Anaerobic membrane bio‐reactors for waste activated sludge digestion: Tubular versus hollow fiber membrane configurations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article presents the results of pilot scale studies that examined the use of negative and neutral charged tubular and hollow fiber (HF) anaerobic membrane bio‐reactors (AnMBR) for anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge. Both AnMBR configurations were operated at a hydraulic retention time of 15 days, a sludge retention time (SRT) of 30 days, and a total solids loading of 1.2–1.3 kg m−3 day−1. The results indicate that both membrane digesters showed comparable total chemical oxygen demand and volatile solids removals of 47.6 and 49.1% respectively while maintaining a throughput that was two times that of the completely stirred tank reactor (CSTR) type digesters. The performance of the AnMBRs was similar to that of CSTRs operating at 30 days SRT. The AnMBRs were operated for 160 days. During this period no significant fouling was observed and membrane cleaning was not required. The average fluxes for the neutral and negative tubular membranes were 32 and 39 LMH when operated at a trans‐membrane pressure TMP of 30 kPa. The HF membranes were operated at a constant flux of 11 LMH and the average TMP was less than 10 kPa. The critical flux measured for the tubular and HF membranes were near to 30 and 18 LMH mark respectively indicating a better performance by the former. However both AnMBR configurations generated comparable net energy. © 2012 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Environ Prog, 32: 598–604, 2013
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".