Professional Documents
Culture Documents
886-3-4515811#55720
886-3-4622232
http://green.vnu.edu.tw
lcjuang@vnu.edu.tw
(1997)
(1989)
(1987)
(2006 ~)
(2009/10~)
(2004/2 2007/5)
(2004/2~2007/5)
(2003/8~2009/9)
(1997/8~2004/1)
(1994/8 1997/7)
(1994/8~1997/7)
()
()
(
)
--
()
(
(87 (876 (87 (876 (876 987
624) 24) 624) 24)
24)
28)
38 (5-9)
-----35 (10 4)
pH
6 5-8
6.5
8.55
6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0
6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0
6 0-9
6.0
9.00
6 0-9
6.0
9.0
0
6 0 ~ 9.0
6.0
90
DO (mg/L)
6.5
5.5
4.5
--
--
--
--
--
--
550
SS ((mg/L)
g )
25
25
40
100
30
BOD5 (mg/L)
--
--
30
COD (mg/L)
( /L)
(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
100
--
--
--
--
--
10
(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
10
NO3-N (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
50
NH3-N
N (mg/L)
0 1
0.1
0 3
0.3
0 3
0.3
--
--
--
TP (mg/L)
0.02
0.05
--
--
--
--
PO4 3-(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
F-((mg/L)
g )
--
--
--
--
--
15
-(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
S2
(()
(
(87 (876 (87 (876 (87 987(
624) 24) 624) 24) 624)
28)
(CFU/100mL)
50
5000
10000
--200,000
CN (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
Mn (mg/L)
0 05
0.05
0 05
0.05
0 05
0.05
0 05
0.05
0 05
0.05
--
(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
10
(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
10
Ag (mg/L)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
As (mg/L)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
Cd (mg/L)
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.03
2
Cr (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
Cu (mg/L)(g )
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
Hg (mg/L)
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.005
Ni (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
Pb (mg/L)
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
Se (mg/L))
( g/ ))
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
Zn (mg/L)
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
B (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
(mg/L)
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.5
(mg/L)
--
--
--
--
--
(mg/L)
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.005
(S/cm)
--
()
--
750
--
BOD5 (mg/L)
< 15
--
--
TDS ((mg/L)
g )
--
800
--
800
F-(mg/L)
--
0.8
--
0.8
Cl (mg/L)
--
250
175
250
SO4 2-(mg/L)
--
250
200
250
(mg/L)
--
400
--
--
(CFU/100mL)
--
50
(NTU)
--
--
(mg/L)
--
--
30
3.0
--
NO3-N (mg/L)
--
10
--
10
NO2-N (mg/L)
--
0.1
--
NH3-N (mg/L)
--
0.5
--
0.1
TP (mg/L)
--
--
--
--
As (mg/L)
--
0.05
0.05
0.05
Cd (mg/L
--
0.005
001
0.005
Cr (mg/L)
--
0.05
0.1
0.05
Cu (mg/L)
--
1.0
0.2
1.0
Ni (mg/L)
--
--
0.2
0.1
(mg/L)
--
05
0.5
50
5.0
05
0.5
--
0.05
--
0.01
CN (mg/L)
RO
NF
O
+
*
+
+
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
+
O
+
*
*
O
O
+
+
+
*
*
+
O
+
+
+
*
*
O
O
+
+
+
*
*
+
+
+
*
O
*
*
+
O
+
+
O
+
+
O
O
+
+
+
+
+
O
O
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
*
*
*
+
O
*
*
+
+
+
+
+
O
O
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
+
+
O
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
O
*
*
*
*
+
O
O
O
O
O
*
*
*
*
+
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
*
*
*
+
O
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
+
+
O
*
*
*
*
*
O
*
*
+
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
+
*
*
*
*
*
*
+
+
+
+
+
O
O
O
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
*
+
+
+
+
*
*
O
+
+
+
+
+
*
*
*
+
+
*
+
*
*
*
*
*
+
+
+
+
*
*
UF
MF
+
+
O
+
+
+
+
UV+
O
+
*
+
+
*
O
O
+
*
+
+
*
O
O
+
*
+
O
*
O
+
+
*
+
O
+
+
UV
V
10m
10m
BOD
COD
+ o
+
*
*
10
11
Part 1-
Part 2-(MBR)
Part 3-MBR
12
Part 1-
13
14
:
-:
-:UV
-:
:
:///,
(MMF)(AC).
15M cm
:,15M-cm,
RO CDI UV(254nm).
:
1)RO+IX:
1)RO+IX:,,,
,,,.
2)IX+RO:,, ,
,,,.
:,,
TOC UV UF ,IC
.
15
1
2
pH:
Turbidity: , NTU
S.S: ,ppm
Oil & grease: ,ppm
C.O.D: , ppm
Conductivity: ,
s/cm
Resistivity: , M-cm
Alkanility,ppm
Hardness--,ppm
H d
Silica, ppm
L.S.I
SDI
SDI
Bacteria count: ,CFU/100ml
16
:
1 /
1./
2./
3.
4.:,
5./
6.,
7.
8
8.
9./
10.
:
1.:(MMF)(AC)
2.: 2B3T
3.MF/UF/NF/RO/EDR/CEDI
4.O3/UV
5./
17
18
:
RO
NF
UF
MF
ED
BP
DD
PV
MD
GA
(REVERSE OSMOSIS)------
(NANOFILTRATION)-------
(ULTRAFILTRATION)------
(MICROFILTRATION)------
(ELECTRO DIALYSIS)------
DIALYSIS)
(Bipolar Membrane)------
(DIFFUSION DIALYSIS)---
(Pervaporation)--------
(Membrane Distillation)-
(GAS SEPARATION)------SEPARATION)
19
(SPIRAL WOUND)
(PLATE TYPE)
(TUBULER)
(HOLLOW FIBER)
20
RO
, gpd(m3/d)
(%)
%
BW30-400
10,500 (40)
TM 7 2 0- 400L .
10,200 (37)
99 50%
99.50%
99 0%
99.70%
2,000mg/L Nacl
2,000mg/L Nacl
225 PSI
225 PSI
25
25
15%
15%
600 PSI
600 PSI
45
45
3-9
3-9
2-11
2-10
1000 ppm-hours
1000 ppm-hours
<5
<5
polyamide
polyamide
*(mm)
201*1016
201*1016
(mm)
29
32
PH
SDI
()
400 ft
FRP
400 ft2
FRP
21
RO
(scale formation)
(colloidal fouling)
(organic fouling)
22
23
PH
/
24
RO
10%~15%
10%
15%
90%
>1.5
15k
:
15kg/cm
/ 2
-:
: 14.7kg/cm
14 7kg/cm2
: 14.0kg/cm2
25
SACSO3H
WAC:COOH
Ca2+Mg2+
SBAN+(CH3)3
WBA: SO4=Cl
NO3HCO3CO3=SiO4=
26
27
0.45mm
45cm
12mm
10cm
2 5
25mm
10
10cm
1020mm
15cm
2050mm
15cm
28
MMF(MultiMediaFilter)
10 m/hr
1520 m/hr
29
CEDI()
CEDI1990
CEDI
(95%)
.,,(95%)
:pH:5~7, 15M-cm,24Hr
.
CEDI,
,,,
RO,RO,CEDI
.
30
CEDI
31
(1)
( )
1.
2.
32
(2)
( )
33
(3)
( )
2B3T
34
(4)
( )
:
1.
2
2.
3.
4 (CMP)
4.(CMP)
35
(5)
( )
11.MMF/ACF
MMF/ACF
2.
3.RO
4 /UF
4./UF
5.On-line
1.: ,
2.(Local scrubber):
11.UFNF/RO
UFNF/RO
2.MBR,
36
Part 2(MBR)
37
(Transmembrane pressure,
pressure TMP)
Kpa
p
(Flux)
LMH(liter meter2 hr-1)
(Critical flux)
(Subcritical flux)
38
(Foulant)
(Reversible fouling)
(Irreversible fouling)
(Cross flow)
(Dead-end flow)
39
(Side-stream)
(Submerged/immersed)
(S b
d/i
d)
(backflush)
(Chemical cleaning)
40
41
42
(400X)
43
0.4
hr-1
0.3
0.2
0.1
20
40
60
80
100
44
0 min
30 mins later
45
()
46
MBR
MBR
pH meter
pump
air
47
MBR
MBR
()
MBR0.1~0.4m
(RO)
(RO)
48
What is MBR
Pi
Primary
Clarifier
Secondary
Clarifier
Aeration tank
Effluent
wastewater
ASP
Excess sludge
Return sludge
A
A
High quality
Effluent
wastewater
MBR
Aeration tank
Brings conventional
clarification,
l ifi ti
aeration
ti
and filtration together
into a single step
less sludge
49
MBR
1.
1.
2 2.
2.
2
3. 3.
4.
5
5.
6.
7
7.
50
51
52
Dead-end
Permeatee
Cross-flow
Permeate
53
MBRMBR
MBR
MBR
MBR
MBRMBR
50~120 LMH
7-30Kpa
MBR
54
MBR
1990
MBR
MBR
15~50 LMH
3-4KpaMBR
MBR
MBR
55
MBRMBR
MBR
MBR
2002MBRMBR
MBR
56
1.
2
2.
3.
4
4.
5.
6.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5
5.
MLSS
1.
2.
3
3.
1.
2.
3.
57
MBR
1.
2.
1.
2.
1.
2.
58
MBR
pH
MLSS
1.
2.
3.
1
1.
2. MLSS
3. MLSS
4 MLSS
4.
1.
2.
1
1.
2.
3.
1.
2.
3.
4.
59
(Kinematic viscosity)
13%
(Hydraulic
(Hydraulic resistance)
resistance)
(Deterioration)
60
61
P
(PR)
62
(boundary layer)
(bulk
(
convective flow)
)
(back-diffusion effect)
63
pH
pH
pH
pH
(CA)pH 3~8
pH
pH 5
64
(MTC)
(P)MTC
P
65
MBR
MBR ()
66
MBR
(foulants)
(fo lants)
(
(fouling)
g)
67
adsorption
biofilm
biofouling
precipitation
ageing
68
Concentration
Polarization, CP
69
RO
MBR 0.3~5m
70
NF RO
MF UF
MF
71
MBR
1. SS
2.
2
1. SS
2
2.
1.
2. PVDFPE
1.
2. (EPS)
1.
1.
2. 2. EPS
72
MBR
HRT
SRT
1. HRT
2. HRTMLSS
1. SRTEPS
2. SRTMLSS
73
MBR
74
(m)
(mm)
pH
(oC)
Kubota
Kubota
PE
Toray
Toroy
PVDF
0.4
11-13
13
40
0.08
7
75
/
/
/
( mm)
(m2)
(/ )(bar)
)(b )
(m2/m3)
mm
,
(LMH/bar)
(LMH)
(g/l)
Kubota
Kubota
Toray
Toroy
510
515
1000/490/6
0.8
1500/550/6
1.25
1608
1.4
115
115
135
7
1110
30 - 40
6-12
76
GE-Zenon
ZeeWeed
ZW500d
Mitsubishi-Rayon
USFilter
PVDF
PE
(m)
(ID/OD) (mm)
0.04
0.8/1.9
0.4
0.37/0.54
0.4
1.1/2.8
(1000ppm)
2.0-10.5
400
3
1-13
00-400
1.7
1-10
00-400
2.9
pH
(oC)
(mm)
PVDF
3-6
PVDF
0.1
77
GE-Zenon
ZeeWeed
d
ZW500d
Mitsubishi-Rayon
USFilter
(mm)
(//)
(m2)
, (/
)(bar)
(m2/m3)
2198/844/49
1483 /606/886
2000 /1250/30
31 6
31.6
0.55/ -
105
0.1-0.4
25
93
9.3
300
485, 131
333, 71
(LMH/b )
(LMH/bar)
(LMH)
(g/l)
10-20
8-10
5-100
5
10 -20
9-13
2-3
3-6
3
6
78
Part 3-MBR
Characteristics and effects of soluble microbial
products in the effluent of membrane bioreactors
TFT-LCD industry wastewater (TFT-LCD), Domestic
wastewater (DW),
(DW) wool processing industry wastewater
(WPI).
79
Out e
Outline
`
`
`
`
`
80
Introduction
1 Membrane Bioreactor System(MBR)
1.
<traditional activated sludge treatment process>
Primary
sedimentation
tank
A.S. tank
Secondary
sedimentation
tank
Sand
filtration
Disinfection
tank
Effluent
substitute
Membrane bioreactor
Effluent or recycle
<MBR treatment process>
81
82
83
85
86
Wastewater p
pre-treatment system
y
and characteristics
Wastewater source: TFT-LCD industry wastewater (TFT-LCD),
Domestic wastewater (DW), wool processing industry wastewater (WPI).
Process organic
g
wastewater
AOAO+MBR treatment process
Pre-treatment process
MBR
Aerobic
Tank (1)
Anoxic
Tank (1)
TS4
Aerobic
Tank (2)
Anoxic
Tank (2)
TS1
TS2
Effluent
TS3
Adjustment tank
Returned sludge
Sludge drain
Treatment recycle
for sludge
Domestic Wastewater
treated by MBR system
Effluent
Domestic
wastewater
DS3
DS1
DS2
MBR tank
Sludge
g drain
pH adjustment
tank
WPI Process
wastewater
Collection
Tank
Sedimentation
tank
WS1
Sludge (1)
Effluent
Sedimentation
tank
WS4
Aerobic
tank
WS3
Biological
Contactor
Tank
Buffer
tank
Multi-Buffer
t k
tank
Buffer
t k
tank
WS2
Pre-treatment process
Returned sludge
Sludge
g (2)
( )
Sludge (2)
Sludge
treatment
Sludge (1)
Sludge (2)
88
Analysis
A l i items
i
off sampling
li
analysis item
sampling
Water
Organic
quality compounds
analysis
SMP analysis
l i off composition
ii
Total
total protein
EEM
carbohydrate
content
analysis
concentration
analysis
Raw wastewater
MBR influent
In MBR
MBR effluent
89
90
..(2)
( )
COD// Weight =
COD
...(3)
(3)
(Rittmann & McCarty, 2001)
91
92
TFT-LCD
AVE
Range
8 59
8.59
7 74-99.60
7.74
60
DW
AVE
Range
7 77 7.64
7.77
7 64-77.91
91
WPI
AVE
Range
2 09
2.09
1 99-22.30
1.99
30
DO
6.9
5.2-7.9
3.8
2.6-5.5
6.9
6.6-7.2
(mg/L)
Dimethyl
y sulfoxide
Monoethanolamine
Tetramethylammonium
y
Isopropyl
p py Alcohol
Name
SS
(
DMSO
,(CH
)
SO)
(MEA,C
H
ONH
)
Hydroxide
(
TMAH
,
(
IPA
,
2 5
2 81-101
11
0-23
94
282
132-530
(mg/L)
(CH ) NOH)
CH CHOHCH )
VSSMolecular
+
10CH3
0-21 HO 76
70-87 R 255
116-495
OH
structure
(mg/L)
O
S
R N R
OH
SCOD
R
2
1324
910-1524 136 NH
127-152
2423 1939-2857
CH3
(mg/L)
3 2
3 4
DOC
(mg/L)
SCOD/DOC
882.1 616.3-1171.0
3 49
3.49
2 81
2.81
2 75 4 62
2.75-4.62
4 66 4.45-4.86
4.66
4 45 4 86
2 44 3 15
2.44-3.15
UV254
(1/cm)
SUVA
(L/mg-m)
Presume organic
wastewater
g
contained high
concentration Ncompound, such as
DMSO or MEA.
Molecular weight
g ((MW)) distribution of raw wastewater in ((a)TFT-LCD
)
(b)DW (c)WPI
94
DW
WPI
Qin (CMD)
4000
0 0144
0.0144
300
V(m3)
444
0.02
200
SRT(days)
60
30
20-30
20
30
0.04
0.22
0.4
VSS/SS
0 90
0.90
0 76
0.76
0 73
0.73
F/M (gSCOD/gVSS d)
0.24
0.15
0.09
Sludge sampling
95
from MBR tank
In MBR
R
Range
MBR Effluent
A
Ave.
R
Range
A
Ave.
A
Ave.
pH
7.77
7.64-7.91
7.14
6.29-7.71
7.36
HRT:33.3 hours
6.50-7.88
DO(mg/L)
3.8
2.6-5.5
4.4
SRT: 30 days
3.2-5.1
7.0
6.7-7.2
( g )
SS(mg/L)
94
81-101
885
VSS(mg/L)
76
70-87
672
598-736
0-3
SCOD(mg/L)
136
127 152
127-152
70
65 76
65-76
24
19 29
19-29
DOC(mg/L)
29.3
26.6-32.7
18.7
17.9-19.7
10.1
8.6-10.9
SCOD/DOC
4.66
4.45-4.86
3.72
3.60-3.86
2.38
2.20-2.65
UV254(1/cm)
0.136-0.150
0.139 0.132-0.148
0.756-0.776
1.392 1.292-1.526
MBR reactor
R
Range
96
In MBR
MBR Effluent
AVE
Range
AVE
Range
AVE
Range
pH
7.47
7.38-7.57
7.58
7.49-7.66
7.74
7.60-7.88
DO(mg/L)
1.1
0.4-2.8
SS(mg/L)
9260
8375-9856
VSS(mg/L)
8370
7060 9097
7060-9097
SCOD(mg/L)
286
230-350
233
179-282
15
10-26
DOC(mg/L)
69.4
51.2-79.2
64.7
56.0-77.2
8.7
5.2-15.7
SCOD/DOC
4.15
3.03-4.64
3.03
4.64
3.58
3.20-4.16
3.20
4.16
1.80
1.60-1.99
1.60
1.99
MBR reactor
0.4
0.1-0.7
6.4
5.7-7.9
HRT: 2.67 hours
SRT: 60 days
11966 9170-13633
F/M: 0.24 gSCOD/gVSS.d
Pore size: 0.04 m
10790 8442-12693
8442 12693
UV254(1/cm) 0.120
0.081-0.192
SUVA(L/mg-m) 0.176
0.107-0.269
In MBR
Range
MBR Effluent
AVE
Range
AVE
AVE
pH
7.70
7.56-7.90
6.21
DO(mg/L)
6.3
5.8-6.7
3.8
SS(mg/L)
31
26-35
5868
HRT:16 hours
SRT: 20~30 days
2.4-5.4
6.8
6.4-7.0
F/M: 0.09 gSCOD/gVSS.d
4278-7584
3-14
Pore size: 0.47m
VSS(mg/L)
21
17-25
4265
3086-5571
1-9
SCOD(mg/L)
251
210-286
168
120-206
103
68-125
DOC(mg/L)
61.3
35.9-83.8
64.1
49.0-79.5
26.5
16.9-35.7
SCOD/DOC
4 35
4.35
3 41 5 84
3.41-5.84
2 63
2.63
2 23 2 96
2.23-2.96
3 95
3.95
3 50 4 43
3.50-4.43
UV254(1/cm)
0.502 0.378-0.609
0.480
0.323-0.621
0.407
0.261-0.535
1.575
1.268-1.986
98
MBR reactor6.62
5.84-6.68
Range
6.03-6.93
items
WPI
SCOD
78 43(1324286mg/L)
78.43
(1324 286mg/L)
89 65(2423251
89.65
(2423 251 mg/L)
DOC
81.97(384.769.4 mg/L)
93.05(882.161.3 mg/L)
UV254
-23.51((0.0970.120 cm-1)
74.92((2.0000.502cm-1)
99
[4.15]
[3.58]
[1 80]
[1.80]
[[4.66]]
[3.72]
[2.38]
[4 35]
[4.35]
[2.63]
[3.95]
100
[4 27]
[4.27]
[8.98]
[5.2]
[6.48]
[9.29]
[13.13]
[2 29]
[2.29]
101
TFT-LCD
DW
WPI
AVE
MBR
Range
MBR Effluent
AVE
Range
SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)
9.43
7.07~
14.26
14.62
10.16~
23.08
75.57
52.13~
87.41
DOCSMP/DOC
(%)
14.83
7.94~
94
23.42
19.61
12.43~
12
43
31.28
58.01
06
50.67~
64.00
SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)
23 42
23.42
20.41~
26.20
39 63
39.63
35.34~
43.80
DOCSMP/DOC
(%)
37.59
33.53~
42.70
40.41
34.41~
49.09
SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)
7.94
6.28~
8.76
28.42
23.43~
33.92
34.35
30.41~
40.88
DOCSMP/DOC
(%)
12.97
7.99~
99
18.80
28.01
227.20~
20
37.37
50.40
43.58~
43
8
58.78
102
The fulvic
acid has
higher
concentration
The humic
acid has
higher
concentration
EEM fluorescence spectroscopy of the effluent for MBR treatment at (a)blank (b)TFT-LCD
104
(c)DW (d)WPI
Wastewater properties of the permeate from UF membrane filtered with effluent MBR
TFT-LCD
pH
DO(mg/L)
SCOD(mg/L)
DOC(mg/L)
UV254(1/cm)
SUVA(L/mg m)
SUVA(L/mg-m)
SCOD/DOC
DW
WPI
MBR
Effluent
UF
Effluent
(ave)
MBR
Effluent
UF
Effluent
(ave)
MBR
Effluent
UF
Effluent
(ave)
7.87
7
87
6.0
10
5.2
0.040
0 763
0.763
1.99
88.01
01
7.7
7
4.8
0.033
0 701
0.701
1.44
77.54
54
6.0
33
12.6
0.151
1 198
1.198
2.62
77.76
76
6.3
24
9.6
0.118
1 226
1.226
2.51
77.64
64
6.2
73
20.3
0.417
1 252
1.252
3.60
77.68
68
6.5
57
15.0
0.376
1 539
1.539
3.78
105
The SMP content and the ratio of SMP to the concentration of organics at the MBR
effluent and UF permeate
TFT-LCD
MBR
UF
Effluent Effluent
(ave)
DW
WPI
MBR
Effluent
UF
Effluent
(ave)
MBR
UF
Effluent Effluent
(ave)
Carbohydrate
(mg/L)
6.39
5.00
13.53
9.93
18.45
13.70
Protein
(mg/L)
0.97
0.73
1.64
ND
2.45
1.38
SCODSMP
(mg/L)
8.29
6.44
16.94
10.62
23.42
16.73
DOCSMP
(mg/L)
3.08
2.40
6.31
3.97
8.72
6.23
80.27
94.26
51.32
44.26
32.08
29.61
59 32
59.32
50 44
50.44
50 05
50.05
41 58
41.58
42 93
42.93
41 69
41.69
SCODSMP/SCOD
(%)
DOCSMP/DOC
(%)
106
EEM fluorescence
spectroscopy for both of the
MBR effluent and UF
permeate at (a) TFT
TFT-LCD
LCD (b)
DW (c) WPI and (d) TFTLCD (e) DW (f) WPI,
p
y
respectively.
107
Scaling on
the
membrane
surface
Original
membrane has
the consistency
of pore size.
Significant
scaling on the
membrane
surface
Scaling on the
membrane
surface and
the pore size
si e
decrease
SEM photograph on the cross-section of UF membrane filtrated the MBR effluent for
(a)blank(b)TFT LCD (c)DW(d)WPI
(a)blank(b)TFT-LCD
108
109
110
ATR-FTIR spectroscopy of
UF membrane
b
filt t d the
filtrated
th
effluent of MBR
MBR effluent:
In
MBR
reactor:
1. The
weight
component
of carbohydrate
is moremechanisms
than that in MBR,
thatwater
is, thequality
protein for
Relationships
between
the possible
DW removal
and the
1. Thematter
ratio of
C/N isclogged
bigger than
that of TFT-LCD wastewater.
is easily
on MBR
membrane.
both the
reactor and MBR effluent.
2. 2.EEM
fluorescence
spectroscopy
theSMP
composition
of huminThis
acid is
and
fulvicfrom
acidthe
and DOC
/DOC is increased.
caused
The ratio of SCODSMP/SCOD shows
i significantly
is
i ifi ofl protein
greateristhan
hmore
soluble
l bl that
microbiological
i of bi
l i l by-product-like.
b
d
lik
removal
than
carbohydrate.
3. 3.BAP
ought
to beof
thehumic
majoracid
consistent
ofspectroscopy
SMP.
The
intensity
on EEM
is also high.
111
Relationships between the possible TFT-LCD removal mechanisms and the water
quality for both the MBR reactor and MBR effluent.
112
Relationships between the possible WPI removal mechanisms and the water quality for
both the MBR reactor and MBR effluent.
113
114
Co
Co-Researchers
Researchers11 2
3
Institution:
1
2
3
115
116