Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61

A novel flux enhancing method for membrane bioreactor

(MBR) process using polymer

Seong-Hoon Yoon*, John H. Collins

Nalco Company, 1601 West Diehl Rd., Naperville, Illinois 60563-1198, USA
Tel. +1 (630) 305-1012; Fax +1 (630) 305-2982; email: syoon@nalco.com

Received 15 March 2005; accepted 22 April 2005

Abstract
Pilot- and full-scale experiments were performed to elucidate the feasibility of using a modified cationic polymer
for capital and operational cost savings. This membrane performance enhancing product is referred to as MPE50TM.
Since the low flux caused by low water temperature is one of the most important hurdles in reducing capital costs,
the extent of short-term and long-term flux improvements by MPE50 was tested at low temperatures (10–13°C).
Though membrane fouling rates should be exponentially proportional to the flux when the critical flux is exceeded,
it was found that membrane fouling rates were almost constant during MPE50 treatment, irrespective of the flux, if
the flux was moderately higher than the critical flux. As a consequence, with 400 ppm MPE50, a full-scale municipal
MBR plant (2,300 m3/d) could be operated at an average flux of 47.25 LMH, which is 39% above the critical flux
(34LMH), for one day without significant permeability loss. On the other hand, without MPE50, flux could be
maintained at 35 LMH, which was 35% above the critical flux (26 LMH), for only 2–3 h. Additional pilot tests
were performed at a low temperature (10°C), to test for long-term flux increase. During treatment with 200 ppm
MPE50, the flux duration increased from 22 days to more than 30 days, and a 50% higher flux (from 17 LMH to
25 LMH) could be maintained. MPE50 was also tested at a problematic site (50 m3/d) where membrane fouling
hydrophobic waxes were present in the influent. At this site, the long-term flux increased from 10 LMH to 25 LMH
by using 300 ppm MPE50, which was a 150% increase. Finally, membrane and aeration savings by MPE50 were
estimated. When the flux increased 50–150%, membrane and aeration savings were expected to be 33–60% and
22–40%, respectively.
Keywords: Membrane bioreactor (MBR); Membrane performance enhancer (MPE); Flux improvement; Membrane
fouling

*Corresponding author.

Presented at the International Congress on Membranes and Membrane Processes (ICOM), Seoul, Korea,
21–26 August 2005.

0011-9164/06/$– See front matter © 2006 Published by Elsevier B.V.

doi:10.1016/j.desal.2005.04.124
 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61
1. Introduction
Since the submerged membrane was invented
[1], membrane bioreactor (MBR) technology has
been rapidly developing during the last decade.
For the purpose of reducing overall operating costs
by reducing membrane fouling, various methods
have been developed, e.g. intermittent suction, back-
flushing, module design optimization, intermittent
aeration, etc [2–4]. As a result, MBR technology
is accepted as a reliable and advanced option for
wastewater treatment, which can replace the con-
ventional biological methods.
One of the most important driving forces for
the MBR deployment is the excellent effluent
quality regardless of influent quality and opera-
tional conditions. In most of the cases, effluent
BOD has been reported at less than 3 ppm [5].
However, due to the nature of the physical barrier,
MBRs are less flexible in treating peak flow com-
pared to conventional methods.
Generally, membrane fouling rates are expo-
nentially proportional to the flux especially above
the critical flux. Therefore, if the peak flow ex-
ceeds the critical flux on the membrane system,
MBRs may rapidly lose their capability of handl-
ing the flow. In order to avoid this catastrophic
situation, most of MBRs are designed to treat 2–
3 times dry weather flow (DWF) [6]. In some in-
stances, even four times DWF should be treated
in winter for a few days [7], where the cold water
not only increases operating pressure due to a high
viscosity but also increases a membrane fouling
rate by decreasing particle back-transport velocity
from the membrane surface. Consequently, lots
of extra membranes should be installed for the
short time peak flow events.
A new concept for increasing MBR flux has
been developed [8,9]. In this method, modified
cationic polymers (Permacare MPE50 TM and
MPE51 TM) were used to reduce biopolymer levels
and increase the particle size. In lab- and full-scale
tests, polysaccharides levels were reduced by half,
while the long-term flux increased significantly.
53
The membrane flux enhancers (MPE) can be
used to handle the peak flow conditions. For
example, if the peak flux is increased by 50% with
MPE, significant amounts of redundancy in the
membrane system can be removed.
In this study, short-term and long-term flux
increases with MPE50 were investigated at high
and low temperatures. The performance of MPE50
was also tested at a problematic MBR plant, which
was being hampered by abnormal membrane foul-
ing. Based on all of the field trial results, savings
in membrane and aeration were estimated. In order
to justify the validity of the aeration savings, the
effect of MPE50 on the oxygen transfer rate was
investigated.
2. Experiment
Experiments were performed at various scales
and locations. All experiments shown in this
article were performed with flat sheet submerged
membranes. The details of experimental con-
ditions will be described in each related paragraph.
The optimum dosage of MPE50 was deter-
mined based on simple jar tests, visual tests, or
filterability tests described in our previous papers
[8,9]. In each method, a dosage that gave the lowest
supernatant COD, biggest particle size, or the most
filtrate volume through 0.45 mm filter in 5 min
was determined. Then, the optimum dosage was
determined at a 50% higher level than the dosage
obtained. MPE50 was added without dilution to
the point that had enough turbulence.
To investigate the effect of MPE50 on the
oxygen transfer rate, bench tests were performed
using a dissolve oxygen (DO) meter (YSI, USA).
Two pilot MBRs were operated continuously and
MPE50 (500 ppm) was added to one MBR. From
each MBR, 800 ml of sludge was sampled and
transferred to one liter graduated cylinder. After
DO decreased less than 0.1 ppm, aeration was started
at a rate of 1 L/min while DO was monitored using
a DO meter (YSI, USA). Elapsed times were
54 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61

measured when the DO increased from 2 ppm to ditions used in the pilot tests, the critical flux was
4 ppm. found to increase approximately twice, i.e. from
17 LMH to 33 LMH.
The residual MPE50 in permeate was mea-
3. Results and discussions
sured using a colloid titration method of which
Using two pilot MBRs, efficacy of MPE50 on detection limit is around 0.5 ppm [10]. No MPE50
flux improvement was tested at high temperature was found in all cases. It was concluded that MPE50
(19°C). Five flat sheet membrane modules completely attach to the bio-solids and hardly
(0.1 m2) were submerged in each reactor and 40 L permeate membrane.
air was supplied per minute from the bottom of The performance of MPE50 was tested at a
the modules. The mixed liquor suspended solids full-scale municipal MBR equipped with flat sheet
(MLSS) was maintained at 12,000 mg/L. The ef- submerged membranes (Kubota, Japan). Though
fluent was obtained using a common peristaltic this plant was normally operated at 2,300 m3/d
pump from the two MBRs without membrane (or 25 LMH), the flow rate increased up to
relaxation time. Monitoring and logging the trans- 3,800 m3/d (or 42 LMH) in winter occasionally.
membrane pressure (TMP) periodically, flux was Therefore, a method to prevent membrane fouling
increased stepwise from 17 LMH to 38 LMH. at the high flux and low temperature conditions
As shown in Fig. 1, the control MBR, the stable was necessary.
TMP at 17 LMH started to increase quickly when Control experiments were done before testing
the flux reached 20 LMH. The TMP exceeded MPE50. After throughly cleaning the membranes
30 kPa within a day at 23 LMH. On the other hand, using 5,000 ppm NaOCl, a crtical flux test was
with 500 ppm of MPE50, the TMP was increased performed. While the flux was raised stepwise,
only slightly after stepwise flux increases until trans-membrane pressure (TMP) was logged
the flux reached 33 LMH. The TMP started to in- every minute. Each flux was maintained for
crease more quickly at 35 LMH and it increased 12 min and 3 min relaxation time was given before
even faster at 38 LMH. Overall, under the con- increasing flux to the next step. Once significant

50 50
Trans-membrane pressure ( kPa)

Control
40 40

Flux
Flux ( LMH )

30 30

20 20
With 500ppm MPE50

10 10

0 0
0 3 6 9 12 15
Time ( days )

Fig. 1. Effect of MPE50 on the reduction of membrane fouling. Flat sheet membrane (0.5 m2, Yuasa Co., Japan), influent
COD = 500 ppm, reactor size = 200 L, aeration = 30 L/min, MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 500 ppm, water
temperature = 19°C. No relaxation time was applied.
 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61 55

TMP increase was observed, flux was reduced to since maximum TMP limit (20 kPa) was reached.
25 LMH for 1.5 h, then a one-day peak flux test One thing noticeable was that the permeability
was performed. declining rate with MPE50 was almost constant
The dosage of MPE50 was determined based between 42 LMH and 60 LMH unlike the control
on the filterability test [8,9]. Since the filterability experiments. Therefore, with MPE50, MBR will
was the best at 250–300 ppm of MPE50, one and have more stability when operated above the
half times of that amount was added, i.e. 400 ppm. critical flux compared to the control experiment.
Considering the total bioreactor volume, 300 kg A one-day peak flux test was perfromed at an
of MPE50 was directly added to the aeration basin average flux of 35 LMH (or 42 LMH instan-
without dilution. All test sequences with MPE50 taneous with an 10 min on and 2 min off), which
were exactly the same as the control tests. The was 35% higher than the critical flux (26 LMH).
water temperature in the aeration basin was 13°C As shown in Fig. 3, the target flux could be main-
during the experimental period. tained only for 2–3 h at a water temperature of
As shown in Fig. 2, without MPE50, perme- 13°C. Then flux started to decrease because TMP
ability started to decrease at 34 LMH. The rate of reached the maximum limit (20 kPa), while mem-
permeability decrease became more significant at brane fouling was becoming continuously more
42 LMH. The filtration was finally stopped at severe.
51 LMH, since flux could not be maintained at Assuming 31.5 LMH, which is 10% below the
the target level due to the high TMP (20 kPa). 35 LMH, could be maintained for one day, 50%
The critical flux without MPE50 was determined higher one-day peak flux was targeted with
at 26 LMH. 400 ppm MPE50. The average flux was set at
With 400 ppm of MPE50, permeability was 47.25 LMH (or 56.7 LMH instantaneous), which
stable until 34 LMH and started to decrease was 39% higher than the critical flux (34 LMH).
slightly at 42 LMH. The permeability was lowered As shown in Fig. 3, both flux and permeability
at 51 LMH and filtration was stopped at 60 LMH were maintained stably for 24 h (the data between

21 70
Permeability, Control
Permeability ( LMH / kPa )

18 Permeability, 400 ppm MPE50 60

Flux
15 50
Flux ( LMH )

12 40

9 30

6 20

3 10

0 0
0 20 40 60 80
Time ( minutes )
Fig. 2. A critical flux test with and without MPE50. Flat sheet membrane (Kubota Co., Japan), influent BOD = 200 ppm,
design flow rate = 2300 m3/d, MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 400 ppm, water temperature = 13°C, operational
mode = 12 min suction and 3 min relaxation.
56 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61

10 60

Instantaneous Flux ( LMH )

Permeability ( LMH / kPa )
8 48
Permeability, Control
Permeability, Treatment
6 Flux, Control 36
Flux, Treatment

4 24

2 12

0 0
0 5 10 15 20
Time ( Hours )
Fig. 3. A short-term peak flux test with and without MPE50. Flat sheet membrane (Kubota Co., Japan), influent BOD =
200 ppm, design flow rate = 2300 m3/d, MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 400 ppm, water temperature = 13°C,
operational mode = 10 min suction and 2 min relaxation.

19 h and 24 h is not shown). It was concluded that
one-day peak flux can be inreased 50% at 13°C.
As explained above, MBR plants will expe-
rience the most difficult time when peak flow and
low temperature situations occur simultaneously.
Therefore, flow rate at low temperature is often
the limiting factor in designing MBR processes
in many geographical areas. Using a pilot MBR,
critical flux and long-term flux were further tested
with and without MPE50 at 10°C. The pilot MBR
was equipped with eight flat sheet submerged
membranes (Kubota, Japan) and influent was
obtained from a dormitory nearby. The total mem-
brane area was 6.4 m2 and the aeration was 80 L/min.
The aeration basin was chilled with a cooling coil
inside which coolant was circulating.
Critical flux tests were performed using a
similar method used in the previous experiment
(Fig. 2). At each flux, filtration was maintained
for 15 min and membranes were relaxed for five
minutes. As shown in Fig. 4, the critical flux was
measured at 24 LMH without MPE50. Without
MPE50, TMP increased abruptly during the
filtration at 24 LMH. With MPE50 (200 ppm),
no critical flux was observed until 72 LMH, which
was the maximum allowable flux with the suction
pump. It was concluded that critical flux increase
was more than three times at the experimental con-
dition.
A long-term flux test was also performed.
Without MPE50, TMP was stable at 17 LMH for
the first 22 days and surged to above 30 kPa (Fig. 5).
Due to the high TMP, flux was maintained at
9 LMH for the rest of the control experiment. After
cleaning the membranes using NaOCl, 200 ppm
of MPE50 was added to the aeration basin. With
MPE50, flux was set at 50% higher than 17 LMH,
i.e. 25 LMH. It was found that TMP was main-
tained at below 10 kPa for the first 30 days without
additional MPE50. When some of the sludge was
removed from the aeration basin, TMP increased
a little probably due to the MPE50 loss along with
the sludge removal.
In addition to the reduced membrane fouling,
permeate quality improved significantly as shown
in Fig. 6. As postulated in our previous works [8,
9], MPE50 seemed to coagulate biopolymers,
which otherwise passed through the membranes,
and made bigger particles that could not pass.
Under the conditions used in the experiment, COD
 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61 57

30
Control
Trans-membrane Pressure ( kPa )
25 200 ppm MPE50

20

15

10

24 72
0
0 20 40 60 80
Flux ( LMH )
Fig. 4. Critical flux improvement by MPE50 at 200 ppm. Flat sheet membrane (6.4 m2, Kubota Co., Japan), aeration =
80 L/min, influent BOD = 200 ppm, average MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 200 ppm, water temperature
=10°C, operational mode = 15 min suction and 5 min relaxation.

40
17 LMH 9 LMH 25 LMH
Trans-membrane Pressure ( kPa )

30

20
Membrane Cleaning
Membrane Addition of 200 ppm MPE50
Cleaning
10

Sludge Removal
0
0 20 40 60 80
Time ( days )
Fig. 5. Long-term flux tests with and without MPE50. Flat sheet membrane (6.4 m2, Kubota Co., Japan), aeration =
80 L/min, influent BOD = 200 ppm, average MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 200 ppm, water temperature
=10°C, operational mode = 15 min suction and 2 min relaxation.

reduction in effluent (permeate) was approxi- chemical cleanings. MPE50 was tested to deter-
mately 50% from 8 ppm to 4 ppm. mine if it could improve the situation by reducing
In some MBR plants, membranes suffer from membrane fouling.
abnormal fouling problems and need frequent A MBR plant located in the central US was
58
12
10
COD in Effluent ( mg/l )
8
4
0
0 20
Fig. 6. Effect of MPE50 on permeate quality. Flat sheet membrane (6.4 m2, Kubota Co., Japan), BOD = 200 ppm, average
MLSS = 12,000 mg/L, MPE50 dosage = 200 ppm, water temperature =10°C.
treating wastewater from a school. In this plant,
severe membrane fouling was frequently observed
and the plant was often shut down for 1–2 h to
prevent further damage to the membranes. On
average, plant shut downs occurred twice a day
and the wastewater was often bypassed to a lagoon
located near the plant. The average flux was only
10 LMH due to the frequent system shut downs.
It turned out that the hydrophobic waxes used for
floor cleanings were the cause of these failures.
The dosage of MPE50 was determined based
on a visual test, where MPE50 concentration was
gradually increased while the particle size was
visually monitored [8,9]. After adding 300 ppm
MPE50 to the aeration basin, membrane fouling
was significantly reduced. An additional amount
of MPE50 (10 ppm) was added daily to compen-
sate the loss by the excess sludge removal. While
the average flux increased from 10 LMH to 25
LMH (Fig. 7), the system shut downs triggered
by high TMP (33 kPa) were reduced by 50%. The
average daily flux (total daily flow/membrane
area) increased to 44–50 LMH and could be sus-
tained for 4 days. However, the detailed mecha-
S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61
Addition of 200 ppm MPE50
8 mg/l
4 mg/l
40 60 80
Time ( days )
nism about how MPE50 reduced the wax problem
is not known clearly to date.
Based on the above experiments, it was con-
cluded that up to 150% of a long-term flux in-
crease (from 10 LMH to 25 LMH) was possible
while one-day peak flux increased 50% (from
31.5 LMH to 47.25 LMH). Depending on the plant
situation, either long-term or one-day peak flux
can be a limiting factor in designing the membrane
capacity. It was worthwhile to estimate the savings
in capital and operating costs as they relate to the
flux increases. The savings of membrane can be
calculated using the following equation:
Flux increase (%)
Savings (%) = × 100
100 + Flux increase (%)
As a result of the less membrane modules, less
coarse bubble aeration will be necessary. How-
ever, less coarse bubble aeration will in turn reduce
total oxygen supply to the mixed liquor. In general,
coarse bubbles supplied for the membrane
scouring are three times less efficient in oxygen
transfer than fine bubbles [11]. Therefore, to

60
Average Daily Flux ( LMH )
50
40
30
10 LMH
20
10
0
13-Jun
Fig. 7. Effect of MPE50 on long-term flux improvement while hydrophobic membrane foulants (waxes) are coming in.
Flat sheet membrane (Kubota Co., Japan), influent BOD = 250 ppm, design flow rate = 50 m3/d, average MLSS =
12,000 mg/L, initial MPE50 dosage = 300 ppm, daily MPE50 dose = 10 ppm, water temperature > 18°C, operational
mode = 8 min suction and 2 min relaxation.
maintain the constant oxygen supply, the 1/3 of
savings in coarse aeration should be compensated
with fine bubble aeration. Thus, the net savings
in coarse aeration will be 2/3 of the amount
originally saved.
As shown in Fig. 8, the membrane saving will
be 60% with 150% flux increase, when long-term
flux is a limiting factor in membrane system
design. The net aeration saving is expected to be
40%. On the other hand, membrane and aeration
savings will be 33% and 22%, respectively, with
a 50% flux increase, when one-day flux at low
temperature is a limiting factor in design.
Though MPE50 can clearly save the aeration
costs along with membrane costs, one may
question about the impact of MPE50 on oxygen
transfer rate (OTR). In fact, the aeration savings
for membrane scouring can be partly encroached
by the decreased OTR, if MPE50 decreases the
oxygen transfer efficiency.
Overall OTR was measured using a simple
bench test as described in the experimental section
above. As shown in Fig. 9, with MPE50 treatment,
S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61 59
Before MPE50
After MPE50
25 LMH
23-Jun 3-Jul 13-Jul 23-Jul 2-Aug 12-Aug 22-Aug 1-Sep
DO increasing rate from 2 ppm to 4 ppm was
always higher than control. The improvement of
OTR was 10–20% in most of cases, which means
that MPE50 may be able to reduce even the
amount of fine bubble aeration. Therefore, the
aeration savings according to flux improvement
shown in Fig. 8 was considered as a conservative
estimation. More research is necessary to inves-
tigate the effect of MPE50 on OTR.
4. Conclusions
The following conclusions were drawn from
the results of pilot- and full-scale experiments using
a recently developed modified cationic polymer,
known as membrane performance enhancer
(MPE50TM).
1. Unlike normal membrane filtration, mem-
brane fouling rates became almost constant irres-
pective of the flux, if the flux was moderately
higher than the critical flux. As a consequence,
with 400 ppm MPE50, a full-scale municipal
MBR plant (2,300 m3/d) could be operated at an
60 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61

60

Membrane/Aeration Savings (%) 50

Membrane Savings

40

30
Aeration savings
20

10

0
0 30 60 90 120 150

Flux improvement ( % )
Fig. 8. Membrane and aeration savings according to flux improvement.

Oxygen Transfer Rate Improvement(%)

250 100
From 2 ppm DO to 4 ppm DO (sec)

200 Control 80
Elapsed Time

150 60
500 ppm MPE50

100 40

Improvement
50 20

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Time ( days )

Fig. 9. Elapsed time until dissolved oxygen (DO) increases from 2 ppm to 4 ppm. Sample volume = 800 ml, aeration rate
= 1 L/min, temperature = 20°C.

average flux of 47.25 LMH, which is 39% above 31.5 LMH to 47.25 LMH at 400 ppm MPE50 at
the critical flux (34LMH), for one day without 13°C.
significant permeability loss. On the other hand, 3. At a low temperature (10°C), the long-term
without MPE50, the flux could be maintained at flux increased from 17 LMH to 25 LMH while
31.5 LMH, which is 21% above the critical flux the flux duration increased simultaneously from
(26 LMH), for only 2–3 h. 22 days to more than 30 days.
2. In a full-scale trial, one-day peak flux of a 4. In a small municipal MBR plant in which
large municipal MBR increased 50% from the membranes were being fouled by hydrophobic
 S.-H. Yoon, J.H. Collins / Desalination 191 (2006) 52–61
waxes contained in the influent, 300 mg/l of
MPE50 could increase the long-term daily flux
by 150%. Calculations showed that the membrane
savings were expected to be 60% and 33%, res-
pectively, when flux increased 150% and 50%.
The corresponding aeration savings were cal-
culated at 40% and 22%, respectively.
5. MPE50 increased overall oxygen transfer
rate by 10–20%. Therefore, MPE50 will not nega-
tively affect the overall aeration demand.
Acknowledgements
The authors sincerely wish to thank Mr. Dennis
Livingston of Enviroquip Incorporated, USA,
Mr. Trevor Miller of Running Springs Water
District, CA, and Mr. Rick Higgins of Duckett
Creek Sanitary District, MO, and Mr. Kiyoshi
Izumi and Mr. Kazuhisa Nishimori of Kubota
Corp., Japan for their help with the pilot- and full-
scale MBR trials with Kubota membranes.
References
[1] K. Yamamoto, M. Hiasa, T. Mahmood and T.
Matsuo, Direct solid–liquid separation using hollow
fiber membrane in an activated sludge aeration tank,
Wat. Sci. Tech., 21 (1989) 43–54.
[2] S. Chang, A. Fane and S. Vigneswaran, Modeling
and optimizing submerged hollow fiber membrane
module, AIChE, 48 (2002) 2203–2212.
[3] D. Guibert, R. Ben Aim and P. Côté, Aeration
61
performance of immersed hollow-fiber membranes
in a bentonite suspension, Desalination, 148 (2002)
395–400.
[4] I.-S. Chang, C.-H. Lee and K.-H. Ahn, Membrane
filtration characteristics in membrane-coupled acti-
vated sludge system — the effect of floc structure
on membrane fouling, Separ. Sci. Technol., 34
(1999) 1743–1758.
[5] Mitsubishi Rayon, Co. homepage, http://
www.mrc.co.jp/mre/sterapore/eigo0/, 2004.
[6] Copa Ltd. Homepage, http://www.copa.co.uk/
products/mbr/mbrcasestudies/municipal_case.asp,
http://www.copa.co.uk/products/mbr/mbrcasestudies/
municipal_case.asp, 2005.
[7] S. Warren, MBR-Wessex water experience, MBR5
conference, Cranfield University, UK, 2005.
[8] S. Yoon, J. Collins, D. Musale, S. Sundararajan, S.
Tsai, A. Hallsby, J. Kong, J. Koppes and P. Cachia,
Effects of flux enhancing polymer on the charac-
teristics of sludge in membrane bioreactor process,
IWA Water Environment and Membrane Technology
Conference, Seoul, Korea, 2004.
[9] S. Yoon, J. Collins, D. Musale, S. Sundararajan, S.
Tsai, A. Hallsby, J. Kong, J. Koppes, P. Cachia, D.
Chung and K. Kronoveter, Application of membrane
performance enhancer (MPE) for full scale mem-
brane bioreactors, IWA Water Environment and
Membrane Technology Conference, Seoul, Korea,
2004.
[10] APHA Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater, 20th ed., APHA, Washing-
ton, DC, 1998.
[11] P. Cornel, M. Wagner and S. Krause, Investigation
of oxygen transfer rates in full scale membrane
bioreactors, IWA annual conference, Melbourne,
Australia, e21291a, 2002.