4.7 Article

A pilot-scale study of a down-flow hanging sponge reactor as a post-treatment for domestic wastewater treatment system at short hydraulic retention times

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jwpe.2022.103313

关键词

Domestic wastewater; Post -treatment; DHS reactor; Escherichia coli; Arcobacter spp

资金

  1. National Institute for Environmental Studies
  2. NIES Research Funding (Type A)
  3. Grant for Environmental Research Projects of the Sumitomo Foundation [184011]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study introduces a novel post-treatment process for sewage treatment systems, the down-flow hanging sponge (DHS) reactor. Through a pilot-scale experiment, it is demonstrated that the DHS reactor can effectively remove suspended solids, biochemical oxygen demand, and ammonium nitrogen in sewage, as well as reduce the concentration of fecal indicator bacterium Escherichia coli and potentially pathogenic bacterial group Arcobacter spp. under relatively short hydraulic retention times (HRT).
This study proposes a down-flow hanging sponge (DHS) reactor as a post-treatment process for sewage treatment systems. A pilot-scale DHS reactor was operated over 1000 days under relatively short hydraulic retention times (HRT) of 1-3 h to evaluate its effectiveness as a post-treatment technology. The DHS reactor consistently ach-ieved superior effluent water quality with total suspended solid <10 mg/L, biochemical oxygen demand < 10 mg/L, and ammonium nitrogen < 5 mg/L. The effective removals (> 2-log10 reduction) of Escherichia coli, a fecal contaminant indicator, and Arcobacter spp., a potentially pathogenic bacterial group, were achieved. The treatment performance was compared with the previous operation treating raw domestic wastewater under long HRTs of 4 and 5 h. As a result, the DHS reactor under short HRT conditions showed advantages for biological oxidation and fecal contaminant removal. These results indicate that the DHS reactor could be a compact post-treatment technology.

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