7-5

MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR
PROCESSES FOR
SECONDARY TREATMENT
Membrane filtration processes
 Filtration
◦ Separation of particulate and colloidal matter from a liquid
 Membrane filtration
◦ Range of particle size includes dissolved constitutes
 0.0001 to 1.o µm
 Membrane – selective barrier
Membrane bioreactor
 Coupling a biological reactor with a membrane system
◦ Enhanced organic and suspended solids removal
 Conventional treatment operations can be eliminated (secondary
clarifier)
◦ Overall space requirement and facilities cost can be reduced
◦ Small footprint – MRB plants to be located in sites with
limited area or satellite treatment applications
Description of MBR
Fig 7-12 General types of
membrane bioreactors:
(a) With external
pressure-driven
membrane
(b) Integrated
submerged,
(c) With external
submerged,
(d) With external
submerged rotating
membrane

Low-pressure membrane
system (MF or UF)
for solid liquid
separation
Description of MBR
 Advantages over conventional clarifiers:

1. Ancillary facilities are much smaller;

2. Higher quality product water can be obtained
3. Increased MLSS produces a more stable sludge that is
less susceptible to upset
4. In small MBR plants, return sludge system can be
eliminated or greatly reduced
5. Systems are simpler to operate
Microfiltration or Ultrafiltration membrane

 MF or UF membrane
◦ Flat sheet (FS)
◦ Fine hollow fiber (HF)
◦ (multi) Tubular form (MT)
◦ Spiral-wound (SW)
Tubular form

Spiral-wound
Hollow fiber
Hollow fiber
Spiral wound
Kubota membrane (flat sheet)
Suitability of MBRs for Reclaimed Water
applications
1. A high level of water quality is produced
consistently
2. Compact size
MBR can be sited close to the points of potential users
3. Membrane units have small pore sizes (0.04-0.4μm)
product water low in BOD, TSS, turbidity and bacteria
4. Product water suitable for a variety of reclaimed
water applications
5. Nutrient removal (places where N must be
controlled)
Types of membrane bioreactor systems
Types of membrane bioreactor systems
 Type-1: integrated submerged membranes
installed in fixed module

 Advantage
◦ Can be installed in an existing aeration tank
 Save space
Vacuum up to 50kPa
Types of membrane bioreactor systems
 Type-2: fixed membrane modules installed in an
external membrane separation vessel

 Advantage
◦ Can be designed to utilize fine pores diffusers in the
aeration tank to improve energy efficiency, and coarse
bubble diffusers in the membrane compartment for
membrane scouring and fouling control
Types of membrane bioreactor systems
 Type-3: rotating membrane modules

 Advantage:
◦ Can utilize rotation of the membrane modules to assist
in membrane fouling control and minimize air
requirement for coarse bubble diffusers
◦ Can also be submerged in aeration tank
Comparison with conventional suspended
growth
1. MBRs operates at higher suspended solids
concentration
◦ Reactor hydraulic retentiont time (HRT) are short
 Reduced reactor size
2. Longer SRT ( in order 2-3 times than conventional)
◦ Less sludge production
◦ More stable operation
◦ Less chances for process upsets
3. Simultaneous nitrification-denitification can be
achieved
When longer SRT combined with low DO in bioreactor
Disadvantages of MBRs
 High capital costs for the membrane modules
 Limited data on membrane life
◦ Thus a potential high recurring cost of periodic
membrane replacement
 Higher energy costs due to membrane
scouring as compared to conventional suspended-
growth processes
 Potential membrane fouling that affects the
ability to treat design flows
 Waste sludge from eh membrane process may
be more difficult to dewater
 Characteristics of popular membrane
modules

Manufacturer Pore size Type Size Flux

(m) (mm) (L/m2/hr)

Kubota 0.4 Flat sheet, MF 1000 x 490 25

Mitsubishi 0.4 Hollow fiber, MF 1000 x 400 30

Zenon 0.035 Hollow fiber, UF 2155x820 30

 Analysis and design of membrane bioreactor
processes
 Flux – the flow of liquid through a specific
membrane surface area is called flux
permeate flow [l/h]
Flux [l/(m .h)] 
2

membrane surface area [m 2 ]

◦ MBRs generally operates at fluxes between 10
– 100 LMH
  Trans-membrane pressure (TMP)

Trans  membrane pressure TMP [bar]  static pressure [bar] - dynamic pressure [bar]

Static pressure at zero permeate flow

Dynamic pressure with permeate flow
 Wastewater Characterization
Table 8-1 Metcaf and eddy
Example of typical domestic wastewater characterization parameters and typical values
Component Concentration, mg/L
COD 430
BOD 190
TSS 210
VSS 160
TKN 40
NH4-N 25
NO3-N 0
Total phosphorus 7
Alkalinity 200 (as CaCO3)
Typical medium-strength wastewater in the United States
 Carbonaceous
constituents

Nitrogenous
constituents

Suspended and
volatile solids
Wastewater Characterization
1. Carbonaceous constituents

nbVSS

MetCalf and Eddy Figure 8-4

Fraction wastewater the COD. Information on fractions is used in the detailed
design of activated sludge Processes
Wastewater Characterization
2. Nitrogenous constituents
Analysis and design of membrane bioreactor
processes
 Key wastewater constituents
Analysis and design of membrane bioreactor
processes
 Water quality issues
◦ Both influent and effluent
◦ Characteristics of the feed stream to MBRs are
important
 Affect the design and performance of the bioreactor and
membrane
◦ Effluent water quality requirements affect the need for
chemical pretreatment or posttreatment
Analysis and design of membrane bioreactor
processes
Wastewater constituents that affect the performance of membrane bioreactor
Analysis and design of membrane bioreactor
processes (Table 7-16)
 Kinetic equations
Table 17-7: Activated sludge design coefficients for
heterotriphic bacteria at 20oC
Table 17-8: Activated sludge design
nitrification coefficients for at 20oC
Biological solids production
 For process control
 For design of subsequent solids processing
facilities

(1) Estimating biosolids production based on

published data
(2) Estimating biosolids production based on kinetic
coefficient
Biological solids production
 Estimating biosolids production based on
published data
Biological solids production
Estimating biosolids production based on
kinetic coefficient eq 7-27

Where Px, VSS= total mass of volatile suspended solids produced per day , kg
VSS/day
Y= heterotrophic biomass yield, g biomass produced/g substrate utilized

g VSS/g VSS.d
Estimating biosolids production based on
kinetic coefficient
 Total mass of dry solids wasted per day
◦ Include influent inert TSS fraction
 (TSS includes VSS plus inorganic solids)
Example 7-3 (Water reuse)

Determine the solids produced in a conventional activated sludge reactor that

treats 18,900 m3/d of primary effluent and compare the results to those
produced in an MBR. The reactors are designed for BOD removal only. The
following wastewater characteristics apply:
Constituent Concentration,
The following design conditions and s g/m3
assumptions apply: BOD 140
1. The SRT for the activated sludge process is sBOD 70
5 d and the SRT for the MBR is 15 d
COD 300
2. The aeration basin mixed-liquor
sCOD 132
temperature is 12oC
rbCOD 80
3. Use the kinetic coefficient from table 17-7
TSS 70
4. bCOD/BOD=1.6
VSS 60
Note: g/m3= mg/L
Solution (ASP)
1.Develop wastewater characteristics and calculate the mass
of VSS and TSS in the aeration basin of the activated sludge
process
a. Develop wastewater characteristics
i. Find bCOD using eq 7-4
bCOD = So = 1.6 (BOD)
= 1.6 (140 g/m3) = 224 g/m3

ii. Find nbVSS using eq 7-1

bpCOD bCOD / BODBOD  sBOD

pCOD COD  sCOD

bpCOD 1.6BOD / BODBOD  sBOD  bpCOD 1.6BOD  sBOD

 
pCOD COD  sCOD pCOD COD  sCOD


bpCOD 1.6140  70g / m3
  0.67

pCOD 
300  132g / m3 

nbVSS  1  0.67 60gVSS / m3  20g / m3 
.solution (ASP)
iii.Find iTSS using eq 7-7
iTSS= TSS-VSS= (70-60)g/m3 = 10 g/m3

iv. Determine S, the concentration of growth limiting substrate in

solution, using eq 17-7 in table 7-16
K s 1  k d SRT 
S Note that Yk= μm
SRT Yk  k d   1
μm= 6.0 g/g.d; Ks= 20g/m3, kd= 0.12 g/g.d

Determine μm at 12oC using  = 1.07  m ,T   m , 20o c T  20  6.0g / g  d 1.07 

12  20
 3.5g / g.d

Determine kd at T=12oC using  = 1.04 k d ,T  k d , 20o c T  20  0.12 g / g  d 1.04 12 20  0.088 g / g.d

20g / m3 1  0.088g / g  d 5d 

S  1.8g bCOD/m3
5d3.5  0.088g / g  d   1
.. Solution (ASP)
b. Determine mass of VSS and TSS in the activated sludge
reactor.
i. Determine the daily biomass production using part
(A) and Part (B) in eq 7-27. The term (C) = 0 as there is
no nitrification, and the term (D) is not considered as the
nbVSS is not part of the biological solids produced in the
reactor. Use Y =0.4 g VSS/g bCOD and fd = 0.15
QYSo  S1kg / 103 g  (f d )(k d )QYSo  SSRT 1kg / 103 g 
PX ,VSS  
1  (k d )SRT 1  (k d )SRT

PX ,VSS 
 
(18,900m 3 / d)0.4g / g 224  1.8 1kg / 103 g

1  (0.088g / g.d)5d

(0.15g / g)(0.088g / g.d)(18,900m 3 / d)0.4g / g 224  1.85d 1kg / 103 g 
1  (0.088g / g.d)5d

PX ,VSS  1166 .5kg / d  77 .0kg / d  1243 .5kgVSS / d

…solution (ASP)
ii. Determine mass of VSS in the aeration tank using eq 7-
19 in table 7-16
Mass of VSS in the aeration tank = (XVSS)(V)=PX,VSS (SRT)
Determine PX,VSS using eq 7-27 for term (A), (B), and (D).The term
(D) is included as the nbVSS contributes to the overall VSS
budget.
From eq 7-27, PX,VSS is:
PX ,VSS  1243.5kgVSS / d  Q(nbVSS )(1kg / 103 g )
PX ,VSS  1243.5kg / d  (18,900m 3 / d )(20 g / m 3 )(1kg / 103 g )
PX ,VSS  (1243.5  378)kg / d  1621.5kg / d

Calculate the mass of VSS in the aeration tank

Mass of VSS in the aeration tank = PX,VSS (SRT)=1621.5kg/d*5d=8107.5kg
….solution (ASP)
iii.Determine the mass of TSS in the aeration tank using eq 7-20
in Table 7-16
Mass = (XTSS)(V) = PX,TSS(SRT)
From eq 7-28, PX,TSS is:

PX ,TSS 
1243.5kg / d   (378kg / d )  Q(TSS
o  VSSo )
0.85
 1463kg / d  (378kg / d )  18900m 3 / d (10mg / L)(1kg / 103 g )
 2030kg / d

Calculate the mass of TSS in the aeration tank

Mass of TSS in the aeration tank = (PX,TSS)SRT
MLTSS= (2030kg/d)(5d) = 10,150 kg
…..solution (MBR)
2. Develop wastewater characteristics and
calculate the mass of VSS and TSS for and MBR.
Use a computation procedures similar to Step-1.
a. Develop the wastewater characteristics
So= 224 g/m3 (from Step 1a)
Compute S following the same procedure as Step 1a-iv
using SRT = 15d

20 g / m3 1  0.088g / g  d 15d 
S  1.3g bCOD/m3
15d 3.5  0.088g / g  d   1
……solution (MBR)
b. Determine mass of VSS and TSS in MBR.
i. Substitute values in eq 7-27 for term (A) and (B) and solve for
the biological solids production component of PX,VSS
QYSo  S1kg / 103 g  (f d )(k d )QYSo  SSRT 1kg / 103 g 
PX ,VSS  
1  (k d )SRT 1  (k d )SRT

PX ,VSS 

(18,900m3 / d )0.4 g / g 224  1.3 1kg / 103 g


1  (0.088g / g.d )(15d )

(0.15 g / g )(0.088g / g.d )(18,900m3 / d )0.4 g / g 224  1.8(15d ) 1kg / 103 g 
1  (0.088g / g.d )(15d )

PX ,VSS  (725 .7 kg / d  143 .7 kg / d )  869 .3kgVSS / d

…….solution (MBR)
ii. Determine mass of VSS in the MBRusing eq 7-19 in
table 7-16
Mass of VSS in the aeration tank = (XVSS)(V)=PX,VSS (SRT)
Determine PX,VSS using eq 7-27 for term (A), (B), and (D). The term
(D) is included as the nbVSS contributes to the overall VSS
budget.
From eq 7-27, PX,VSS is:
PX ,VSS  1243.5kgVSS / d  Q(nbVSS )(1kg / 103 g )
PX ,VSS  869.4kg / d  (18,900m 3 / d )(20 g / m 3 )(1kg / 103 g )
PX ,VSS  (869.3  378)kg / d  1247.5kg / d

Calculate the mass of VSS in the aeration tank

Mass of VSS in the aeration tank = PX,VSS
(SRT)=1247.5kg/d*15d=18,711kg
……..solution (MBR)
iii.Determine the mass of TSS in the MBR using eq 7-20 in Table
7-16
Mass = (XTSS)(V) = PX,TSS(SRT)
From eq 7-28, PX,TSS is:

PX ,TSS 
869.4kg / d   (378kg / d )  Q(TSS
o  VSSo )
0.85
 1022.8kg / d  (378kg / d )  18900m 3 / d (10mg / L)(1kg / 103 g )
 1589.8kg / d

Calculate the mass of TSS in the aeration tank

Mass of TSS in the aeration tank = (PX,TSS)SRT
MLTSS= (1589.8kg/d)(15d) = 23,847kg
……..solution (MBR)
3. Summarize results
Parameter Units Activated Membrane
sludge bioreactor
Daily biological solids production kgVSS/d 1243.5 869.4

Mass of daily VSS produced in the kgVSS/d 1621.5 1247.8

aeration tank and bioreactor and
influent VSSa
SRT d 5 15

Total mass of VSS in reactor kgVSS/d 8107.5 18,711

Total mass of TSS in reactor kgVSS/d 10,150 23,847

Example 7-4: compare the area requirement (Footprint) of
an activated sludge plant to that of a membrane bioreactor
facility
Compute the space requirements for a conventional
activated sludge plant and an MBR treatment system
using the wastewater characteristics and solids
production determined in example 7-3. The space
requirements for preliminary and primary treatment
are assumed to be the same for both plants and are
not included in the example. The plants are designed
to meet an effluent BOD of less than 30 g/m3. For the
activated sludge process, secondary clarifier are to be
used. For an MBR, an allowance equal to 35% of the
aeration tank volume is provided for installation of
the membrane units in a separate compartment. The
following design conditions apply:
 Example 7-4: compare the area requirement (Footprint) of
an activated sludge plant to that of a membrane bioreactor
facility
Process parameters
Process unit/Parameter Units Conventional Membrane
activated sludge bioreactor
Average flowrate m3/d 18,900 18,900
Aeration tank
Solid retention time (SRT) d 5 15
MLSS (XTSS) g/m3 3000 10,000
Mass of TSS (exp 7-3) Kg/d 10,150 23,847
Depth of tank M 5 5
Secondary clarifier
Hydraulic application rate m3/m2.d 22 N/A
Membrane compartment 35%of the
Area allowance for membrane aeration tank
installation volume
Solution
1. For a conventional activated sludge plant
a. Determine the aeration tank volume

(V)(XTSS) = 10, 150 kg/d

At XTSS= 3000 g/m3
10,150kg 103 g / kg 
V  3383m3
(3000 g / m3 )
b. Determine surface area of aeration tank
A=V/d = (3383m3)/5m = 667 m2
. Solution
c. Determine hydraulic retention time
aeration tank 3
V (3383m )(24h / d )
   4.30h
Q (18,900m3 / d )
d. Determine surface area of clarifier
Area 
18,900m / d   859m
3
2

22m / m .d 
3 2

e. Total surface area of aeration tank + clarifier

AreaT= 667m2+859m2= 1536 m2
..solution
2. For an MBR:
a. Determine the aeration tank volume
(V)(XTSS) = 23,847kg/d
At XTSS= 10,000 g/m3
23,847kg 103 g / kg 
V  2385m3
(10,000 g / m3 )

b. Determine surface area of aeration tank

A=V/d = (2385m3)/5m = 447 m2
c. Determine aeration tank hydraulic retention time

V (2385m3 )(24h / d )
   3.02h
Q (18,900m3 / d )

d. Determine surface area of membrane tank

Area= 0.35 x 447m2= 167m2

e. Determine surface area of membrane tank

Total surface area of aration tank+membrane tank
AreaT=167m2+447m2 = 644 m2
Q1. Determine the solids produced in a conventional activated sludge reactor
that treats 50,200 m3/d of primary effluent and compare the results to those
produced in an MBR. The reactors are designed for BOD removal only. The
following wastewater characteristics apply:
Constituent Concentration,
The following design conditions and s g/m3
assumptions apply: BOD 130
1. The SRT for the activated sludge process is sBOD 75
6 d and the SRT for the MBR is 18d
COD 310
2. The aeration basin mixed-liquor
sCOD 135
temperature is 13oC
rbCOD 82
3. Use the kinetic coefficient from table 17-7
TSS 75
4. bCOD/BOD=1.6
VSS 65
Note: g/m3= mg/L
Q2 .Compute the space requirements for a
conventional activated sludge plant and an MBR
treatment system using the wastewater
characteristics and solids production determined in
Q1. The space requirements for preliminary and
primary treatment are assumed to be the same for
both plants and are not included in the example. The
plants are designed to meet an effluent BOD of less
than 30 g/m3. For the activated sludge process,
secondary clarifier are to be used. For an MBR, an
allowance equal to 35% of the aeration tank volume is
provided for installation of the membrane units in a
separate compartment. The following design
conditions apply:
Process unit/Parameter Units Conventional Membrane
activated sludge bioreactor
Average flowrate m3/d 50,200 50,200
Aeration tank
Solid retention time (SRT) d 6 18
MLSS (XTSS) g/m3 3000 10,000
Mass of TSS (Q1) Kg/d
Depth of tank M 5 5
Secondary clarifier
Hydraulic application rate m3/m2.d 22 N/A
Membrane compartment 35%of the
Area allowance for membrane aeration tank
installation volume
Membrane fouling
 Resistance (/m), permeability K (LMH/bar) are
inversely related
P
R
J
 η is viscosity (kg/(m s2)), ΔP= pressure drop or TMP (Pa or bar)
 Permeability
 Ratio of flux to TMP (J/ ΔP)
Membrane fouling
 Important operation problem in MBR
◦ Critical flux
 increasing flux steps are imposed and the TMP monitored for its
stability at each step

 When the TMP is no longer stable at each flux step and increases
rapidly to indicate rapid accumulation of foulants, this is usually
referred to as the critical flux.

◦ a critical flux exists below which a decline of

permeability with time does not occur, and above
which fouling is observed
Critical flux
 Cake structure

 During the filtration of suspension, a cake layer is form on the

surface of the membrane known as the secondary membrane
and the hydraulic resistance to the flow is established.

◦ permeability of the cake layer

 flux, electrostatic interactions, and particle size.

 Cakes formed in the crossflow mode may have higher specific cake
resistances than cakes formed in dead-end filtration

66
 cake resistance (Rc)
R  Rm  Rc
 Specific cake resistance ()

Rc   mc

mc is the cake load/area of membrane

Specific cake resistance ()
 The degree of resistance can be quantified by
calculating the  known as the specific cake
resistance.

  is the only factor determining the permeate

flux
◦ For a given size of suspended solids,
 when the rest of the filtration parameters (i.e., membrane type
and surface area, cross flow velocity etc.) are fixed.
 Specific cake resistance ()
 Relationship to calculate specific cake resistance
using dead-end filtration experiment
intrinsic membrane resistance [1/m]
specific cake resistance
permeate viscosity [Pa sec
t  Rm C (0) [m/kg]

  Vp
accumulated permeate volume AP 2 A
Vp trans-membrane 2
 P
pressure area of the membrane [m ], 2

C(0) is the concentration of solute at the initial time [kg/m3] and t is the time elapsed.

 A linear relationship can be illustrated by plotting the t/VP versus Vp by

using the data obtained from the dead end filtration experiment.

Then the specific cake resistance can be calculated from the slope.
Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR

■ All the parameters involved in the design and operation of MBR

processes have an influence on membrane fouling
■ membrane and module characteristics,
■ feed and biomass parameters and
■ operating conditions Feed Characteristics
Pretreatment
Strength
Loading rate (HRT)

Membrane and Module

characteristics
Biomass Characteristics Pore size
Bulk parameters Configuration
Floc parameters Material
EPS Hydrophobicity

Operation Conditions
Imposed flux
Aeration
Filteration mode
Sludge waste (SRT)
Membrane cleaning
 Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR
■ Nature and strength of feed
◦ physico-chemical changes in the biological suspensions
 Protein fraction in the bound-EPS found to be significantly
lower when biomass was fed with synthetic feed

 fouling rate was higher using synthetically fed MBR

 fouling potential of wastewater should be taken into

consideration
 Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR
■ MLSS concentration
◦ Sludge concentration is often considered as the main foulant
parameter
◦ controversial findings
 increase in MLSS concentration seems to have a mostly
negative impact- (If the other biomass characteristics are not accounted for)
 Some reported positive impact

 Above 30 g/l, negative impact

 8 and 12 g/l, no significant impact on fouling
 Influence of shift of MLSS concentration (g/L) on MBR fouling
Adapted *
*.
from (Le-Clech et al., 2006)

MLSS shift Fouling parameters References

Fouling increase
0.09-3.7 Rc:21-541011 /m1, α:1.8 to 0.7108 m/kg (Chang et al., 2005)
2.4-9.6 Rp:9 to 22 /m (Fang et al., 2005)
7-18 Jc:47-36 l/m2.h (SRT 30-100 days) (Han et al., 2005)
2.1-9.6 Jc: 13–8 l/m2 h (Bin et al., 2004)
1–10 Jc: 75–35 l/m2 h (Madaeni et al., 1999)
2–15 Limiting flux: 105–50 l/m2 h (Cicek et al., 1998)
1.6–22 Stabilized flux: 65–25 l/m2 h (Beaubien et al., 1996)

Fouling decrease
3.5–10 Jc: <60 to >80 l/m2 h (Defrance et al., 1999)

No (or little) effect

9–14 No impact on fouling rate (Rosenberger et al., 2006)
4.4–11.6 No impact between 4 and 8 g/l, slightly (Le-Clech et al., 2003)
less fouling for 12 g/l
6–18 Similar fouling rates for J<10 l/m2 h, (Brookes et al., 2006)
and slightly lower fouling rates for
higher J
4–15.1 Jc decreased from 25 to 22 l/m2 h (Bouhabila et al., 1998)
3.6–8.4 - (Hong et al., 2002)
 Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR
Extra cellular polymeric substance (EPS)

 Microbial EPS are biosynthetic polymers.

 EPS are composed of polysaccharides, proteins,

nucleic acid and lipids etc.

 EPS are located at or outside the cell surface

independent of their origin.

 The extracellular localization of EPS and their

composition may be the result of different processes:
active secretion, shedding of cell surface material, cell
lysis and adsorption from the environment.

74
Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR
■ Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS)

■ EPS can form a highly hydrated gel matrix in which microbial cells are
embedded

 responsible for the creation of a significant barrier to permeate

flow in membrane processes.

EPS

-EPS hydrolysis
nd
bou
Active Cell SMP Substrate

Diffusion
 Concentration of bound-EPS components in different MBR systems (units: mg/g SS)a
bound-EPSp bound-EPSc Other Details Reference
25-30 7-8 Humic: 12-13 R(10) (Cabassud et al., 2004)

29 36 : 2.8-3.1 l/m mg S (Ahn et al., 2005)b

120 40 S () (Gao et al., 2004)

31-116 6-15 TOC:37-65 Four pilot-scale plants, municipal (Brookes et al., 2003)

20 14 - Pilot-scale plant, industrial

11-46 12-40 TOC:44-47 Three full-scale plants, municipal

25 9 TOC:42 Full-scale plant, industrial

- - EPSp+EPSc=8 - (Jang et al., 2005)

30-36 33-28 - From 20 to 60 (Lee et al., 2003)

73 30 - S () (Le Clech et al., 2003)

60 17 - R ()

- - TOC: 250 mg/L S,MLSS:14 g/L (Nagaoka et al., 2005)

- - TOC: 26-83 mg/g From 8 to 80 (Cho et al., 2005)

VSS
116-101 22-24 - S(20) (Ji et al., 2006)

S, synthetic wastewater; R, real wastewater; SRT are given in days in bracket; , infinite SRT (i.e. no sludge wastage); SUVA, specific ultraviolet absorbance method.
a adapted from (Le-Clech et al., 2006); b Anaerobic up flow-sludge bed filter (UBF) and an aerobic MBR.

bound-EPS protein bound-EPS carbohydrate

Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS)

 Bound-EPS was found to have no effect on the

specific resistance below 20 and above 80
mgEPS/gMLVSS,

 but played a significant role on MBR fouling

between these two limits.
Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS)

 Soluble microbial products (SMP)

◦ soluble cellular components that are released during cell
lysis, diffuse through the cell membrane, are lost during
synthesis or are excreted for some purpose

◦ soluble EPS and SMP are identical

◦ SMP adsorb on the membrane surface, block membrane

pores and/or form a gel structure on the membrane
surface
Factors affecting membrane fouling in MBR
■ Sludge retention time (SRT) or F/M

■ controls biomass characteristics

■ higher SRT leads inevitably to increase of MLSS
concentration
■ may not necessary lead to greater fouling

■ SRT lower from 10 to 2 days – fouling increased 10

times
■ increased levels of production of EPS.
SRT
 Early MBRs were typically run at very long SRTs
to minimize excess sludge
◦ The increase in MLSS concentration related to prolong
SRT could also result in higher fouling propensity

◦ effects of SRT on biological parameters

 like MLSS, SMP, bound-EPS concentrations
 major impact of SRT on MBR fouling.

 selection of the SRT must be considered very

carefully in order to optimize MBR operation.
 Control of membrane fouling
 Membrane backflusing
◦ Most common
◦ Eliminate the accumulated material from the membrane surface
by backflushing with water and/or air

 Physical cleaning
◦ Pressured water to remove material from surface of membrane
– flat sheet membrane

 Chemical cleaning of membrane

◦ Soak in chemical to destroy chemical precipitates adhered on
membrane surface – alteration of chemistry
 NaOCl
Control of membrane fouling
 Emerging research area

◦ EPS including SMP are considered major fouling agents.

◦ control of generation of EPS in MBR .

◦ a new fouling control technique using Quorum Sensing

(Yeon et al. 2009).
Control of membrane fouling
 New research

◦ Bacteria produce small molecules called autoinducers

for the purpose of intercellular communication.

◦ Bio-fouling can be controlled if production of

autoinducers responsible for EPS generation is
suppressed.

◦ studies are on fundamental stage and can be developed

further.