lastID = -292820
Skip to main content Skip to top navigation Skip to site search
Top of page
  • My citations options
    Web Back (from Web)
    Chicago Back (from Chicago)
    MLA Back (from MLA)
Close action menu

You need to login to use this feature.

Please wait a moment…
Please wait while we update your results...
Please wait a moment...
Loading icon
Description: Access Water
Context Menu
Description: Book cover
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles
  • Browse
  • Compilations
    • Compilations list
  • Subscriptions
Tools

Related contents

Loading related content

Workflow

No linked records yet

X
  • Current: 2020-01-31 21:11:40 Administrator
  • 2020-01-31 21:11:39 Administrator
Description: Access Water
  • Browse
  • Compilations
  • Subscriptions
Log in
0
Accessibility Options

Base text size -

This is a sample piece of body text
Larger
Smaller
  • Shopping basket (0)
  • Accessibility options
  • Return to previous
Description: Book cover
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles

Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles

Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles

  • New
  • View
  • Details
  • Reader
  • Default
  • Share
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • New
  • View
  • Default view
  • Reader view
  • Data view
  • Details

This page cannot be printed from here

Please use the dedicated print option from the 'view' drop down menu located in the blue ribbon in the top, right section of the publication.

screenshot of print menu option

Description: Book cover
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles
Abstract
In the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process, coarse bubble aeration is used to scour the surface of the membranes to help control biofouling. Energy required for coarse bubble aeration represents a significant fraction of the total power demand for these systems. To reduce this demand, MBR systems manufactured by Zenon Environmental Inc. operate with cyclic aeration, using a cycle of 10 seconds on and 10 seconds off (10/10 aeration cycle). The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential to reduce power requirements for a full-scale Zenon MBR facility that is currently under construction by application of an alternative aeration cycle. The alternative cycle consists of 10 seconds on and 30 seconds off (10/30 aeration cycle), which reduces scouring air requirements by 50% from the 10/10 cycle. To achieve this objective, a pilot-scale evaluation using an existing 30-gallon per minute MBR plant was conducted. The specific goal of the evaluation was to compare the ability of the 10/10 and 10/30 cycles to control biofouling while operating over a range of flux values. In addition to the pilot-scale testing, an estimate of anticipated power costs savings resulting from implementation of the 10/30 cycle was determined for the full-scale facility. Key findings include: (1) While operating with the 10/10 cycle at a flux of 12 gallons/ft2-d (gfd) over a period of two months, there was no measurable fouling observed. The fouling rates at 15 and 18 gfd were approximately 0.1 and 0.3 psi/day, respectively; (2) While operating with the 10/30 cycle at 12 gfd, a relatively significant amount of fouling was observed after only 14 days of operation, indicating that long operating periods could not be sustained between membrane cleanings; (3) 10/30 cycle fouling, at a flux of 12 gfd, was significantly reduced by modifying the permeate production cycle of the system from 12 minutes permeation/30 seconds relaxation to 12 minutes/45 seconds. As a result of this modification, it was estimated that the system could be operated for 17 months before the membranes would need to be cleaned; (4) 10/30 cycle fouling rates at fluxes of 15 and 18 gfd were approximately 1.1 psi/day and 9.4 psi/day, respectively. These rates are significantly higher than what was observed while operating with the 10/10 cycle; (5) It was estimated that implementation of the 10/30 cycle would result in an approximate 20% reduction of the total power requirements, and thus costs, for the full-scale MBR facility.
In the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process, coarse bubble aeration is used to scour the surface of the membranes to help control biofouling. Energy required for coarse bubble aeration represents a significant fraction of the total power demand for these systems. To reduce this demand, MBR systems manufactured by Zenon Environmental Inc. operate with cyclic aeration, using a cycle of 10 seconds on...
Author(s)
Bruce MansellJames PetersonChi-Chung TangRobert HorvathJames Stahl
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 25: Municipal Wastewater Treatment Processes: Membrane Bioreators
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2006
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20060101)2006:11L.1904;1-
DOI10.2175/193864706783750583
Volume / Issue2006 / 11
Content sourceWEFTEC
First / last page(s)1904 - 1916
Copyright2006
Word count415

Purchase price $11.50

Get access
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: Book cover
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles
Pricing
Non-member price: $11.50
Member price:
-292820
Get access
-292820
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.

Details

Description: Book cover
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles
Abstract
In the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process, coarse bubble aeration is used to scour the surface of the membranes to help control biofouling. Energy required for coarse bubble aeration represents a significant fraction of the total power demand for these systems. To reduce this demand, MBR systems manufactured by Zenon Environmental Inc. operate with cyclic aeration, using a cycle of 10 seconds on and 10 seconds off (10/10 aeration cycle). The objective of this study was to evaluate the potential to reduce power requirements for a full-scale Zenon MBR facility that is currently under construction by application of an alternative aeration cycle. The alternative cycle consists of 10 seconds on and 30 seconds off (10/30 aeration cycle), which reduces scouring air requirements by 50% from the 10/10 cycle. To achieve this objective, a pilot-scale evaluation using an existing 30-gallon per minute MBR plant was conducted. The specific goal of the evaluation was to compare the ability of the 10/10 and 10/30 cycles to control biofouling while operating over a range of flux values. In addition to the pilot-scale testing, an estimate of anticipated power costs savings resulting from implementation of the 10/30 cycle was determined for the full-scale facility. Key findings include: (1) While operating with the 10/10 cycle at a flux of 12 gallons/ft2-d (gfd) over a period of two months, there was no measurable fouling observed. The fouling rates at 15 and 18 gfd were approximately 0.1 and 0.3 psi/day, respectively; (2) While operating with the 10/30 cycle at 12 gfd, a relatively significant amount of fouling was observed after only 14 days of operation, indicating that long operating periods could not be sustained between membrane cleanings; (3) 10/30 cycle fouling, at a flux of 12 gfd, was significantly reduced by modifying the permeate production cycle of the system from 12 minutes permeation/30 seconds relaxation to 12 minutes/45 seconds. As a result of this modification, it was estimated that the system could be operated for 17 months before the membranes would need to be cleaned; (4) 10/30 cycle fouling rates at fluxes of 15 and 18 gfd were approximately 1.1 psi/day and 9.4 psi/day, respectively. These rates are significantly higher than what was observed while operating with the 10/10 cycle; (5) It was estimated that implementation of the 10/30 cycle would result in an approximate 20% reduction of the total power requirements, and thus costs, for the full-scale MBR facility.
In the membrane bioreactor (MBR) process, coarse bubble aeration is used to scour the surface of the membranes to help control biofouling. Energy required for coarse bubble aeration represents a significant fraction of the total power demand for these systems. To reduce this demand, MBR systems manufactured by Zenon Environmental Inc. operate with cyclic aeration, using a cycle of 10 seconds on...
Author(s)
Bruce MansellJames PetersonChi-Chung TangRobert HorvathJames Stahl
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 25: Municipal Wastewater Treatment Processes: Membrane Bioreators
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2006
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20060101)2006:11L.1904;1-
DOI10.2175/193864706783750583
Volume / Issue2006 / 11
Content sourceWEFTEC
First / last page(s)1904 - 1916
Copyright2006
Word count415

Actions, changes & tasks

Outstanding Actions

Add action for paragraph

Current Changes

Add signficant change

Current Tasks

Add risk task

Connect with us

Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Connect to us on LinkedIn
Subscribe on YouTube
Powered by Librios Ltd
Powered by Librios Ltd
Authors
Terms of Use
Policies
Help
Accessibility
Contact us
Copyright © 2025 by the Water Environment Federation
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: WWTF Digital Boot 180x150
WWTF Digital (180x150)
Created on Jul 02
Websitehttps:/­/­www.wef.org/­wwtf?utm_medium=WWTF&utm_source=AccessWater&utm_campaign=WWTF
180x150
Bruce Mansell# James Peterson# Chi-Chung Tang# Robert Horvath# James Stahl. Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Web. 31 Oct. 2025. <https://www.accesswater.org?id=-292820CITANCHOR>.
Bruce Mansell# James Peterson# Chi-Chung Tang# Robert Horvath# James Stahl. Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Accessed October 31, 2025. https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-292820CITANCHOR.
Bruce Mansell# James Peterson# Chi-Chung Tang# Robert Horvath# James Stahl
Comparison of Biofouling Control in a Membrane Bioreactor via Two Coarse Bubble Aeration Cycles
Access Water
Water Environment Federation
December 22, 2018
October 31, 2025
https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-292820CITANCHOR