Impact of AnMBR operating conditions on anaerobic digestion of waste activated sludge
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The impact of solids retention time (SRT) and hydraulic retention time (HRT) on anaerobic digestion of thickened waste activated sludge (TWAS) in a pilot‐scale anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) was compared with that achieved in conventional anaerobic digestions (CD). The AnMBR was able to successfully digest municipal TWAS at HRTs ranging from 7 to 15 days and SRTs ranging from 15 to 30 days. Increasing SRT in the AnMBR resulted in a significant improvement in COD and VS removal efficiency when compared against CD operating at the same HRT. The VS and COD destructions (35%–50%) observed in the AnMBR were similar to those observed in CD operating at the same SRT but longer HRTs. Operation at elevated ratios of SRT/HRT resulted in the production of a thickened biosolid (2%–3% TS). Specific methane production values for AnMBR operating at HRT‐SRT ratios of 15–30, 7–30, and 7–15 were 0.19, 0.19, and 0.14 m 3 CH 4 /kg of COD fed, respectively, showing a 25% increase in methane production with SRT. A model based upon describing hydrolysis of biodegradable solids using first‐order kinetics was able to describe VS destruction as a function of SRT. Practitioner points The AnMBR process was able to successfully digest waste activated sludge at a shorter seven‐day HRTs Operation at elevated ratios of SRT/HRT resulted in enhanced biogas and thickened biosolid (2%–3% TS) production requiring reduced downstream processing The AnMBR process produces a particle‐free permeate that might be suitable for side stream nutrient recovery A model developed by considering hydrolysis as a limiting process can be used to determine design SRTs.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 it