E-Andrew Sindt Creative Component S11.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Calibrated simulator parameters for regular modeParametersDefaultValueCalibratedValuePercentChangeUnitsStoichiometricHeterotrophic yield (OHO) 0.666 0.5128 -23 mgCOD/mgCODKineticAOB max. spec. growth rate 0.9 0.603 -33 1/dNOB max. spec. growth rate 0.7 0.469 -33 1/dSettlingMax. Vesilind settling velocity 170 119 -30 (m/d)Effluent quality characteristics for the calibrated simulation run for the regular SBR mode aresummarized in Table 4.3. Effluent TSS, NH 3 -N, NO 2 -N concentrations were improved markedly fromdefault simulator settings. Calibration efforts were unsuccessful in correcting the effluent TN and NO 3 - -N concentrations to within 20% of the observed values. Predicted effluent TN concentration currentlyhas nearly 50% error. Predicted effluent NO 3 - -N concentrations are actually further from observedvalues at nearly 89% error. The increase in deviation for effluent NO 3 - -N is the unintended result fromcorrecting the other monitored parameters, namely TN.The simulator appears to not have the flexibility that is required to achieve a match to observed data foreffluent TN and NO 3 - -N concentrations by adjusting simulator parameters only. This difficulty could alsobe attributed to inadequate or erroneous input data on raw wastewater and effluent characteristics.Increased flexibility in wastewater simulators has advantages and disadvantages. On one hand, a veryflexible simulator would be able to achieve a match to nearly any data set, no matter how erroneous itmay be. While the ease of calibration may be helpful from one point of view, major mistakes in processmodeling become inherently possible if the model is forced to fit available process performance datawithout considering basic process fundamental relationships.Table 4.3- Regular mode effluent quality for calibrated 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 - 26.7Calibrated (mg/L) 14.82 6.93 5.94 9.74 1.45 3.74 1.18 5.93 43.84 26.45% deviation -1.84 1.95 - -48.71 -3.34 10.08 -88.78 -1.23 - -0.924.3.2 BNR-S1 Mode CalibrationTable 4.4 is a comparison of the calculated effluent quality at the default simulator settings for the BNR-S1 mode to observed data obtained by Ersu et al. (2008). Effluent parameters requiring the greatestcorrection include NH 3 -N, NO 2 - -N, NO 3 - -N, and TP. The simulated over predicted NH 3 -N and NO 2 - -Nremovals while the concentration of NO 3 - -N was much higher than observed. These disparities mayindicate an unaccounted for inhibition to the nitrification process. The inhibition could be in theammonia oxidation reaction, the nitrite oxidation reaction, or both. The error in NO 3 - -N concentration56
could be due to the reduced nitrite oxidation or possibly the observed denitrification was better thansimulated, or some combination of both was present.The observed effluent TP concentration was much higher than that simulated. This could be due tosomething inhibiting PAOs that is currently not accounted for in the simulator. The over-prediction ofeffluent TP could also be due in part to the way the simulator handles the significantly higher RBCODfraction determined by the influent specifier. This possibility of RBCOD fraction affecting effluent TPconcentrations is investigated further in sub-section 4.5.2.Total nitrogen, the effluent parameter that was most difficult to adjust in regular mode, was alreadywell within the 20% margin for error at 11.4% for default simulator parameter values for the BNR-S1 SBRmode.Table 4.4- BNR-S1 mode effluent quality for default simulator parameter settingsTSS pH cBOD TN NH 3-N NO - 2 -N NO - 3 -N TP COD F. CODObserved (mg/L) 7.9 6.9 - 6.6 1.4 1.3 2.6 1.5 - 29.3Default (mg/L) 5.6 7.0 3.4 7.4 0.3 0.1 4.7 0.3 40.1 33.3% deviation -29.3 1.9 11.4 -75.5 -89.6 81.0 -78.9 13.7Table 4.5 compares observed effluent quality for the BNR-S1 mode to predicted effluent quality for theBNR-S1 mode using the regular mode calibrated simulator parameter values. Improvements fromdefault predictions were made to TSS, NO 2 - , TP and filtered COD. Regular mode calibrated simulatorparameters created increased deviations from observed values in TN and NO 3 - .Table 5.5- BNR-S1 mode effluent quality with calibrated regular mode simulator parametersTSS pH cBOD TN NH3-N NO2-N NO3-N TP COD F. CODObserved (mg/L) 7.9 6.9 - 6.6 1.4 1.3 2.6 1.5 - 29.3regular mode calibration (mg/L) 8.9 7.0 3.9 11.4 0.7 1.7 6.6 1.1 42.3 31.9% deviation 12.2 1.4 72.4 -47.8 29.8 153.7 -25.1 8.9Calibration of the BNR-S1 mode built upon the calibration of the regular mode in that the first step ofthe BNR-S1 mode calibration was to optimize the settings for OHO yield and NOB and AOB maximumspecific growth rate (Figure 4.15). Similar to the regular mode, these three parameters had the mostsignificant effects on the largest number of effluent parameters. Side effects of simulator parameteradjustment were greatly reduced by optimizing these three first before adjusting the simulatorparameters with more targeted effects. The simulator parameters that yielded more targeted effluentparameter concentration changes and the effluent parameter they target include maximum Vesilindsettling velocity for effluent TSS, AOB substrate half-saturation concentration for effluent NH 3 , andaerobic P/PHA uptake for effluent TP.57
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 56 and 57: 4.2.2.2 Aerobic P/PHA uptake and P/
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 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?