Parameters Governing Permeate Flux in an Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor Treating Low‐Strength Municipal Wastewaters: A Literature Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this review was to conduct a comprehensive literature survey to identify the parameters that govern the permeate flux in an anaerobic membrane bioreactor (AnMBR) treating municipal wastewater. Based on the survey, research to date indicates that the optimal membrane system for an AnMBR consists of an organic, hydrophilic, and negatively charged membrane with a pore size of approximately 0.1 microm. The use of both external and submerged membrane configurations shows promise. The operating parameters that affect permeate flux in an external membrane system are transmembrane pressure (TMP) and cross-flow velocity. The operating parameters that affect permeate flux in a submerged membrane system are TMP, sparging intensity, and duration of the relaxation period. Both cross-flow velocity and sparging intensity impart a significant amount of shear force on the biomass in an AnMBR. High shear forces can reduce the microbial activity in an AnMBR. In addition, high shear forces can reduce the size of the biosolids in the mixed liquor and increase the release of soluble microbial products. In this respect, external and submerged membrane systems are expected to perform differently because the magnitude of the shear forces to which the biomass is exposed in an external membrane system is significantly greater than that in a submerged system. The size of the biosolid particles and concentration of soluble microbial products in the mixed liquor affect permeate flux. Higher concentrations of soluble microbial products may be present in the mixed liquor when an AnMBR is operated at relatively low operating temperatures. Aerobic polishing following anaerobic treatment can potentially significantly reduce the concentration of some components of the soluble microbial products in the mixed liquor. It is not possible to remove the foulant layer on an organic membrane with caustic cleaning alone. Acidic cleaning or acidic cleaning followed by caustic cleaning is required to remove the foulant layer. This suggests that both biological/organic and inorganic material contribute to membrane fouling.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".