4.7 Article

Role of dissolved organic matters (DOM) in membrane fouling of membrane bioreactors for municipal wastewater treatment

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 178, 期 1-3, 页码 377-384

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.01.090

关键词

Dissolved organic matter (DOM); DOM fraction; Membrane bioreactor (MBR); Membrane fouling; Wastewater treatment

资金

  1. Key Special Program on the S&T for the Pollution Control and Treatment of Water Bodies [2008ZX07316-002, 2008ZX07101-003]
  2. Chinese Stake Key Laboratory of Pollution Control and Resource Reuse for Young Scholars [PCRRY08005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Two membrane bioreactors (MBRs) with different operation conditions were employed to investigate the role of dissolved organic matter (DOM) in membrane fouling. DOM characteristics and their correlations with membrane fouling in the MBR systems were studied by using three-dimensional excitation-emission matrix (EEM) fluorescence technology, gel filtration chromatography (GFC) analysis, and column chromatographic method for DOM fractionation, etc. The three-dimensional EEM fluorescence spectroscopy analysis indicated that the fluorescence intensity of protein-like peaks in DOM samples collected from the MBR zones showed positive correlations with membrane fouling. The fluorescence spectra of membrane foulants also exhibited two protein-like peaks, confirming that proteins played an important role in membrane fouling. The DOM samples collected from MBR zones were fractionated into four components, i.e., hydrophobic (HPO), transphilic (TPI), charged hydrophilic (HPI-C) and neutral hydrophilic fractions (HPI-N). It was found that HPI-N was the most abundant fraction in all the samples, accounting for 42.0-48.9% of the total DOM. Test results also showed that HPI-N had the highest fouling potential, which could be attributed to the high molecular weight (MW) distribution and the high membrane rejection rate of macromolecules. (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据