Mechanistic assessment reveals the significance of HRT and MLSS concentration in balancing carbon diversion and removal in the A-stage process
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, the shift toward energy and resource-efficient wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) has become a necessity rather than a choice. For this purpose, there has been a restored interest in replacing the typical energy and resource-extensive activated sludge process with the two-stage Adsorption/bio-oxidation (A/B) configuration. In the A/B configuration, the role of the A-stage process is to maximize organics diversion to the solids stream and control the following B-stage's influent to allow for the attainment of tangible energy savings. Operating at very short retention times and high loading rates, the influence of the operational conditions on the A-stage process become more tangible than typical activated sludge . Nonetheless, there is very limited understanding of the influence of operational parameters on the A-stage process. Moreover, no studies in the literature have explored the influence of any operational/design parameters on the Alternating Activated Adsorption (AAA) technology which is a novel A-stage variant. Hence, this article mechanistically investigates the independent effect of different operational parameters on the AAA technology. It was inferred that solids retention time (SRT) shall remain below 1 day to allow for energy savings up to 45% and redirecting up to 46% of the influent's COD to the recovery streams. In the meantime, the hydraulic retention time (HRT) can be increased up to 4 h to remove up to 75% of the influent's COD with only 19% decline of the system's COD redirection ability. Moreover, it was observed that the high biomass concentration (above 3000 mg/L) amplified the effect of the sludge poor settleability either due to pin floc settling or high SVI 30 which resulted in COD removal below 60%. Meanwhile, the concentration of the extracellular polymeric substances (EPS) was not found to be influenced or to influence process performance. The findings of this study can be employed to formulate an integrative operational approach in which different operational parameters are incorporated to better control the A-stage process and achieve complex objectives.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".