This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Inna Garuda Hotel, Yogyakarta, Indonesia 6 – 8 November 2012
Consideration of selection floating roof model for biogas digester mass construction on household scale
Satriyo Krido Wahono*
Technical Implementation Unit for Development of Chemical Engineering Processes Indonesian Institutes of Sciences, Yogyakarta 55861, Indonesia Received 9 July 2012; accepted 11 October 2012
Abstract One of the alternative energy sources being developed in Indonesia today is biogas from organic waste, particularly dung from the farm. The commonly used model construction is dome, balloon and floating roof models. Dome construction was mostly built, but at mass amounts dome construction was found some obstacles. The evaluation of models of biogas digester construction can be done through the assessment of construction management factors (cost-quality-time) and another construction factors such as labor expertise, ease of design, lifetime and maintenance of construction. Based on the evaluation of an assessment of these factors using matrix consideration, floating roof model have the highest consideration than other models. Therefore, Floating roof model of biogas digester construction can be used as recommendations for the working reference on household scale construction procurement mass on another various site and construction activities.
Keywords: biogas digester; floating roof models; household scale; mass construction; construction management factors; matrix considerations.
Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Research Centre for Electrical Power and Mechatronics, Indonesian Institute of Sciences
1. Introduction Indonesia is a country with rich agricultural potential, one of which is a farms resource. They have potential for food resource, also has potential as energy source by utilization of livestock dung into biogas. Biogas that has been widely used in the community comes from cows dung as raw material. Biogas is made by feeding cow dung from the stables to the mixing tub. After evenly, the mixture was put in a digester tank through the input pipe. The formation of methane from biogas mainly sludge (activated sludge) is influenced by the activity of microorganisms in the reactor/digester. The process of biogas formation is influenced by several factors such as anaerobic conditions, substrate, pH, temperature, agitation, moisture content, solids concentration, C/N ratio, toxic materials, and length of fermentation substrate in the digester [1, 2]. Biogas has main gas composition is methane (CH4) on 40-75%; most of residual gas is carbon dioxide (CO2); and another gas in little such as Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S), Water Vapors (H2O), Nitrogen (N2), Hydrogen (H2) and Oxygen (O2)
* Corresponding author: Tel: +62-274-392570 E-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
[3, 4, 5]. Furthermore, biogas is expected to be one of the alternative solutions. Biogas technology has been developed in many countries, such as Denmark since the 1970's; China and India since the 1980's [6, 7]. Biogas can be utilized for the generation of heat and electricity, vehicle fuel, injection into the gas piping and converted into another chemical . On the other hand, biogas process residues can be used as a high quality fertilizer. Without the involvement of waste treatment technologies, methane as waste decomposition will naturally come off and pollute the atmosphere because methane is included in the greenhouse gas. Due to some reason before, it can be concluded that biogas technology also includes environmental friendly technologies as well as alternative energy sources. Based on the benefits of biogas, some biogas construction procurement activities have been undertaken in various places on single construction (small amounts) or mass construction. Model construction of biogas digester commonly used for construction activities is fixed dome model. The implementation of this model need skilled and experienced construction workers to constructing good biogas digester. In a single digester construction, the manufacture of biogas digester has conducted nicely because constructed and supervised by expert workers directly and continuously. However, for mass construction,
© 2013 Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Research Centre for Electrical Power and Mechatronics Available online at http://www.icseea.org
Replacing this placeholder balloon models. but to use biogas cooking has resulted in an adequate specification. 1. There are several models of biogas construction that has been developed with reference to the basic construction of three models. and the construction maintenance. The study was conducted by supporting from the literature to produce a paper that is not only objective. Indonesia. dome has advantages in terms of "quality". Therefore. because of the simple construction the cost for this model is also lower than others. lifetime and maintenance of construction. This model has the difficulty of construction is more simple than dome. the construction workers. such as dome. These conditions can be met by making the construction much shut. Based on three considerations before (CTQ). Using floating tank construction model was method to optimize utilization and improve the success of biogas digester which was built through mass construction activity.Wahono / Proceeding of ICSEEA (2012) 41– 44 uniformity of the digester construction standards was difficult to achieve. All three models have been proven to produce biogas for cooking fuel specification purposes. before using an iron plate into fiberglass. and internet. Based on three considerations before (CTQ). Ballon model design International Conference on Sustainable Energy Engineering and Application (ICSEEA) Inna Garuda Hotel. The main requirement that must be met for producing biogas is the anaerobic fermentation conditions [1. proceedings. applicable but also provide recommendations on the reference in accordance with the conditions in the field. 2. In terms of “quality” that seen from the result of biogas pressure. construction age of floating roof models are 2. Data and information process was conducted by analyzing the data and information into an essay. other factors that can be reviewed are the age of the tools. the evaluation of biogas digester construction models can be done through another construction factors such as labor expertise. but more difficult than balloon. This research and study would give recommendation about the most appropriate model of construction for using in household biogas digester scale particularly in mass construction activity. research reports/activities. so it’s commonly chosen. However. the construction design. journals. The purpose of this paper provides a consideration of successful construction for household-scale biogas digesters using some construction models that already exist. UPT BPPTK LIPI has been applied floating roof models and established since 2006. their constructions can be considered based on cost. Fixed dome model design Fig. but in manufacture requires high costs and needs skilled-experienced construction workers to ensure successfully construction. the balloon model and floating roof model construction was feasible to be used and developed as a solution of the problem. Methods The process of collecting data and information related to biogas was conducted by searching data sources such as books. this model has advantages in terms of "cost" and "Time". Moreover. Floating roof model has considered the CTQ factors between two other models. this model has a comparatively tool lifetime is much shorter than the others because the reservoir tools are prone leakage. The focus of the discussion was the consideration of factors affecting the success of digester construction and fields observations related to the digester that can be utilized by the community. The model have ability to produce biogas with higher pressure than other models. balloons and floating roof/tank . Surabaya and Bandung). In addition. plastic reservoirs parts is quite difficult to obtain because it is hard to get in general market (only supplied in big city such as Jakarta.K. Yogyakarta. time and quality (CTQ). it will produce exceed biogas specification requirements because don’t need high pressure. so in terms of “cost” and “time” better than the dome and worse than balloons. Balloon model is the simplest model and faster construction time than others as can be seen at figure 2. crushed. With the modification of gasholder.42 S. In the other hands when construction was broken. ease of design. Selection of floating roof model digester Dome model is commonly used by the public as can be seen at figure 1. this model also has a resistance between the other two models. and makers biogas digester were also undertaken. observations of the locations of the biogas digester construction and interviews of the users Fig. Leaks can occur due to the influence of weather or surrounding objects (impaled. Based on the age factor construction. it is difficult to repair by users and expertise is needed to conduct. But in household scale with limited use for cooking. In addition for CTQ factors consideration for floating roof model which mentioned above. Based on the principles of construction management. 6 – 7 November 2012 . In addition. better than the balloon but slightly worse than dome. In addition. 3. this model produces biogas which is better than balloon and worse than dome. 9]. etc). so many construction was poor and fail to function.
Based on the maintenance construction factor. the highest score was obtained a model of a floating roof. this model was the easiest maintenance digester if there are problems / damage / leakage in the future. It was done for increasing pressure of the gas holder into biogas result and for longer usage time. or producing 1 m3 of biogas per day requires 100 kg of cow dung as much or as dung production of 4-5 cows. the position consideration factor of this model are between the others. especially in setting workmanship standards. The design of floating roof model can be seen in Figure 3.7% of body weight . while the construction of digester floating roof models with iron plate gas holder and fibreglass gas holder can be seen in figure 4 and 5 respectively. Iron plate construction Fig. 4.01 m3 of biogas per day. From the gas production estimation.S. Floating roof model construction underused by the public because of CTQ and other construction factors for this model is not in a dominant position (not the best or the worst). It is possible to obtain the optimum point when compared with the other models. Floating roof construction was relatively easier implemented and understood by the contractor (biogas maker) or farmer (biogas users). Fiberglass construction Indonesian Institute of Sciences. the model of floating roof construction was feasible to be applied in the mass construction of biogas digester. Digester tank and gas holder were made in one place for costs saving and land using efficiency. It means. Floating roof model design relatively similar with dome model because of corrosion has minimized. It can be repaired by removing case gas tank/gasholder and drain the contents of the digester to find the problem and then solve it. Other Factor Lifetime 3 3 1 Labor 1 3 3 Design 1 3 3 Maintenance 1 3 2 Total 11 18 16 Note : 1 = less. 5. Dung was converted into biogas by converting 300 kgs of dung into 170 m3 of biogas within 60 days . The plate has the minimum thickness on 2 mm and adds weight on the top of gas holder. when measured using a matrix of considerations which can be seen in table 1.6 to 1. Digester capacities were built based on the amount of cattle dung and its residence time in the digester. Construction of floating roof model consists of two parts. Every day cattle excrete fresh dung as much as 5-8% of the weight. The optimum residence time for producing biogas and good quality organic fertilizer is 1020 days. namely the digester tank and the gas holder as floating roof/tank. Whereas. floating roof model was relatively better Table 1 Matrix selection considerations of biogas digester construction models o Models Management Cost 1 2 3 Dome Floating Roof Ballons 1 2 3 Quality 3 2 1 Time 1 2 3 judgment than others. to create biogas digester with this model requires no special expertise for the design of simple construction and can be done by ordinary construction workers.K. Therefore. quality control and construction utilization indicators. each kg of cow dung can be converted into 0. Dry matter dung was produced per day in 0. Research Centre for Electrical Power and Mechatronics . Based on the factors of construction workers and construction design. it was also estimated gas holder requirement capacity. while the gas holder made of metal or fibreglass plate.Wahono / Proceeding of ICSEEA (2012) 41 – 44 43 Biogas Outlet Dung Inlet Gas Holder Sludge Outlet Digester Fig. 3 = well Fig. 2 = quite. The digester tank wall was made of waterproof concrete. Based on the scores in the matrix of considerations in table 1. 3. This results which is based on more proper consideration. Materials were chosen with consideration of safety and tool lifetime.
Handbook of Organic Waste Conversion. Small / Medium Scale Biogas Reactor (Part One). Arifin.com. China Biogas. 2007  Raven. ISSN: 1411-4216. www. FTI Chemical Engineering . 2007  M. Animal Waste Utilization Potential Beef Cattle Through Biogas Technology for Rural People's Alternative Energy Sources in The Marginal LandCase Studies in the Village of Bandung Gunungkidul. Washington D. ISSN 1410-5667. Yogyakarta. Integrated Farming System Team. Beijing.org. Bewick.ITS. The Vegetable Waste was Converted into Biogas as Renewable Alternative Energy. Biogas. Institute of Science in Society Press Release 02/10/06. Van Nostrand Reinhold. Wahono and P. 2003  J. Semarang. Chemical and Environmental Technology Team for support of facilities in this research. 2005  Yuli Setyo I. Indonesia. Monnet. Chemical Engineering – Diponegoro University. ISTECS. W. Recent Developments in Biogas Technology for Poverty Reduction and Sustainable Development. Matter 1. F. 1981 Ramli Tahir and Mustafa. C. Proceedings of National Seminar and Conference CFP V FAM-PII. The Netherlands. 2006. F. M. et al. Byrom. 1980  Andi Febrisiantosa. Yogyakarta. Juliastuti. Green Alternative Energy. I. 2006  R. 6 – 7 November 2012 . Proceedings of National Seminar on Fundamentals and Applications of Chemical Engineering. The Effect of αamylase enzyme and EM-4 against the establishment of Biogas from Tapioca Solid Waste. Proceedings of National Seminar on Chemistry and Process Engineering. Japan. Biogas plants in Denmark: Successes and Setbacks.  International Conference on Sustainable Energy Engineering and Application (ICSEEA) Inna Garuda Hotel. New York. Perdana and S.beritaiptek. S.i-sis. Bioenergy Technology. et al.44 S. National Academy Press.al. United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific. References  George Bughiarello. 2006  E. Institute for Agricultural Technology (BPTP). Hambali. R. Remade Scotland. Eindhoven University of Technology. K. 2007  F.uk.Wahono / Proceeding of ICSEEA (2012) 41– 44 4. 2005  Li Kang Min and Mae-Wan Ho. Conclusion Floating roof model of biogas digester construction can be used as recommendations for the working reference on household scale mass construction procurement on another various site and construction activities Acknowledgement The author are thankful to UPT BPPTK LIPI Yogyakarta as a place for my development competency especially for Alternative Energy Team. Surabaya. An Introduction to Anaerobic Digestion of Organic Waste. ISBN: 979-25-8870. Harrison Brown and Fletcher L. Agro Media Library. Central Java. et. www.K. P. Pudjiono. Energy for Rural Development (Renewable Resource and Alternative Technologies for Developing Countries). Ungaran. 2008  United Nations Asian and Pacific Centre for Agricultural Engineering and Machinery. Pramono Muryanto.