مقایسه راکتورهای UASB معمول و اصلاح شده در تصفیه پساب صنایع لبنی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد دانشگاه بیرجند

2 دانشگاه بیرجند

3 دانشیار دانشکده مهندسی، گروه عمران-محیط زیست دانشگاه بیرجند

4 گروه عمران/ دانشکده مهندسی/ دانشگاه بیرجند

چکیده

تحقیق حاضر به منظور مقایسه کارایی راکتور UASB معمول و اصلاح شده جهت تصفیه پساب صنایع لبنی انجام شده است. جهت انجام تحقیق دو واحد راکتور با ارتفاع 120 سانتیمتر و حجم 48 لیتر در مقیاس آزمایشگاهی بکار گرفته شده و از یک مخزن سپتیک تانک و یک پتو لجن اضافی جهت بهینه‌سازی راکتور UASB استفاده شده است. تلقیح اولیه راکتور با استفاده از لجن تصفیه‌خانه فاضلاب (روش لجن فعال) کشتارگاه به همراه فضولات گاوی تازه و تغذیه با استفاده از شیر خشک انجام گرفته است. تحقیق حاضر در چهار دوره به مدت 154 روز به طول انجامیده، که دوره اول به مدت 30 روز شامل طراحی و ساخت راکتور، دوره دوم به مدت 40 روز شامل راه اندازی، تشکیل گرانول و اندازه‌گیری H P ،دوره سوم به مدت 40 روز شامل ادامه روند تشکیل گرانول و پتو لجن، اندازه‌گیری H P و بررسی اولیه راندمان حذف COD و دوره چهارم به مدت 44 روز شامل ادامه روند اندازه‌گیری لجن گرانوله، H P و بررسی راندمان حذف COD m3/kgCOD 4/11-2/5 بوده و دمای راکتور در طی دوره دوم تا سوم می‌باشد. بارگذاری آلی طی چهار دوره به میزان day. در محدوده دمای مزوفیلیک و در طی دوره چهارم در محدوده دمایی مزوفیلیک و سایکروفیلیک قرار گرفته است. زمان ماند طی دوره‌های مورد بررسی 24 ساعت می‌باشد. راندمان COD خروجی طی چهار دوره برای راکتور معمول 75-60 و برای راکتور اصلاح شده 94-60 درصد می‌باشد. بهینه‌سازی راکتور UASB باعث افزایش راندمان به میزان 22-18 درصد نسبت به حالت معمول می‌گردد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Comparison of normal and modified UASB reactors for dairy wastewater treatment

نویسندگان [English]

  • somayeh rahmani 1
  • morteza yeganeh mirza aliloo 2
  • mohammad reza doosti 3
  • Mohammad Javad Zoqi 4
1 Master of science student-university of birjand
2 university of birjand
3 Associate Professor, Faculty of Engineering, Civil-Environmental Department of university of birjand
4 civil environment department of university of birjand
چکیده [English]

The present study was conducted to compare the efficiency of normal and modified UASB reactor for the treatment of dairy wastewater. To conduct research, two reactor units with a height of 120 cm and a volume of 48 liters have been used on a laboratory scale and a tank septic tank and an additional sludge blanket have been used to optimize the UASB reactor. Initial inoculation of the reactor was carried out using sewage treatment sludge (active sludge method) slaughterhouse, along with fresh cow discharges and feeding using dry milk. The research lasted for fourteen periods for 154 days, the first period for 30 days including the design and construction of the reactor, the second period for 40 days including starting, forming granules and measuring PH, the third period for 40 days including the continuation of the process The formation of granules and sludge blankets, pH measurements, and preliminary analysis of the removal efficiency of COD and the fourth period for 44 days include the continuation of granulation sludge measurement, PH and the evaluation of COD removal efficiency. The organic loading during four periods was 5.2-11.4 kgCOD/m3.day, and the reactor temperature was in the second to third period in the mesophilic temperature range and during the fourth period at the mesophilic and psychrophilic temperature range. The retention time in the studied period is 24 hours. The output COD yields four to for normal reactor 75-60% and a modified reactor of 94-60%. Optimization of the UASB reactor increases the efficiency by a factor of 22-18% compared to the normal one.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • wastewater Treatment
  • Industrial wastewater
  • Dairy Industry
  • Normal UASB Reactor
  • Modified UASB Reactor
[1] A.H. Javid, A.H. Hasani, S. Gahvarband, Quality and quantity of wastewater from food industry and its effect on performance of wastewater treatment system (Case study: Minoo-Khoramdareh factory). Environmental science and technology, 17(1) (2015) 37-47.
[2] R. Bagheri, S. Sobhanardakani, B. Lorestani, Selection of the best wastewater treatment alternative for HDPE unit of petrochemical research and technology CompanyArak center based on the analytical hierarchy process Iran, Health & Environ, 3(10) (2017).
[3] D.S. Verma, A. Pateriya, Supplier Selection through Analytical Hierarchy Process: A Case Study in Small Scale Manufacturing Organization, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 4(5) (2013) 14281433.
[4] W.D.M.C. Perera, N.J.G.J. Bandara, M. Jayaweera, Treatment of Landfill Leachate using Sequencing Batch Reactor, Tropical Forestry and Environ, 4(2) (2104) 82-90.
[5] Metcalf, Eddy, sewage engineering, University Press Publication Center, Tehran, 2006.
[6] M. Esparza-Soto, O. Arzate-Archundia, C. Solís-Morelos, C. Fall, Treatment of a chocolate industry wastewater in a pilot-scale low-temperature UASB reactor operated at short hydraulic and sludge retention time, water science & technology, 67 (2013) 1353-1361.
[7] A.A. Khan, R.Z. Gaur, V.K.Tyagi, A. Khursheed, B. Lew, I. Mehrotra, A.A.Kazmi, Sustainable options of post treatment of UASB effluent treating sewage: A review, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 55(12) (2011) 1232-1251.
[8] A.v. Haandel, J.v.d. Lubbe, Handbook of Biological Wastewater Treatment, IWA Publishing, 2012.
[9] A.A. Chatzipaschali, A.G. Stamatis, Biotechnological Utilization with a Focus on Anaerobic Treatment of Cheese Whey: Current Status and Prospects, Energies 5(9)(2012)3492-3525.
[10] V.Perna, E. Castelló, J. Wenzel, C. Zampol, D.M.F. Lima, L. Borzacconi, M.B. Varesche, M. Zaiat, C. Etchebehere, Hydrogen production in an upflow anaerobic packed bed reactor used to treat cheese whey, International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 38(1) (2013) 54-62.
[11] A.V. Qasim, A.V. Mane, Characterization and treatment of selected food industrial effluents by coagulation and adsorption techniques, Water Resour Ind, 4 (2013) 1-12.
[12] S.J. Rad, M.J. Lewis, Water utilisation, energy utilisation and waste water management in the dairy industry: A review, International Journal of Dairy Technology, 67(1) (2014) 1-20.
[13] S. Frogzadeha, Promote active sludge systems using the UASB method and install membrane unit at low temperatures, Khajeh Naseeriddin Tusi, Tehran, 2013.
[14] Z.A. Bhatti, F. Maqbool, A.H. Malik, Q. Mehmood, UASB reactor startup for the treatment of municipal wastewater followed by advanced oxidation process Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 31 (2014).
[15] A.P. Rosa, C.A.L. Chernicharo, L.C.S. Lobato, R.V. Silva, R.F. Padilha, J.M. Borges, Assessing the potential of renewable energy sources (biogas and sludge) in a fullscale UASB-based treatment plant Renewable Energy 124 (2018) 21-26.
[16] N. Nasirpour, Using the combination of anaerobic bioreactors and a biofilm filler bed in the treatment of oil refinery wastewater, Tarbiat Modarres, Tehran, 2012.
[17] Cruz-Salomón, R. Meza-Gordillo, A. Rosales-Quintero, C. Ventura-Canseco, S. Lagunas-Rivera, J. CarrascoCervantes, Biogas production from a native beverage vinasse using a modified UASB bioreactor, Fuel, 198 (2016) 170-174.
[18] L. Petta, S.D. Gisi, P. Casella, R. Farina, M. Notarnicola, Evaluation of the treatability of a winery distillery (vinasse) wastewater by UASB, anoxic-aerobic UF-MBR and chemical precipitation/adsorption, Environmental Management, 201 (2017) 177-189.
[19] B. Kamyab, An Investigation of the Anaerobic digestion process of potato waste in a mixed-UASB two-stage system, Industrial Esfahan, Esfahan, 2012.
[20] W. Niu, J. Guo, J. Lian, H.H. Ngo, H. Li, Y. Song, H. Li, P. Yin, Effect of fluctuating hydraulic retention time (HRT) on denitrificationin the UASB reactors, Biochemical Engineering Journal 132 (2018) 29-37.
[21] H. Li, K. Han, Z. Li, J. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Huang, L. Shen,Q.Li, Y. Wang, Performance, granule conductivity and microbial community analysisof upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors from mesophilicto thermophilic operation, Biochemical Engineering Journal 133 (2018) 59-65.
[22] L. Zhang, J.D. Vrieze, T.L.G. Hendrickx, W. Wei, H. Temmink, H. Rijnaarts, G. Zeeman, Anaerobic treatment of raw domestic wastewater in a UASB-digester at 10 °C and microbial community dynamics Chemical Engineering Journal 334 (2018) 2088-2097.
[23] R.R. Comez, Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor: modelling, Royal institute of technology, (2011).
[24] P. Boonsawang, S. Laeh, N. Intrasungkha, Enhancement of sludge granulation in anaerobic treatment of concentrated latex wastewater, Songklanakarin J. Sci. Technol, 30 (2008) 111-119.
[25] APHA, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Am Pub Health Associat, Washington, 2005.
[26] B. Ritman, M. Parallel, Environmental Biotechnology: Basics and Applications, Scientific publication of Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, 2006.
[27] P. Bhunia, M.M. Ghangrekar, Influence of biogas-induced mixing on granulation in UASB reactors, Biochemical Engineering Journal 41 (2008) 136-141.
[28] I. SB, d.L.P. CJ, T. H, v.L. JB, Extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) in upflow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB) reactors operated under high salinity conditions, Water Research, 44 (2010) 1909-1917.
[29] BNuntakumjorn, W. Khumsalud, N. Vetsavas, T. Sujjaviriyasup, C. Phalakornkule, Comparison of sludge granule and UASB performance by adding chitosan in different forms, Chiang Mai Journal of Science 35 (2008) 95-102.
[30] M. Rezaei, Medical Equipment Office, in, Fars University of Medical Sciences and Health Services, 2013.
[31] C. Rico, N. Muñoz, J. Fernández, J.L. Rico, High-load anaerobic co-digestion of cheese whey and liquid fraction of  dairy manure in a one-stage UASB process: Limits in co-substrates ratio and organic loading rate Chemical Engineering Journal 262 (2015) 794-802.
[32] R.A. Hamza, O.T. Iorhemen, J.H. Tay, Advances in biological systems for the treatment of high-strength wastewater Journal of Water Process Engineering 10 (2016) 128-142.
[33] D. Buntner, A. Sánchez, J.M. Garrido, Feasibility of combined UASB and MBR system in dairy wastewater treatment at ambient temperatures Chemical Engineering Journal 230 (2013) 475-481.