.07666, respectively while the
Perm decreasing rates (dPerm/dt) were 0.01333 and 0.00511,
respectively. We concluded that the (dTMP/dt) increasing rate
and the (dPerm/dt) decreasing rate for the upward aeration
were 2.13 and 2.66 times higher than that of simultaneous
aeration, respectively. The training procedures for TMP and
Perm models were successful for both RBFANN and MLPANN.
The train and test models by MLPANN and RBFANN showed
an almost perfect match between the experimental and the
simulated values of TMP and Perm. We concluded that the
MLPANN has stronger approximation and generalization abil-
ity than RBFANN with regard to our experimental data in the
modeling of the TMP and Perm.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Ekbatan wastewater treatment
plant for their technical and logistical assistance during this
work which was supported by authors. And also, we wish to
thank Ali Reza Jafari and Mohammad Reza Ghanbari for tech-
nical help with modeling by artificial neural network.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data associated with this article can be
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.
psep.2015.03.015.
References
Andrew, D., 2005. Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater. APHA-AWWA-WEF, Washington, DC.
 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124
Artiga, P., Ficara, E., Malpei, F., Garrido, J., Mendez, R., 2005.
Treatment of two industrial wastewaters in a submerged
membrane bioreactor. Desalination 179, 161–169.
Azmy, A.M., Erlich, I., Sowa, P., 2004. Artificial neural
network-based dynamic equivalents for distribution systems
containing active sources. IEE Proc. Gener. Transm. Distrib.
151, 681–688.
Badrnezhad, R., Mirza, B., 2014. Modeling and optimization of
cross-flow ultrafiltration using hybrid neural network-genetic
algorithm approach. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 20,
528–543.
Bagheri, M., Mirbagheri, S., Ehteshami, M., Bagheri, Z., 2014.
Modeling of a sequencing batch reactor treating municipal
wastewater using multi-layer perceptron and radial basis
function artificial neural networks. Process Saf. Environ. Prot.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2014.04.006.
Barello, M., Manca, D., Patel, R., Mujtaba, I.M., 2014. Neural
network based correlation for estimating water permeability
constant in RO desalination process under fouling.
Desalination 345, 101–111.
Börger, E., Päppinghaus, P., Schmid, J., 2000. Report on a Practical
Application of ASMs in Software Design Abstract State
Machines-Theory and Applications. Springer,
Berlin/Heidelberg, pp. 361–366.
Bouhabila, E.H., Ben Aïm, R., Buisson, H., 1998. Microfiltration of
activated sludge using submerged membrane with air
bubbling (application to wastewater treatment). Desalination
118, 315–322.
Caro, J., 1998. Basic principles of membrane technology. Z. für
Phys. Chem. 203, 263.
Chamkalani, A., Amani, M., Kiani, M.A., Chamkalani, R., 2013.
Assessment of asphaltene deposition due to titration
technique. Fluid Phase Equilib. 339, 72–80.
Chang, I.-S., Le Clech, P., Jefferson, B., Judd, S., 2002. Membrane
fouling in membrane bioreactors for wastewater treatment. J.
Environ. Eng. 128, 1018–1029.
Chen, H.-W., Yu, R.-F., Ning, S.-K., Huang, H.-C., 2010. Forecasting
effluent quality of an industry wastewater treatment plant by
evolutionary grey dynamic model. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 54,
235–241.
Chen, H., Kim, A.S., 2006. Prediction of permeate flux decline in
crossflow membrane filtration of colloidal suspension: a
radial basis function neural network approach. Desalination
192, 415–428.
Cho, B., Fane, A., 2002. Fouling transients in nominally
sub-critical flux operation of a membrane bioreactor. J.
Membr. Sci. 209, 391–403.
Chon, K., Cho, J., Shon, H.K., 2013. A pilot-scale hybrid municipal
wastewater reclamation system using combined coagulation
and disk filtration, ultrafiltration, and reverse osmosis:
removal of nutrients and micropollutants, and
characterization of membrane foulants. Bioresour. Technol.
141, 109–116.
Çinar, Ö., Hasar, H., Kinaci, C., 2006. Modeling of submerged
membrane bioreactor treating cheese whey wastewater by
artificial neural network. J. Biotechnol. 123, 204–209.
Ct, P., Thompson, D., 2000. Wastewater treatment using
membranes: the North American experience. Water Sci.
Technol. 41, 209–215.
Cui, Z., Chang, S., Fane, A., 2003. The use of gas bubbling to
enhance membrane processes. J. Membr. Sci. 221,
1–35.
Delgrange, N., Cabassud, C., Cabassud, M., Durand-Bourlier, L.,
Laine, J., 1998a. Modelling of ultrafiltration fouling by neural
network. Desalination 118, 213–227.
Delgrange, N., Cabassud, C., Cabassud, M., Durand-Bourlier, L.,
Laine, J., 1998b. Neural networks for prediction of
ultrafiltration transmembrane pressure–application to
drinking water production. J. Membr. Sci. 150, 111–123.
Dong, W.-y., Wang, H.-j., Li, W.-g., Ying, W.-c., Gan, G.-h., Yang, Y.,
2009. Effect of DO on simultaneous removal of carbon and
nitrogen by a membrane aeration/filtration combined
bioreactor. J. Membr. 344, 219–224.
123
Enayatifar, R., Abdullah, A.H., Isnin, I.F., 2014. Chaos-based image
encryption using a hybrid genetic algorithm and a DNA
sequence. Opt. Lasers Eng. 56, 83–93.
Ferrari, S., Bellocchio, F., Piuri, V., Borghese, N.A., 2010. A
hierarchical RBF online learning algorithm for real-time 3-D
scanner. IEEE Trans. Neural Networks 21, 275–285.
Gander, M., Jefferson, B., Judd, S., 2000. Membrane bioreactors for
use in small wastewater treatment plants: membrane
materials and effluent quality. Water Sci. Technol. 41, 205–211.
Geissler, S., Wintgens, T., Melin, T., Vossenkaul, K., Kullmann, C.,
2005. Modelling approaches for filtration processes with novel
submerged capillary modules in membrane bioreactors for
wastewater treatment. Desalination 178, 125–134.
Guadix, A., Zapata, J.E., Almecija, M.C., Guadix, E.M., 2010.
Predicting the flux decline in milk cross-flow ceramic
ultrafiltration by artificial neural networks. Desalination 250,
1118–1120.
Guglielmi, G., Saroj, D.P., Chiarani, D., Andreottola, G., 2007.
Sub-critical fouling in a membrane bioreactor for municipal
wastewater treatment: experimental investigation and
mathematical modelling. Water Res. 41, 3903–3914.
Han, H.-G., Qiao, J.-F., 2012. Prediction of activated sludge bulking
based on a self-organizing RBF neural network. J. Process
Control 22, 1103–1112.
Henze, M., Grady, C., Gujer, W., Marais, G., Matsuo, T., 1987. A
general model for single-sludge wastewater treatment
systems. Water Res. 21, 505–515.
John, H., 1992. Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial
Systems. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Judd, S., 2010. The MBR Book: Principles and Applications of
Membrane Bioreactors for Water and Wastewater Treatment.
Elsevier, Amsterdam.
Kashaninejad, M., Dehghani, A., Kashiri, M., 2009. Modeling of
wheat soaking using two artificial neural networks (MLP and
RBF). J. Food Eng. 91, 602–607.
Kılıç, U., Ayan, K., Arifoğlu, U., 2014. Optimizing reactive power
flow of HVDC systems using genetic algorithm. Int. J. Electr.
Power Energy Syst. 55, 1–12.
Kurek, W., Ostfeld, A., 2013. Multi-objective optimization of water
quality, pumps operation, and storage sizing of water
distribution systems. J. Environ. Manage. 115, 189–197.
Le Clech, P., Jefferson, B., Chang, I.S., Judd, S.J., 2003. Critical flux
determination by the flux-step method in a submerged
membrane bioreactor. J. Membr. Sci. 227, 81–93.
Lipták, B.G., 2010. Instrument Engineers’ Handbook Volume Two:
Process Control and Optimization. CRC Press, Boca Raton.
Liu, Q.-F., Kim, S.-H., 2008. Evaluation of membrane fouling
models based on bench-scale experiments: a comparison
between constant flowrate blocking laws and artificial neural
network (ANNs) model. J. Membr. Sci. 310, 393–401.
Liu, Q.-F., Kim, S.-H., Lee, S., 2009. Prediction of microfiltration
membrane fouling using artificial neural network models.
Sep. Purif. Technol. 70, 96–102.
Liu, S., Butler, D., Brazier, R., Heathwaite, L., Khu, S.-T., 2007.
Using genetic algorithms to calibrate a water quality model.
Sci. Total Environ. 374, 260–272.
Martin, K.J., Nerenberg, R., 2012. The membrane biofilm reactor
(MBfR) for water and wastewater treatment: principles,
applications, and recent developments. Bioresour. Technol.
122, 83–94.
Mendes, J., Araújo, R., Matias, T., Seco, R., Belchior, C., 2014.
Automatic extraction of the fuzzy control system by a
hierarchical genetic algorithm. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 29,
70–78.
Meng, F., Yang, F., Shi, B., Zhang, H., 2008. A comprehensive study
on membrane fouling in submerged membrane bioreactors
operated under different aeration intensities. Sep. Purif.
Technol. 59, 91–100.
Meng, F., Zhang, H., Yang, F., Liu, L., 2007. Characterization of
cake layer in submerged membrane bioreactor. Environ. Sci.
Technol. 41, 4065–4070.
Metcalf, I., 2003. Wastewater Engineering; Treatment and Reuse.
McGraw-Hill, New York.
124 Process Safety and Environmental Protection 9 6 ( 2 0 1 5 ) 111–124
Montastruc, L., Azzaro-Pantel, C., Pibouleau, L., Domenech, S.,
2004. Use of genetic algorithms and gradient based
optimization techniques for calcium phosphate precipitation.
Chem. Eng. Process: Process Intensif. 43, 1289–1298.
Moral, H., Aksoy, A., Gokcay, C.F., 2008. Modeling of the activated
sludge process by using artificial neural networks with
automated architecture screening. Comput. Chem. Eng. 32,
2471–2478.
Naessens, W., Maere, T., Nopens, I., 2012. Critical review of
membrane bioreactor models—Part 1: Biokinetic and filtration
models. Bioresour. Technol. 122, 95–106.
Nandi, B., Moparthi, A., Uppaluri, R., Purkait, M., 2010. Treatment
of oily wastewater using low cost ceramic membrane:
comparative assessment of pore blocking and artificial neural
network models. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 88, 881–892.
Nourbakhsh, H., Emam-Djomeh, Z., Omid, M., Mirsaeedghazi, H.,
Moini, S., 2014. Prediction of red plum juice permeate flux
during membrane processing with ANN optimized using RSM.
Comput. Electron. Agric. 102, 1–9.
Ordóñez Galán, C., Rodríguez-Pérez, J.R., Martínez Torres, J.,
García Nieto, P.J., 2011. Analysis of the influence of forest
environments on the accuracy of GPS measurements by using
genetic algorithms. Math. Comput. Modell. 54, 1829–1834.
Park, C., Lee, Y.H., Lee, S., Hong, S., 2008. Effect of cake layer
structure on colloidal fouling in reverse osmosis membranes.
Desalination 220, 335–344.
Park, H.-D., Lee, Y.H., Kim, H.-B., Moon, J., Ahn, C.-H., Kim, K.-T.,
Kang, M.-S., 2010. Reduction of membrane fouling by
simultaneous upward and downward air sparging in a
pilot-scale submerged membrane bioreactor treating
municipal wastewater. Desalination 251, 75–82.
Park, J.-W., Venayagamoorthy, G.K., Harley, R.G., 2005. MLP/RBF
neural-networks-based online global model identification of
synchronous generator. Ind. Electron. IEEE Trans. 52,
1685–1695.
Patsios, S., Karabelas, A., 2011. An investigation of the long-term
filtration performance of a membrane bioreactor (MBR): the
role of specific organic fractions. J. Membr. Sci. 372, 102–115.
Pendashteh, A.R., Fakhru’l-Razi, A., Chaibakhsh, N., Abdullah,
L.C., Madaeni, S.S., Abidin, Z.Z., 2011. Modeling of membrane
bioreactor treating hypersaline oily wastewater by artificial
neural network. J. Hazard. Mater. 192, 568–575.
Psoch, C., Schiewer, S., 2006. Anti-fouling application of air
sparging and backflushing for MBR. J. Membr. Sci. 283,
273–280.
Rani, D., Jain, S.K., Srivastava, D.K., Perumal, M., 2013. 3—Genetic
algorithms and their applications to water resources systems.
In: Yang, Xin-She, Gandomi, Amir Hossein, Talatahari, Siami,
Alavi, Amir Hossein (Eds.), Metaheuristics in Water,
Geotechnical and Transport Engineering. Elsevier, Oxford, pp.
43–78.
Ratkovich, N., Chan, C., Bentzen, T.R., Rasmussen, M.R., 2012.
Experimental and CFD simulation studies of wall shear stress
for different impeller configurations and MBR activated
sludge. Water Sci. Technol. 65, 2061–2070.
Rocha, I., Parente Jr., E., Melo, A., 2014. A hybrid
shared/distributed memory parallel genetic algorithm for
optimization of laminate composites. Compos. Struct. 107,
288–297.
Sahoo, G.B., Ray, C., 2006. Predicting flux decline in crossflow
membranes using artificial neural networks and genetic
algorithms. J. Membr. Sci. 283, 147–157.
Saltelli, A., Ratto, M., Andres, T., Campolongo, F., Cariboni, J.,
Gatelli, D., Saisana, M., Tarantola, S., 2008. Global Sensitivity
Analysis: The Primer. Wiley.com, Chichester, West Sussex.
Sarma, M., Sahai, V., Bisaria, V., 2009. Genetic algorithm-based
medium optimization for enhanced production of fluorescent
pseudomonad R81 and siderophore. Biochem. Eng. J. 47,
100–108.
Sha, W., Edwards, K., 2007. The use of artificial neural networks in
materials science based research. Mater. Des. 28,
1747–1752.
Shetty, G.R., Chellam, S., 2003. Predicting membrane fouling
during municipal drinking water nanofiltration using artificial
neural networks. J. Membr. Sci. 217, 69–86.
Shokrian, M., Sadrzadeh, M., Mohammadi, T., 2010. C3H8
separation from CH4 and H2 using a synthesized PDMS
membrane: experimental and neural network modeling. J.
Membr. Sci. 346, 59–70.
Soleimani, R., Shoushtari, N.A., Mirza, B., Salahi, A., 2013.
Experimental investigation modeling and optimization of
membrane separation using artificial neural network and
multi-objective optimization using genetic algorithm. Chem.
Eng. Res. Des. 91, 883–903.
Suchacz, B., Wesołowski, M., 2006. The recognition of similarities
in trace elements content in medicinal plants using MLP and
RBF neural networks. Talanta 69, 37–42.
Trussell, R.S., Merlo, R.P., Hermanowicz, S.W., Jenkins, D., 2006.
The effect of organic loading on process performance and
membrane fouling in a submerged membrane bioreactor
treating municipal wastewater. Water Res. 40,
2675–2683.
Ueda, T., Hata, K., Kikuoka, Y., Seino, O., 1997. Effects of aeration
on suction pressure in a submerged membrane bioreactor.
Water Res. 31, 489–494.
Vaca Mier, M., López Callejas, R., Gehr, R., Jiménez Cisneros, B.E.,
Alvarez, P.J., 2001. Heavy metal removal with mexican
clinoptilolite:: multi-component ionic exchange. Water Res.
35, 373–378.
Venayagamoorthy, G.K., 2007. Online design of an echo state
network based wide area monitor for a multimachine power
system. Neural Netw. 20, 404–413.
Verrecht, B., Maere, T., Nopens, I., Brepols, C., Judd, S., 2010. The
cost of a large-scale hollow fibre MBR. Water Res. 44,
5274–5283.
Wallhäußer, E., Hussein, W.B., Hussein, M.A., Hinrichs, J., Becker,
T.M., 2011. On the usage of acoustic properties combined with
an artificial neural network—a new approach of determining
presence of dairy fouling. J. Food Eng. 103,
449–456.
Wang, X., Chen, Y., Zhang, J., Li, X., Ren, Y., 2013. Novel insights
into the evaluation of submerged membrane bioreactors
under different aeration intensities by carbon emission.
Desalination 325, 25–29.
Weiss, J., Bernardara, P., Andreewsky, M., Benoit, M., 2012.
Seasonal autoregressive modeling of a skew storm surge
series. Ocean Modell. 47, 41–54.
Xi, X., Cui, Y., Wang, Z., Qian, J., Wang, J., Yang, L., Zhao, S., 2011.
Study of dead-end microfiltration features in sequencing
batch reactor (SBR) by optimized neural networks.
Desalination 272, 27–35.
Zarragoitia-González, A., Schetrite, S., Alliet, M., Jáuregui-Haza,
U., Albasi, C., 2008. Modelling of submerged membrane
bioreactor: conceptual study about link between activated
slugde biokinetics, aeration and fouling process. J. Membr. Sci.
325, 612–624.
Zhu, X., Wang, Z., Wu, Z., 2011. Characterization of membrane
foulants in a full-scale membrane bioreactor for supermarket
wastewater treatment. Process Biochem. 46, 1001–1009.