4.7 Article

Performance and model of a full-scale up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) to treat the pharmaceutical wastewater containing 6-APA and amoxicillin

期刊

JOURNAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
卷 185, 期 2-3, 页码 905-913

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.09.106

关键词

Up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB); Pharmaceutical wastewater; 6-APA; Amoxicillin; Simulation model

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [50908062]
  2. National Key Technology R&D Program in the 11th Five year Plan of china [2008BADC4B01]
  3. State Key Laboratory of Urban Water Resource and Environment [HIT-QAK201003]
  4. Harbin innovation Science Foundation for Youths [2008RFQXS023]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A full-scale test was conducted with an up-flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) pre-treating pharmaceutical wastewater containing 6-aminopenicillanic acid (6-APA) and amoxicillin. The aim of the study is to investigate the performance of UASB in the condition of a high chemical oxygen demand (COD) loading rate from 12.57 to 21.02 kg m(-3) d(-1) and a wide pH from 5.57 to 8.26, in order to provide a reference for treating the similar chemical synthetic pharmaceutical wastewater containing 6-APA and amoxicillin. The results demonstrated that the UASB average percentage reduction in COD, 6-APA and amoxicillin were 52.2%, 26.3% and 21.6%, respectively. In addition, three models, built on the back propagation neural network (BPNN) theory and linear regression techniques were developed for the simulation of the UASB system performance in the biodegradation of pharmaceutical wastewater containing 6-APA and amoxicillin. The average error of COD, 6-APA and amoxicillin were -0.63%, 2.19% and 5.40%, respectively. The results indicated that these models built on the BPNN theory were well-fitted to the detected data, and were able to simulate and predict the removal of COD, 6-APA and amoxicillin by UASB. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by 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