Print this page Email this page
Users Online: 461
Home About us Editorial board Search Browse articles Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

Previous article Browse articles Next article 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Int J Env Health Eng 2013,  2:12

Prediction of effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor using kinetic models of monod, contois, second-order Grau and modified stover-kincannon


1 Department of Civil Environmental Engineering, Graduate Faculty of Environment, University of Tehran, Iran
2 Environment Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences (IUMS), Isfahan, Iran, and Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health, IUMS, Isfahan, Iran
3 Department of Environmetal Health Engineering, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran
4 School of Civil Water Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

Date of Web Publication06-Apr-2013

Correspondence Address:
Mohammad Mehdi Amin
Environment Research Center, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Hezar-Jerib Avenue, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: University of Tehran, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2277-9183.110149

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Aims: The aim of this study is predicting the effluent COD of UASB reactors with flowing mathematical models.
Materials and Methods: Weak industrial wastewater of the township, after passing screening unit, grit removal chamber and equalization tank, entered UASB reactor with volume of 144 m 3 (Length and width: 6 m; useful depth: 4 m). Analyses of laboratory parameters were done in accordance with water and wastewater standards.
Results: The reactor start-up started with hydraulic retention time of 14.4 d and organic loading rate of 0.04 Kg COD/m 3 .d or 0.02 Kg BOD 5 /m 3 .d which in 200 days, hydraulic retention time reached to 0.9 d and organic loading rate reached to 0.85 Kg COD/m 3 .d or 0.45 Kg BOD 5 /m 3 .d eventually, that the highest COD and BOD 5 removal efficiencies were observed up to 70% and 64%, respectively in the hydraulic retention time of 0.9 d. In the kinetic evaluation, the equations for effluent COD concentration prediction were obtained after calculating kinetic coefficients of Y, K d , K, K S and μmax in the Monod model; β and μmax in the Contois model; α, β and K 2(S) in the second-order Grau model and K B and U max in the modified Stover-Kincannon model.
Conclusion: The effluent COD concentration of reactor is a function of influent COD concentration of reactor in the modified Stover-Kincannon and second-order Grau models that have highest correlation coefficients while, it is a function of reactor's solids retention time in Contois and Monod models.

Keywords: Contois model, modified stover-kincannon model, monod model, second-order grau model, UASB Reactor


How to cite this article:
Abtahi SM, Amin MM, Nateghi R, Vosoogh A, Dooranmahalleh MG. Prediction of effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor using kinetic models of monod, contois, second-order Grau and modified stover-kincannon. Int J Env Health Eng 2013;2:12

How to cite this URL:
Abtahi SM, Amin MM, Nateghi R, Vosoogh A, Dooranmahalleh MG. Prediction of effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor using kinetic models of monod, contois, second-order Grau and modified stover-kincannon. Int J Env Health Eng [serial online] 2013 [cited 2022 Jul 3];2:12. Available from: https://www.ijehe.org/text.asp?2013/2/1/12/110149


  Introduction Top


Anaerobic treatment process is a complex process including the degradation of organic compounds to intermediate products and finally methane and carbon dioxide. [1] Using anaerobic reactors dates back to over the last century and in recent decades, anaerobic reactors were developed rapidly, [2] including Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB), Anaerobic Baffled Reactor, Anaerobic Baffled Reactor, Anaerobic Filter Reactor, Anaerobic Sequencing Batch Reactor and Anaerobic Hybrid Reactors. [3] UASB reactor was developed in 1970s by Lettinga et al. in Netherland. [4] Today, 87% of UASB reactors are used in wastewater treatment of food, fermentation, wood and paper industry. Other applications of this reactor are wastewater treatment of petrochemical, textile industries and waste landfill leachate. In addition, UASB reactor has been widely applied in tropical countries like India, Brazil and Colombia. [5] Considerable success of UASB reactors due to retention of high concentration of biological solids is due to the formation of granules in these reactors that leads into the accept of high organic loading rate and Solids Retention Time (SRT) in a low Hydraulic Retention Time (HRT) even at environment temperature. Although, it seems that there are some disadvantages in UASB reactors, like high operational cost and special patent design types related vendor. [6] Today, modeling methods are useful tools for description and prediction of the performance of anaerobic treatment systems. [7] There are various models among these models including Monod, [8] Contois, [9] First and Second-Order Grau, [10] Stover-Kincannon Modified, [11] Chen and Hashimoto, [12] Michaelis-Menten, [13] First-Order Substrate Removal Model [14] etc. for prediction of effluent substrate concentration of anaerobic treatment systems. The input data to all these models should be at steady-state condition of reactor performance. In these models, it is assumed that sludge granules are in spherical form in reactor and relative concentrations of acid-forming and methanogenic bacteria are equal in them. [15]

In the last decade, more than 75 active industrial townships in Iran are equipped with industrial wastewater treatment plants and in most of them including Kalat Mashhad, Salmanshahr, Bandarabas, Shahid Rajayi, Islam Abad Qarb, Faraman and Amirkabir of Kashan, there are UASB reactors with various designs. The aim of this study is predicting the effluent COD of UASB reactors with flowing mathematical models. In this study, for predicting the effluent substrate concentration of UASB reactor of Kashan's Amirkabir industrial township wastewater treatment plant, kinetic models of Monod, Contois, second-order Grau and modified Stover-Kincannon were used and the results of the current study were compared with the results of other studies.


  Material and Methods Top


The specifications of UASB reactor of amirkabir industrial township wastewater treatment plant

UASB reactor in Amirkabir industrial township wastewater treatment plant with the volume of 144m 3 (length and width: 6 m, effective depth: 4m) like Clarigestor reactor that is the ancestor of UASB reactors, has no Gas-Liquid-Solid separator system, heating system and baffles to deflect the gas bubbles produced to gas cap. This reactor was designed based on maximum discharge of 350 m 3 /d, maximum HRT of 9.87h, maximum up-flow velocity of 0.405m/h and acceptance of maximum organic loading rate of 1.82 Kg COD/m 3 .d or 0.972 Kg COD/m 3 .d.

Influent wastewater characteristics of UASB reactor

About 65% of wastewater produced in AmirKabir Industrial Township is of sanitary wastewater (human) and the remaining are industrial wastewater that after passing from screening unit, grit removal chamber, Grease removal unit and equalization tank, enter UASB reactor. It can be said that influent industrial wastewater of treatment plant was mostly of textile, carpet weaving, paper making and food industries (dairies and poultry)

Characteristics of influent wastewater of treatment plant UASB reactor during 200 consecutive days were shown in [Table 1]. As shown in the table, influent wastewater of this reactor is a weak industrial sewage. In this study, by measuring Nitrogen and phosphor concentrations of influent wastewater to reactor, it was defined that the amount of influent wastewater nitrogen and phosphor was more than the required amount for anaerobic treatment and there was no need to add these nutrients materials to reactor. Because in anaerobic treatment process, for wastewater with COD <3000 mg/L, ratio COD: N: P= 350:5:1 is used [16] , while the average ratio in the study was 350:28.52:2.59.
Table 1: Characteristics of influent wastewater to UASB reactor during 200 consecutive days

Click here to view


Laboratory methods

COD, TSS, SO 4 -2 , VSS, Ph tests were measured every other day, BOD 5 , once in a week and nitrogen and phosphor of influent wastewater at the beginning of applying each new HRT. COD, BOD 5 , SO 4 -2 , TSS, VSS, total nitrogen, total phosphor and Orthophosphate parameters were performed in accordance with standard water and wastewater experiment methods. [17] To measure COD, Aqualytic photometer (AL-250) was used and to measure BOD 5 , Aqualytic package (BOD-system Oxi-Direct) was provided and Aqualytic photometer (Muli-Direct) was used to measure SO 4 -2 , total nitrogen, total phosphor and orthophosphate parameters. It can be said that all Aqualytic devices were made in Germany. In addition, to measure pH, portable pH meter (Jenway, 13145 made in England) was applied. It should be said that sampling method and experiments were double sampling and averaging of two samples.


  Results Top


UASB reactor set up and operation

[Table 2] indicates a summary of UASB reactor set up and operation during 200 days. As shown in the table, reactor set up was started with HRT of 14.4 d and organic loading rate of 0.044 Kg COD/m 3 .d or 0.023 Kg BOD 5 /m 3 .d. This loading rate is about 11 times smaller than good loading rate for UASB reactor set up (0.5 Kg COD/m 3 .d) [18] and this was due to low discharge of influent wastewater of treatment plant in beginning days of launching. By increasing the discharge of influent wastewater in the following days, HRT reduction to 0.9d and increase of organic loading rate to 0.848 Kg COD/m 3 .d or 0.445 Kg BOD 5 /m 3 .d were occurred at the end of 200 days. As shown in [Figure 1] showing removal efficiencies of COD, BOD 5 based on HRT, the highest COD and BOD 5 removal efficiencies were observed 70.2% and 64.5%, respectively in HRT of 0.9 d. As is shown in this figure, by reduction of HRT, removal efficiencies of COD, BOD 5 are increased. Regarding weak industrial wastewater treatment, the reduction of HRT leads into better mass transfer and this is due to better hydraulic mixture and more contact of biomass and influent wastewater. Indeed, dilute wastewaters form low mass transfer force between biomass and food materials and the activity of biomass is reduced based on Monod equation. [19]
Figure 1: Removal efficiencies of COD and BOD5 considering hydraulic retention time

Click here to view
Table 2: The summary of UASB reactor performance stages

Click here to view



  Formulization of Synthetic Models Top


Monod model

In a UASB reactor with no biomass recycle, changes rate in biomass and substrate concentration are shown by equations 1, 2. Total ratio of the existing biomass in reactor to disposed biomass per time is called cell residence time (solids) that is calculated using equation 3. Equation 4 shows the relationship between specific growth rate and growth-limiting substrate concentration. If in steady state condition, influent biomass concentration to reactor is ignored, by substituting equations 3, 4 into equations 1, 2, equations 5, 6 are achieved. Then by arrangement and linearization of the equations, linear equation 7 is obtained and by plotting this equation, synthetic coefficients of Y, K d are calculated. [13] In Monod model, except equation 2, the concentration changes rate of substrate is expressed by equation 8. [3] By equation 3 and 9 that shows substrate removal rate based on substrate mass balance in a biological reactor, linear equation 10 is obtained, by which synthetic coefficients of K, K s are achieved. Then, by obtained K, Y coefficients and by equation 11, μmax coefficient can be calculated. [3] Finally, by arranging equation 6, equation 12 is obtained that is used to predict effluent substrate concentration of reactor. [20]



Where, Q is inflow discharge to reactor (L/d), V is reactor volume (L), S i is influent substrate concentration (g COD/L), S e effluent substrate concentration (g COD/L), X is total biomass concentration in reactor (g VSS/L), X i is influent biomass concentration (g VSS/L), X e is effluent biomass concentration (g VSS/L), Y is yielding coefficient (g VSS/g COD), K d is endogenous decay coefficient (d -1 ), μ is specific growth rate (d-1), μmax is maximum specific growth rate (d -1 ), K s is half-velocity constant (g COD/L), K is maximum substrate consumption rate per microorganism mass (g COD/g VSS.d), θ is hydraulic retention time (d) and θc is solids retention time (d).

Contois model

Like Monod model, in Contois model, to calculate synthetic coefficients of Y, K d , linear equation 7 is used. In this model, the relationship between specific growth rate and growth-limiting substrate concentration is shown as equation 13. By substituting equation 5 into equaiton1, equation 14 is obtained and by arranging it, linear equation 15 is obtained, by which β and μmax synthetic coefficients are achieved and finally equation 16 is achieve using it to predict effluent substrate concentration of reactor.



In these equations, β is synthetic constant of Contois model (g COD/g VSS). Other parameters are already defined.

Second-order grau model

By linearization of equation 17 that shows substrate concentration changes rate in second-Order Grau model [10] , linear equation 18 was obtained. If parameter α equals Si/K 2(S) .X and parameter b is considered a constant number, linear equation 19 is obtained [21],[22] that by arranging it, equation 20 is used to predict effluent substrate concentration of reactor.



In these equations, K 2(S) is constant of removal rate of second-order substrate in Grau model (d -1 ), α parameter equals Si/K 2(S) .X (g COD.d/g VSS) and parameter b is without unit. Other parameters are defined already.

Modified stover-kincannon model

Changes rate in substrate concentration in modified Stover-Kincannon model is shown in equation 21. By assuming equations 9 and 21 equal and arrangement, linearization and reversing, linear equation 22 is achieved, by which synthetic coefficients K B , U max are calculated. [23] Then, by this equation, equation 23 is obtained to predict the effluent substrate concentration of reactor.



In these equations, K B is saturation constant (g COD/L.d) and U max is maximum rate constant of substrate consumption (g COD/L.d). Other parameters are defined already.


  Applying Synthetic Models in UASB Reactor Top


Monod model

Considering linear equation 7, by plotting S i -S e /θ.X in front of 1/θC , [Figure 2] is obtained, by which synthetic coefficients Y and K d were 0.608 g VSS/g COD and 0.0164 d-1 with correlation coefficient ( R2) of 0.928. Also, based on [Figure 3] that is plotting θ.X/S i -S e in front of 1/Se by linear equation 10, synthetic coefficients K, K s are 0.0137 g COD/g VSS.d and 0.189g COD/L with correlation coefficient of 0.904. Also, by product of synthetic coefficients K, Y based on equation 11, synthetic coefficient μmax equal to 0.008d-1 was obtained. Then, by equation 12, equation 24 was obtained to predict effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor. In [Table 3], the comparison of synthetic coefficients of Monod model in this study with some of the studies performed on UASB reactor is shown. As is shown in this table, there is a considerable difference in synthetic coefficients compared to other studies and this difference is due to reactor characteristics and the type of substrate or influent wastewater. [13]
Figure 2: Diagram of determining synthetic coefficients of Y, Kd in Monod model

Click here to view
Figure 3: Diagram of determining synthetic coefficients of Y, Ks in Monod model

Click here to view
Table 3: The comparison of synthetic coefficients of Monod model with other studies in UASB

Click here to view




Contois model

Like Monod model, to calculate synthetic coefficients of Y, K d in Contois model, linear equation 7 is used. [13] To calculate synthetic coefficients of β and μmax , by linear equation 15, by plotting θC /1+θC .K d in front of X/S e , that is shown in [Figure 4], synthetic coefficients of β and μmax as 0.0212 g COD/g VSS and 0.0132 d-1 with correlation coefficient of 0.975 were achieved. Finally, for prediction of effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor, by equation 16, equation 25 was obtained. The comparison of synthetic coefficients of Contois model in this study with some of the studies on UASB is shown in [Table 4]. The resulting synthetic coefficients of β and μmax were in line with the values achieved in Hu et al. studies [9] . In a study conducted by Martin et al. on olive mill wastewater treatment, it was found that Contois model was more suitable and practical compared to Monod model to predict substrate removal rate in UASB reactor. [25]
Figure 4: The diagram of determining synthetic coefficients of β and μmax in Contois model

Click here to view
Table 4: The comparison of synthetic coefficients of Contois model with other studies in UASB reactor

Click here to view




Second-order grau model

[Figure 5] is plot of S i .θ/S i -S e for θ by linear equation 19 and according to it, parameters α, b were achieved 0.583 g COD.d/g VSS and 2.023 with correlation coefficient of 0.981. Then, based on equation 20, equation 26 to predict effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor was used. But as parameter α is equal S i /K 2(S) .X and in hydraulic retention time 0.9d that UASB reactor had the highest removal efficiencies of organic matter, average S i and X was 0.763 g COD/L and 7.808 g VSS/L, synthetic coefficient K 2(S) will be 0.168d-1. In [Table 5], the comparison of the parameters and obtained synthetic coefficient in this study with other studies on UASB reactor is shown and the results were in line with the results of the studies conducted by Isik and Sponza. [13]
Figure 5: The diagram of determining α, b parameters in second‑Order Grau model

Click here to view
Table 5: The comparison of synthetic coefficients of second-Order Grau model with other studies in UASB reactor

Click here to view




Modified stover-Kincannon model

Synthetic coefficients K B and U max were achieved based on linear equation 22 by plotting V/Q (S i -S e ) for V/Q.Si in [Figure 6] as 2.924 g COD/L.d and 1.502 g COD/L.d with correlation coefficient 0.990. Thus, based on equation 23, equation 27 can be obtained and it can be used to predict effluent COD concentration of UASB reactor. In [Table 6], the comparison of the resulting synthetic coefficients in this study with other studies on some of anaerobic reactors is shown and the results were in line with the results of Yilmaz et al. studies. [28]
Figure 6: The diagram of determining synthetic coefficients KB and Umax in Modified Stover‑Kincannon model

Click here to view
Table 6: The comparison of synthetic coefficients of modified stover-kincannon model with other studies

Click here to view





  Discussion Top


In the current study, removal efficiency of organic materials in UASB reactor was increased with reduction of hydraulic retention time and it can be predicted that by increasing inflow discharge to UASB reactor in future days, more reduction of hydraulic retention time will increase confusion, reduction of half-velocity constant coefficient (K S ) and increasing efficiency of UASB reactor. By synthetic investigation of this reactor, the highest correlation coefficient was related to modified Stover-Kincannon model, Second-Order Grau model, Monod model, Contois and Monod, respectively. Also, the equations for predication of effluent COD coefficient of UASB reactor showed that in modified Stover-Kincannon and Second-Order Grau models, effluent COD concentration of reactor (S e ) was a function of influent COD concentration to reactor (S i ), while in Contois and Monod models, Se is a function of solids retention time (θC ).


  Acknowledgment Top


The authors of this paper are thankful of the kind collaboration of Mr. Seyed Alireza Moemeni and his colleagues in Industrial townships of Isfahan province.


  Abbreviations Top


Q: Inflow discharge to reactor (L/d)
V: Reactor volume (L)
S i : Influent substrate concentration
S e : Effluent substrate concentration
X: Total biomass concentration in reactor (g VSS/L)
X i : Influent biomass concentration (g VSS/L)
X e : Effluent biomass concentration (g VSS/L)
θ: Hydraulic retention time (d)
θC : Solids retention time (d)
Y: Yielding coefficient (g VSS/g COD)
K d : Endogenous decay coefficient (d -1)
μ: Specific growth rate (d -1 )
μmax : Maximum specific growth rate (d -1)
K s : Half-velocity constant (g COD/L)
K: Maximum substrate consumption rate in microorganism mass (g COD/g VSS.d)
β: Synthetic constant of Contois model (g COD/g VSS)
K 2(S) :Substrate removal rate of second-Order Grau model, Monod model
α: Equals S i /K2(S) .X (g COD.d/g VSS)
b: Without unit
KB : Saturation constant (g COD/L.d)
Umax : Maximum substrate consumption rate (g COD/L.d)

 
  References Top

1.Singh SP, Prerna P. Review of recent advances in anaerobic packed-bed biogas reactors. Renewable and Sustainable Energy reviews 2009;13:1569-75.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.Akunna JC, Clark M. Performance of granular-bed anaerobic baffled reactor (GRABBR) treating whisky distillery wastewater. Bioresource Technology 2000;4:257-261.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Tchobanoglous G, Burton F, Stensel HD. Metcalf and Eddy Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Reuse. Fourth Edition, McGraw Hill Inc; 2003.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.Lettinga G, van Velsen AFM, Hobma SW, De Zeeuw W, Klapwijk A. Use of the upflow sludge blanket (USB) reactor concept for biological wastewater treatment, especially for anaerobic treatment. Biotechnol Bioeng 1980;22:699-734.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Sato N, Okubo T, Onodera T, Ohashi A, Harado H. Prospects for a self-sustainable sewage treatment system: A case study on full-scale UASB system in India Yamuna river basin. J Environ. Manager 2006;80:198-207.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.Hulshoff Pol LW, De Zeeuw WJ, Lettinga G. Granulation in UASB reactor. Water Sci Technol 1983;15:291-304.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.Jimenez AM, Borja R, Martin A. A comparative kinetic evaluation of the anaerobic digestion of untreated molasses and molasses previously fermented with Penicillium decumbens in batch reactors. Biochemistry Engineering Journal 2004;18:121-32.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.Anderson GK, Kasapgil B, Ince O. Microbial kinetics of a membrane anaerobic reactor system. Environ Technol 1996;17:449-64.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.Hu WC, Thayanith K, Forster CF. A kinetic study of the anaerobic digestion of ice-cream wastewater. Process Biochem 2002;37:965-71.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.Grau P, Dohanyas M, Chudoba J. Kinetic of multicomponent substrate removal by activated sludge. Water Research 1975;9:637-642.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.Stover EL, Kincannon DF. Rotating Biological Contactor scale-up and design. 1 st International Conference on Fixed Film Biological Processes Kings Island, Ohio, USA: 1982;1-12.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.Chen YR, Hashimoto AG. Substrate utilization kinetic model for biological treatment processes. Biotechnol and Bioeng 1980;22:2081-95.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.Isik M, Sponza DT. Substrate removal kinetics in an Upflow anaerobic sludge blanket reactor decolorizing simulated textile wastewater. Process Biochemistry 2005;40:1189-98.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.Koppar A. A pseudo-state model for anaerobic bio-nest reactor for treatment of milk parlor wastewater. Master of Science dissertation, Graduate division of the university of Hawaii 2005.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.Saravanan V, Sreekrishnan TR. Modelling anaerobic biofilm reactors--a review. J Environ Manage 2006;81:1-18.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16. Rittman B, McCarty PL. Environmental biotechnology: Principles and applications. McGraw-Hill, New York, 2006.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.APHA/AWWA/WEF. Standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater, 19 th edition, USA: Washington DC; 2005.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.Amin MM. The application of UASB process to reduce the pollution of slaughter wastewater of Isfahan MA. Thesis of health school. Medical sciences of Isfahan University; 1996.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.Barber WP, Stuckey DC. The use of anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR) for wastewater treatment: A review. Water Res 1999;33:1559-78.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.Bhunia P, Ghangrekar MM. Analysis, evaluation, and optimization of kinetic parameters for performance appraisal and design of UASB reactors. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:2132-40.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.Buyukkamaci N, Filibeli A. Determination of kinetic constants of an anaerobic hybrid reactor. Process Biochemistry 2002;38:73-79.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.Broch-Due A, Anderson R, Kristofferson O. Pilot plant experience with an aerobic moving bed biofilm reactor for treatment of NSSC wastewater. Wat Sci Tech 1994;29:283-94.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.Kosinska K, Misskiewicz T. Performance of an anaerobic bioreactor with biomass recycling, continuously removing COD and sulphate from industrial wastes. Bioresour Technol 2009;100:86-90.  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.Sponza DT, Uluköy A. Kinetic of carbonaceous substrate in an upflow anaerobic sludge sludge blanket (UASB) reactor treating 2, 4 dichlorophenol (2,4 DCP). J Environ Manage 2008;86:121-31.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.Martin A, Borja R, Banks CJ. Kinetic model for substrate utilization and methane production during the anaerobic digestion of olive mill wastewater and condensation water waste. J Chem Technol Biotechnol 1994:60:7-16.  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.Ubay G. Anaerobic treatment of municipal wastewaters. Ph.D Thesis, Istanbul Technical University, Turkey; 1994.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.Öztürk I, Altinbas M, Arikan O, Demir A. Anaerobic UASBR treatment of young landfill leachate. In: Proceedings of the first international workshop on environmental quality and environmental engineering in the middle east region. Konya, Turkey; 1998.  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.T, Yuceer A, Basibuyuk M. A comparison of the performance of mesophilic and thermophilic anaerobic filters treating papermill wastewater. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:156-63.  Back to cited text no. 28
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6]


This article has been cited by
1 Effect of hydraulic retention time on the methanogenic step of a two-stage anaerobic digestion system from sewage sludge and wine vinasse: Microbial and kinetic evaluation
Miriam Tena,Montserrat Perez,Rosario Solera
Fuel. 2021; 296: 120674
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Impact of Saddle-Chips biocarrier on treating mariculture wastewater by moving bed biofilm reactor (MBBR): Mechanism and kinetic study
Musa Abubakar Tadda, Rubina Altaf, Mostafa Gouda, Prangya Ranjan Rout, Abubakar Shitu, Zhangying Ye, Songming Zhu, Dezhao Liu
Journal of Environmental Chemical Engineering. 2021; 9(6): 106710
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 The Impact of Educational Intervention Based on Health Belief Model on Nutritional Behaviors Associated with Gastric Cancer among Iranian Female Employees
Ali Khani Jeihooni,Zahra Khiyali,Mansour Kashfi,Farzaneh Ghalegolab,Pooyan Afzali Harsini
Journal of Education and Community Health. 2020; 7(4): 229
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Performance evaluation and kinetic parameter analysis for static granular bed reactor (SGBR) for treating poultry slaughterhouse wastewater at mesophilic condition
M. Basitere,M. Njoya,Z. Rinquest,S. K. O. Ntwampe,M. S. Sheldon
Water Practice and Technology. 2019;
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
5 Performance evaluation and substrate removal kinetics in an up-flow anaerobic hybrid membrane bioreactor treating simulated high-strength wastewater
Isha Burman,Alok Sinha
Environmental Technology. 2018; : 1
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
6 Four-stage biofilm anaerobic–anoxic–oxic–oxic system for strengthening the biological treatment of coking wastewater: COD removal behaviors and biokinetic modeling
Xin Zhou,Zeqian Zhang,Yaxin Li
RSC Adv.. 2017; 7(38): 23714
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Previous article  Next article
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Material and Methods
Results
Discussion
Acknowledgment
Abbreviations
Formulization of...
Applying Synthet...
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed5672    
    Printed206    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded726    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 6    

Recommend this journal