4.5 Article

Nutrient conditions and reactor configuration influence floc size distribution and settling properties

Journal

WATER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 65, Issue 1, Pages 156-163

Publisher

IWA PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.2166/wst.2011.849

Keywords

activated sludge; aggregation; bioreactor; dairy processing wastewater; extracellular polysaccharide polymer; flocculation; particle size distribution

Funding

  1. New Economy Research Fund (NERF) [UOAX0304]
  2. University of Auckland

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Floc formation and settleability is critical for effective solid-liquid separation in many wastewater treatment processes. This study aimed to investigate the relationship between particle size distribution and nutrient conditions in different bioreactor configurations. Size distribution profiles of flocs that formed in continuous (B1), continuous with clarifier and return sludge (B2) and SBR (B3) reactors were investigated in parallel under identical nutrient conditions. An eight-fold dilution of the influent COD of a synthetic dairy processing wastewater resulted in a 'feast and famine' regime that triggered significant effects on the biomass and flocculation characteristics. Floc size analysis of reactor MLSS revealed a shift in floc sizes when reactors were fed with the minimum (famine) COD wastewater feed (0.61 g L-1). Increasing floc size distributions were detected for all reactors during the minimum COD feed although different size patterns were observed for different reactor configurations. These increases corresponded with variations in aggregation and EPS quantities. The SBR yielded comparatively larger flocs when operated under both COD feeds as indicated by d(0.9) values (90% of particles <= d in size). Overall the results indicated that floc formation and floc size are mediated by nutrient concentrations and represents an important step towards improved solid-liquid separation.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available