E-Andrew Sindt Creative Component S11.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4.2.2.2 Aerobic P/PHA uptake and P/Ac release ratioThe aerobic P/PHA uptake parameter is described by the BioWin user manual as the “Amount of Pstored per unit PHA oxidized in aerobic conditions” (EnviroSim, 2010). The P/Ac release ratio parameteris explained as the, “Amount of P released for one mg (milligram) of acetate sequestered in the form ofPHA” (EnviroSim, 2010).As previously discussed, enhanced biological phosphorus removal (EBPR) involves a number of stepsincluding alternating oxic-anaerobic phases in order to successfully achieve enhanced phosphorusuptake. During the anaerobic phase, the hydrolysis of poly P releases phosphorus from the cells into thetank. Then, during the aerobic phase PAOs use stored electrons as energy to “invest” in the storage ofpoly P (Rittman and McCarty, 2001). In order for EBPR to be successful, more P must be taken up duringthe aerobic phase than released during the anaerobic phase. The initial consensus was that in order tooptimize EBPR, the anaerobic P release must be minimized. This was attempted by boosting volatilefatty acids and other RBCOD components in order to limit the amount of P released back into the tankduring the anaerobic phase.A full-scale study completed by Narayanan et al. (2006) suggests that aerobic P uptake is more critical tothe success of the process than anaerobic P release. The researchers never observed P release as alimitation on the process performance through all testing completed. Further, the researchers foundnearly all performance upsets were linked to a disruption of aerobic P uptake. Either parameter couldbe used to adjust the TP effluent concentration in BioWin. Aerobic P/PHA uptake was selected as theparameter to adjust effluent TP concentration for the BNR-S1 mode based on the research workcompleted by Narayanan et al. (2003).4.3 Simulator CalibrationData obtained from sensitivity analyses were used to calibrate the regular mode and BNR-S1 mode tothe respective observed data obtained by Ersu et al. (2008). According to WEF MOP No. 31, deviationsof predicted values from observed values of 10 to 40% are not uncommon for dynamic simulations. As ageneral rule, acceptable deviations of predicted values from observed values were those that were lessthan 20%, preferably less than 10% with a few exceptions discussed below.4.3.1 Regular Mode CalibrationCalibration for the regular mode focused on fitting the model of observed TSS, TN, NH 3 -N, NO 2 - -N, andNO 3 - -N effluent concentrations. Table 4.1 contains a comparison of observed values from Ersu et al.(2008)Table 4.1- Regular mode effluent quality from default simulator parameter settingsTSS pH cBOD TN NH 3-N NO 2 - -N NO 3 - -N TP COD F. CODObserved (mg/L) 15.1 6.8 - 19 1.5 3.4 10.5 6 - 26.7Default (mg/L) 8.81 6.94 4.31 7.63 0.16 0.04 4.55 6.46 37.15 26.33% deviation -41.66 2.06 - -59.84 -89.33 -98.82 -56.67 7.67 - -1.3954
Sum absolute value percent deviation from observedFirst, maximum Vesilind settling velocity was adjusted to -30% of its default value in order to correct theTSS concentration. This was determined directly from sensitivity analysis data collected for the regularmode. Next, OHO yield, AOB maximum specific growth rate, and NOB maximum specific growth ratewere chosen to be adjusted in order to reduce the deviation between the simulator prediction andobserved values. OHO yield was chosen because of the sensitivity shown in TN and NO 3 - -N. AOBmaximum specific growth rate was chosen for its effects on effluent NH 3 -N and TN concentrations. NOBmaximum specific growth rate was chosen because of its influence on NO 2 - -N concentrations. The threeparameters were evaluated in combinations in which two parameters were varied jointly against thethird. The best calibration progression is shown in Figure 4.14. See Appendix II for details on the othercombinations evaluated. Based on data from the sensitivity analysis, effluent parameters were notsufficiently sensitive to any other evaluated simulator parameters.5004003002001000-60-50-40-30-20-10Percent adjustment OHO yield00-10-20-30-40Percent adjustmentAOB and NOBmaximum specifcgrowth rate400-500300-400200-300100-2000-100Figure 4.14 - Progression of regular mode calibrationCalibrated simulator parameters are summarized in Table 4.2. Typical ranges for simulator parametervalues specific to BioWin could not be located but comparisons can be made to general activated sludgemodel parameter ranges. Reported maximum specific growth rates for nitrifiers range from 0.2 to 1.0d -1 (at 20 o C) (Melcer et al., 2003). The calibrated values of AOB and NOB maximum specific growth ratesfall well within this range. Typical OHO yield values with units of mgCOD/mgCOD could not be located.Also, typical maximum Vesilind settling velocity values could not be found.55
Page 1 and 2:
Prediction of nutrient removal with
Page 3 and 4:
Table of ContentsList of Figures ..
Page 5 and 6: 3.9 Effect of COD Fractions .......
Page 7 and 8: List of FiguresFigure 2.1- Biomass
Page 9 and 10: Figure AI.14- D.O. set point itiner
Page 11 and 12: Table AI.1- Influent specifier inpu
Page 13 and 14: Chapter 1: Introduction1.1 Importan
Page 15 and 16: Chapter 2: Literature Review2.1 Nut
Page 17 and 18: has a very low cBOD concentration a
Page 19 and 20: dissolved oxygen (D.O.) at a suffic
Page 21 and 22: Denitrification using biomass decay
Page 23 and 24: Figure 2.7- Phoredox process (Rittm
Page 25 and 26: increased the mean volatile fatty a
Page 27 and 28: used model is the Activated Sludge
Page 29 and 30: conditions included a discrete fill
Page 31 and 32: 3.1 Wastewater Treatment Plant Desc
Page 33 and 34: BNR-S2 operated with 1.5 hours simu
Page 35 and 36: Effluent 7.2 35 7.8 3.5 0.8 0.8 1.9
Page 37 and 38: constant width of 12.6 m over this
Page 39: Table 3.5- Sensitivity Parameters f
Page 42 and 43: 3.6.2 Calibration of BNR-S1 ModeThe
Page 44 and 45: Chapter 4 Results and Discussion4.1
Page 46 and 47: include 24-hour composite samples t
Page 48 and 49: Perecent deviation (predicted - obs
Page 50 and 51: Percent deviation (predicted-observ
Page 52 and 53: Percent deviaton in value (model-ob
Page 54 and 55: Percent deviation in value (modelob
Page 58 and 59: Calibrated simulator parameters for
Page 60 and 61: Sum absolute value of percent devia
Page 62 and 63: Absolute value of percent deviation
Page 64 and 65: Table 4.10- BNR-S2 colder (15.7 o C
Page 66 and 67: Table 4.13- Width adjustment effect
Page 68 and 69: Percent removala linear trend from
Page 70 and 71: Chapter 5: Conclusion5.1 SummaryBio
Page 72 and 73: Chapter 6: ReferencesAlleman, J.E.,
Page 74 and 75: Libra, R. D., Wolter, C. F., and La
Page 76 and 77: Appendix IBioWin Simulation Setup74
Page 78 and 79: Figure AI.2 - Influent specifier fr
Page 80 and 81: Figure AI.5 - Influent specifier fr
Page 82 and 83: Figure AI.9 - SBR operation page fo
Page 84 and 85: Figure AI.13 - SBR operation page f
Page 86 and 87: Appendix IISelected BioWin Simulati
Page 88 and 89: Table AII.1- Percent deviation from
Page 90 and 91: Table AII.2- Percent deviation from
Page 92 and 93: Sum absolute value of percent devia
Page 94 and 95: AOB and NOB maximum specific growth
Page 96 and 97: Appendix IIIMonthly Monitoring Repo
Page 98 and 99: DAYIrrig.1000'sGPDInfluentNH3-Nmg/L
Page 100 and 101: D RAIN- SETT. RECYCLE Irrig.1000' I
Page 102 and 103: D RAIN- SETT. RECYCLE Irrig.1000' I
Page 104 and 105: DAYIrrig.1000'sGPDInfluentNH3-Nmg/L
Page 106 and 107:
DAYIrrig.1000'sGPDInfluentNH3-Nmg/L
Page 108 and 109:
106
Page 110 and 111:
108
Page 112 and 113:
110
Page 114 and 115:
112
Page 116 and 117:
114
Page 118 and 119:
116
Page 120 and 121:
118
Page 122 and 123:
120
Page 124 and 125:
122
Page 126 and 127:
124
Page 128 and 129:
126
Page 130 and 131:
128
Page 132 and 133:
130
Page 134 and 135:
132
Page 136 and 137:
134
Page 138 and 139:
136
show all

E-Andrew Sindt Creative Component S11.pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?