visvesvaraya technological university jnana …

VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY Jnana Sangama, Belagavi – 590018

A DISSERTATION REPORT

ON

“PULP AND PAPER INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATER TREATMENT

USING MODIFIED EXTERNAL MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR”

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE

AWARD OF DEGREE OF

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY

IN

ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING

Submitted by

SADIQUA ANJUM

(4UB16CEE10)

Under the guidance of

Dr. LOKESHAPPA B

Associate Professor

Department of studies in Civil Engineering,Davangere.

Sponsored by, KARNATAKA STATE COUNCIL FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

Indian Institute Of Science Bengaluru-560012

DEPARTMENT OF STUDIES IN CIVIL ENGINEERING

U.B.D.T. College Of Engineering (A Constituent College of VTU,Belagavi)

DAVANAGERE-577004 (2018)

ABSTRACT

The pulp and paper industrial wastewater is a Complex mixture of organicand

inorganic compounds in higher concentrations which normally depends on the

type of pulping process. Pulp and paper industrial wastewater treatment by

conventional biological processes such as Activated Sludge struggle to treat Pulp

and Paper wastewater.

The Membrane Bioreactor is result of research of clubbing two technologies into a

single step treatment process. One is the Membrane Filtration and another one is

Biological treatment. Dissolved Solids are removed by filtration unit and where as

Biological degradation removes organic content. More number of MBR plants are

established in various industries to treat wastewater. The present study is

concerntrating on study of conventional membrane bioreactor and fabricating a

modified external membrane bioreactor. Various modification is done in design

and fabrication of modified external membrane bioreactor. Modified external

membrane bioreactor fabricate is employed to treat Pulp and Paper industrial

wastewater. Physicochemical parameter of raw Pulp and Paper industrial

wastewater and treated Pulp and Paper industrial wastewater is compared. The

present study focused on treating Pulp and Paper industrial wastewater by

Modified External Membrane Bioreactor. The result obtained showed that highest

removal efficiency of 94.42%, 95.921%, 94.423%,94.56%, 85.90%, 98.286%,

96.63% of Color, Turbidity, EC, TDS, Sulphate, COD, BOD respectively is

obtained. It is found that the Modified External Membrane Bioreactor is efficient

in treating Pulp and Paper Industrial wastewater.

Keywords: Pulp and Paper Industrial wastewater, Modified External

Membrane Bioreactor, Color ,Turbidity, EC, TDS, Sulphate,

COD,BOD.

CONTENTS

CONTENTS PAGE

NO

APPROVAL SHEET Ii

CERTIFICATE Iii

DECLARATION Iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS V

ABSTRACT Vi

CONTENTS Vii

LIST OF FIGURES X

LIST OF TABLES Xii

ABBREVIATIONS Xiii

1 INTRODUCTION 01

1.1 Background 01

1.2 Relevance 02

1.3 Scope 03

1.4 Objectives 03

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 04

2.1 Background 04

2.2 The Earlier Research Work done on Bioreactor by

various authors are discussed in Subsequent Section 06

2.2.1 Removal of Phosphates and Sulphates in SAM

Bioreactor 06

2.2.2 Removal of Color by Using Aerobic and

Anaerobic SAM Bioreactor 07

2.2.3 Comparing Aerobic and Anaerobic MBR 07

2.2.4 Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment by Using

Integrated Membrane Process 07

2.2.5 Removal of Heavy Metals from Combined

Waste by Using Ultrafilteration 08

2.2.6 Comparing the Performances of Conventional

MBR with Biofilm MBR 08

2.2.7 Treatment of Synthetic Wastewater by Using

MBR 08

2.2.8 Treatment of Sewage water by Comparing with

Conventional MBR with MBR 09

2.2.9 Domestic Wastewater Treatment by Using MBR 09

2.2.10 Industrial Wastewater Treatment by Using MBR 09

2.2.11 Municipal Wastewater Treatment incorporating

Submerged MBR 10

2.2.12 Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment by Using

Submerged MBR 10

2.2.13 Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater Treatment

by Using Biological Treatment Process 10

2.3 Comments on Literature Review 11

3 MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY 12

3.1 Material 12

3.1.1 Reaction Tanks 12

3.1.2 Air Pumps 13

3.1.3 Diffusers 13

3.1.4 Valve 14

3.1.5 Diaphragm Pump 14

3.1.6 Sediment Filter 15

3.1.7 Hollow Fiber Membrane Filter 15

3.1.8 Stand 16

3.1.9 Magnetic Stirrer 16

3.1.10 Raw Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater 17

3.2 Methodology 19

3.2.1 Design of Membrane Bioreactor 20

3.2.2 Wastewater Parameter Analysis 23

4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 30

4.1 Reaction Time Optimization 30

4.2 Jar Test for Optimum Dosage of Coagulant 40

4.3 Retention Time for Treatment 41

4.4 Comparison of Raw and Treated Pulp and Paper

Industrial Wastewater with Modified EMBR 42

5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 45

5.1 Summary 45

5.2 Conclusions 45

5.3 Scope for the Future Work 46

REFERENCES 47

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig 2.1(a) Membrane Bioreactor Scheme

05

Fig 2.1(b) Membrane Configuration in MBR

06

Fig 3.1 Photographic view of Acrylic sheet tank

12

Fig 3.2 Photographic view of the Air pump

13

Fig 3.3 Photographic view of the Diffuser

14

Fig 3.4 Photographic view of the Valve

14

Fig 3.5 Photographic view of the Diaphragm pump

15

Fig 3.6 Photographic view of the Sediment Filter

15

Fig 3.7 Photographic view of the Hollow fiber membrane

16

Fig 3.8 Photographic view of the Stand

16

Fig 3.9 Photographic view of the Magnetic stirrer

17

Fig 3.10 Flow chart of Methodology

19

Fig 3.11 Design of Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

20

Fig 3.12 Laboratory scale of Modified EMBR

21

Fig 3.13 Photographic view of Open reflux COD apparatus

24

Fig 3.14 Electrical Conductivity and Total Dissolved Solids 26

Fig 3.15 Photographic view of the pH meter

27

Fig 3.16 Photographic view of the Spectrophotometer

27

Fig 3.17 Photographic view of the Turbidity meter

28

Fig 3.18 Photographic view of the Jar test apparatus

29

Fig 4.1 Reaction time Optimization for Anoxic Tank

31

Fig 4.2 pH, EC, TDS in Anoxic Tank

32

Fig 4.3 Sulphate and Color in Anoxic Tank

33

Fig 4.4 COD in Anoxic Tank

34

Fig 4.5 BOD in Anoxic Tank

34

Fig 4.6 pH, Color in Bioreactor

36

Fig 4.7 Sulphates in Bioreactor

36

Fig 4.8 EC in Bioreactor

37

Fig 4.9 TDS in Bioreactor

38

Fig 4.10 Optimizing the reaction time with BOD

39

Fig 4.11 Optimizing the reaction time with COD

39

Fig 4.12 Jar test for Alum dosage

41

Fig 4.13 Shows the comparison of raw PPIW with Treated PPIW

using MEMBR

43

Fig 4.14 Raw PPIW and the treated PPIW with MEMBR

43

Fig 4.15 Treatment efficiency of PPIW in MEMBR

44

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Material used for experimentation 18

Table 4.1 Reaction timing optimization for Anoxic tank 30

Table 4.2 Shows the pH, EC and TDS in anoxic tank 31

Table 4.3 Shows the Sulphate and Color in Anoxic tank 32

Table 4.4 Shows the COD and BOD in Anoxic tank 33

Table 4.5 Shows the pH, Color and Sulphate in Bioreactor

35

Table 4.6 Shows the EC and TDS in Bioreactor 37

Table 4.7 Shows the optimizing the reaction time with BOD and COD 38

Table 4.8 Shows the amount of Alum Dosage for the settling of effluent 40

Table 4.9 Shows the amount of retention time for each section 41

Table 4.10 Shows the Comparison of raw Pulp and Paper industrial

wastewater with the treated Pulp and Paper Industrial

wastewater with Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

42

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

COD : Chemical Oxygen Demand

BOD : Biochemical Oxygen Demand

Pt-Co : Platinum Cobalt

EC : Electrical Conductivity

TDS : Total Dissolved Solids

MBR : Membrane Bioreactor

EMBR : External Bioreactor

MEMBR : Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

Cu : Copper

Al : Aluminum

Fe

: Iron

Cr : Chromium

Cd : Cadmium

K : Potassium

Zn : Zinc

HF

: Hollow Fibre

CPCB : Central Pollution Control Board

PPM : Pulp and Paper Mill

PPIW : Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater

Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater Treatment Using Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

U B D T College of Engineering, Davangere Page 1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In the evaluation of life water is a unique component which has played a crucial role.

the purpose of water for industrial, agriculture, domestic demand of growing

population is more which increasing day by day which leads to depleting limited

resources and also the quality and quantity of water .therefore sustainable supply of

water and also treating polluted water and supplying that to the community may

leads to overcome from the above impacts. Furthermore also by treating the polluted

water and making that for drinking purpose and domestic use which is the major

challenge for the world. Polluted water can be used for domestic purpose when it has

been treated.

In the India the total paper production is 40% from hardwood and bamboo fiber,

30% is from agro waste and remaining 30% is other. paper publication and

newsprint counts to 2 million tones in which 1.2 million tones of newsprint is

manufactured and remaining is imported from producers it means that 40% of

newsprint brought from other country. India imports 2 million tones of pulp wood

(both soft and hard) and waste paper(sack waste for envelopes waste ,unbleached

grades, magazine waste and cup stock for white grades) for news prints.

In PPM the amount of water consumption for the manufacturing of pulp and paper is

about 250-300metre cube hence the amount of wastewater generated is equal to the

amount of water consumed. the PPIW contains toxic and non biodegradable organic

materials (sulphur components, pulping chemicals, organic acids, chlorinated

lignin’s ,resin acids ,phenolics unsaturated fatty acids and terpense).Discharge of the

pulp and paper mill effluent into the streams causes the depletion of oxygen and also

toxicity makes the environment unstable hence to overcome from this impact we

need to treat it efficiently.



Organic and in Organic matter, bacteria various suspended solids can be remove

efficiently from Membrane process. Hence the filtration and biological treatment

combined called as membrane bioreactor to treat the pulp and paper mill wastewater.

The MBR which offers a more advantage against the conventional treatment. The

membrane bioreactor consists of biological treatment which is the best way to treat

the high organic matter wastewater. The MBR increases the quality of water and

decreases the amount of sludge production, amount of chemicals and need of foot

print area for treatment plant(Ketiva et al., 2013).

1.2 Relevance

The pulp and paper mill industry with respect to natural environment it occupies at a

challenging position depending upon the nature of raw material, type of finished

product and extent of water use .The volume of waste water generated for per metric

ton of paper is upto70 meter cube .In India many industries such as Distillery

Industry, Pulp and Paper industry, Textile Industry, Sugarcane Industry etc are there.

Because of the modernization they are touching a peak point. This leads to the more

production and less concentration on the environment. The effluents from these

industries without treatment or partially treated discharge into the stream may cause

the major impact on environmental system(Pratibha Singh,2007)

In the Environmental Protection to satisfy legal requirements the industries should

remove harmful materials from the wastewater before discharging to the streams. In

general the PPM effluents contain a complex mixture of organic compounds such as

lignin, carbohydrates and extractives. The PPIW is of high BOD and COD

concentrations. If the PPIW discharged without treatment into the streams then it

causes the depletion of oxygen, toxic effect on fish and other aquatic organisms and

also the unacceptable changes to color, turbidity,temperature,and solids content.

It is necessary to develop a several options in the treatment of wastewater from

different industries. As comparing from the last few decades to the present the many

modifications has been taken place for the different type of wastewater treatment in

membrane treatment such as Membrane Bioreactor which shows the eco-friendliness

and higher removal efficiency.



1.3 Scope

The successful application of Modified External Membrane Bioreactor in real

application is a critical issue for treating PPIW. The project “Pulp and Paper

Industrial wastewater Treatment using Modified External Membrane Bioreactor ”

includes the degradation of COD, BOD, color and also it include design theory,

Fabrication of Design, aeration, Bio-treatment, Coagulation , Flocculation and

Membrane filtration to reduce pollution load on soil and on water bodies .This

project is innovative lot of possibility and patentability from outcome of work.

The stringent rule on discharge of industrial wastewater to water bodies and sand is

given by CPCB and concerned regulatory authority .In this way to give an effective

usage of the generated industrial wastewater for domestic use providing a suitable

treatment.The project would help pulp and paper mill industries in the view of

treatment of PPIW. In further days the replacing of Modified EMBR instead of

conventional wastewater treatment process has an effective impacts or potential.

This system can find its application in Distillery Industries, Chemical Industries and

Pulp and Paper Mill Industry etc.

1.4 Objectives

The project entitled PPIW treatment by Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

with following objectives

Developing a Lab-scale External Membrane Bioreactor to reduce power

consumption compared to conventional one

To study significant Physicochemical parameters of Pulp and Paper Industrial

Wastewater.

Optimizing reaction timing of Membrane Bioreactor by examining reduction in

physicochemical parameter values after treatment.

Treating Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater with optimized EMBR

Without considering the seasons Pulp and Paper Mill wastewater collected from the

particular industry work is limited and is located in Karnataka state.



CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Background

Filtration process is a tertiary treatment. The most effective filtration process is the

sand filters from this study it has been observed that the membrane filter is more

effective in the removal of total dissolved solids and giving a dischargeable quality

of wastewater. At the end of any treatment the adoption of Membrane filtration was

compulsory from initial studies to give a extensive treatment for wastewater. The

Membrane filtration with the existing treatment combined methodology. To get a

dischargeable quality of wastewater that’s nothing but the Membrane Bioreactor. It

consists of Bio-reaction followed by Membrane filtration for effective treatment in

single step. This MBR is more popular for industrial wastewater treatment as it

observed from the study.

Membrane Bioreactor establishment is flexible with conditions because of aerobic

process in it. The MBR consists of three sections that are Anoxic section, Bioreactor

and Membrane section. In the anoxic section the nitrification and denitrification

takes place by providing agitation and the removal of nitrogen is more essential

because it is the nutrient for the algae growth. In the Bioreactor the removal of

dissolved and suspended organic constituents takes place through biodegradation

and the removal of suspended matter through physical separation. Bioreactor section

removal efficiency of constituents mainly depends upon the biological treatment. In

this dissolved oxygen of waste water is improved to change the oxygen required for

degradation by providing aeration. Indirectly the degradation of organic matter is

measured by Chemical oxygen demand and Biological oxygen demand it also

indicate oxygen levels .The below Fig 2.1(a) shows the general view of Membrane

Bioreactor.



Fig 2.1(a) Membrane Bioreactor Scheme (source: Keerthi et al., 2013)

Effluent from the Bioreactor is pumped to the membrane section after completion of

the reaction in Bioreactor and in the membrane Bioreactor the Membrane section is

the final treatment. The Biomass separation from the treated water is takes place

when it passed through the Micro or Ultra-filtration Membrane. The types of

Membranes used in the MBR processes are plate and frame, Hollow fiber and

Tubular. The most extensively used Membrane in MBR process is the Hollow Fiber

Membranes. The two ways configuration of Membrane section takes place one is the

Membranes are Submerged into the reactor another is it can be used as a separate

section externally. The bioreacted water is passed through the Membranes by using a

suction pump. At the end of Membrane in Submerged type Bioreactor. With the

application of pressure on membrane the bioreacted water passed through membrane

by using pump in External membrane bioreactor. Depends upon the Design

consideration such as pretreatment, substrate and solids removal, foot print area

requires and nutrients removal the selection of the Membrane configuration is done.

Depending upon the nature of the wastewater the two configurations have different



application. In the MBR process the two configurations are shown below in

Fig.2.1(b).

Fig 2.1 (b) Membrane configurations in Membrane Bioreactor

2.2 The Earlier Research work done on Bioreactor by

various Authors are Discussed in Subsequent Section

2.2.1 Removal of Phosphorus and Sulphates in SAM Bioreactor

This study includes the removal of phosphorus and sulphates in anaerobic

MBR system or Sequencing anoxic membrane bioreactor (SAM) .where the

household wastewater with toilet-flushing water is used for the treatment

purpose. In the submerged membrane the continuously aeration is provided

for nitrification and phosphorus uptake and also the fouling control then this

mixed liquor sent to the anaerobic zone for denitrification and phosphorus

release. The mixed liquor recycled continuously from aerobic to anaerobic

zone in the modified Luzack-Ettinge (MLE) type MBR process. The removal

efficiency of the phosphorus is 93% in SAM and the nitrogen removal



efficiency is about 60%.Nitrogen removal efficiency can be increased in SAM

by increasing the duration of Anoxic phase(Kyu-Hong Ahn et al.,2003).

2.2.2 Removal of Color by Using Aerobic and Anaerobic SAM

Bioreactor

In this experimental study the color is removed from the Pulp and Paper mill

industry wastewater by using sequential anaerobic and aerobic treatment in

the two steps Bioreactor. In aerobic treatment the removal efficiency of color

is 50%, COD 29%, adsordable organic halides 25% and phenol 29% in 8

days. Then it’s sent for the second step where the aerobic treatment is done in

the presence of fungal strain, paecilomyces sp and bacterial strain which

shows the removal efficiency of COD 93%, lignin 81%, color 80% and

absorbable organic halides 78% (Pratibha Singh et al.,2005).

2.2.3 Comparing Aerobic and Anaerobic MBR

In this experimental study the advanced treatment given by comparing

anaerobic process followed by aerobic membrane bioreactor to get the effluent

that can be reused in paper mill industry which results in higher efficiency in

the reduction of COD and Suspended solids where the concentration of

suspended solids in MBR is 2.5 mg/l as compared to 25 mg/l in the activated

sludge .Hence this study demonstrate that anaerobic treatment compared to

aerobic MBR will provide quality effluent (Stahi et al., 2006).

2.2.4 Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment by Using Integrated

Membrane Process

In this experimental study the paper mill wastewater treated with Integrated

Membrane process which consist of continuous membrane filtration and

reverse osmosis to treat paper mill wastewater. The discharge water from

sedimentation tank is send to the anoxic tank where the elimination of

Ammoniacal Nitrogen and dissolved or undissolved organic compounds. The

results shows that the RO water is having a conductivity less than 200 micro



semens per centimeter, COD less than 15 mg/l ,turbidity less than 0.1NTU

and chromate is less than 15PCU.Which conclude that the treated water from

this system can be reused in the manufacturing of paper process (Yuzhong

Zhang et al., 2007).

2.2.5 Removal of Heavy Metals from Combined Waste by Using Ultra

Filtration

This experimental study includes the removal of heavy metal and microbial

contamination from the combined waste that is municipal and industrial

wastewater. The activated sludge process combined with flat sheet membrane.

By using ultra filtration the higher efficiency in the removal of suspended solids

this shows that the removal of Heavy metals such as Al, Fe , Pb , Cu , Ni ,Cu

were removed by 81% ,53%,94% ,91%, 59%, and 49% and Microbial

contamination such as coliform 99% from combined waste hence the MBR is

efficient (Majid Hossienzadeh et al., 2013).

2.2.6 Comparing the Performances of Conventional MBR with

Biofilm MBR

The main objective of this study is to compare the performance of the

conventional membrane bioreactor with biofilm membrane bioreactor .Here the

domestic water is used and the submerged type flat sheet ultra filtration

membrane modules are used in MBR. On comparing both systems the removal

efficiency of COD is about 96% but the Total nitrogen removal efficiency is

more in MBR than conventional membrane system. By comparing the

conventional Membrane Bioreactor with biofilm MBR the improved in the

removal efficiency of nitrogen of 6% takes place in biofilm MBR(Subtil et al.,

2014).

2.2.7 Treatment of Synthetic Wastewater by Using MBR

This experimental study includes treatment of synthetic wastewater

contaminated by petroleum organic compounds in Membrane Biological



Reactor (MBR). The Lab scale MBR process is monitored for five months to

investigate the stability and removal efficiency of the organics and the

ammonia from the synthetic wastewater .The COD and total organic carbon

reduction is about more than 90% .The MBR is more effective in the removal

of the COD and organic compounds from the Synthetic wastewater which is

contaminated by the petrochemical compounds(Wiszniowski et al .,2014).

2.2.8 Treatment of Sewage Water by Comparing with Conventional

MBR and MBR

In this study the sewage water is treated by comparing with the Conventional

treatment plant and Membrane bioreactor plant. Here it is observed that MBR

is more superior than the Conventional treated water where the COD and

BOD, TDS, Oil and grease, TSS, chlorine and sulphate removal efficiency is

higher(Dayalan et al., 2015).

2.2.9 Domestic Wastewater Treatment by Using MBR

In this study the Domestic wastewater is treated by using Membrane

Bioreactor. where the Hollow fiber polymeric membrane used for the

effective treatment .For the treatment process some working conditions given

such as cross flow velocity, transmembrane pressure and air supply .The

results shows that the higher the aeration reduces the cross flow velocity with

the minimum cake formation and quality standard effluent( Priscilla Zconic

Viana et al., 2015).

2.2.10 Industrial Wastewater Treatment by Using MBR

This study demonstrates the importance, process, working and application of

MBR. Its consists of Biological reactor integrated with membranes which

combines with the clarification and filtration. It is a single step process where

the development of long SRT in MBR which tends to the development of

microorganisms which increases the removal efficiency of refractory organic



matter and also makes the system robust to load variation and shock loads(

Saima Fazal et al.,2015).

2.2.11 Municipal Wastewater Treatment Incorporating Submerged

MBR

This experimental study includes the municipal wastewater treatment

incorporating submerged membrane bioreactor in conventional activated

sludge process for more than days.To assess the feasibility and performance

on Municipal water treatment. After a stabilization period of days the MBR

is operated under various temperature and MLSS and different aeration

intensities. The MBR unit is 100% effective(Khum Gurung et al., 2016).

2.2.12 Paper mill wastewater treatment by using submerged MBR

In this study the paper mill wastewater is treated by using submerged

membrane bioreactor and which operated for the treatment of paper mill

industry wastewater at 35h of HRT and 40 d of SRT. The removal efficiency

of COD,NH3-N,Total phosphorus is found to be 98%,92.99% and 96.36%

.Accept the problem of calcium accumulation the organic matter and the

nutrients are removed effectively by using a submerged Bioreactor(Hanife

sari Erkan et al.,2017).

2.2.13Pulp and Paper Industrial Wastewater by Using Biological

Treatment Process

This experimental study includes the treatment of PPIW by using a biological

treatment process. Depends upon the type of the pulping process the

wastewater includes the complex organic and inorganic pollutants.

Conventional biological treatment such as activated sludge is not effective to

treat the PPIW because of its complex nature. Now a days instead of

Conventional biological process the more innovative solution has been given

towards the lagoons , Membrane bioreactor ,sequential batch reactor, aerated



lagoons and anaerobic filters are more effective to treat the pulp and paper

industrial wastewater (Harsh Vashi et al., 2017).

2.3 Comments on Literature Review

Anoxic system the more reduction in physicochemical parameters is

Color, Total Nitrogen and Phosphorus.

Bioreactor the COD and BOD reduction is more

Filtration the Sulphates can be removed with a moderate range.

In Modified EMBR I checked some Physicochemical parameters to

know the reaction in each system.



CHAPTER 3

MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

To meet the objective of work the Materials and Methodology adopted to assess

the various parameters are explained in the subsequent sections.

3.1 Materials

In the experimentation the different types of materials used which are explained

below.

3.1.1 Reaction Tanks

For the treatment of PPIW in the external membrane bioreactor. It consists of

three tanks as shown in the below Fig 3.1 to make the reaction effective, namely

Anoxic tank

Bioreactor

Intermediate tank



Fig. 3.1 Photographic view of the Acrylic sheet Tanks

3.1.2 Air pumps

In the experimentation to provide proper aeration in the bioreactor the two small

air pumps are used. These provided to permit the saturation level of aeration

which pumps 3 Liter/min of air into diffusers. The below Fig.3.2 shows the Air

Pump.



Fig. 3.2 Photographic view of the Air pump

3.1.3 Diffusers

To provide aeration in the form of air bubbles in the Bioreactor the diffusers are

used in the experimentation. Two diffusers that is of fine bubble ceramic type

stick used for two air pumps. As shown in the Fig.3.3

Fig.3.3 Photographic view of the Diffusers



3.1.4 Valve

Ball valve of 1/4 inch are used to control flow through tank hence these valves are

provided. Total number of valves is three for three tanks. To prevent leakages the

basket and nuts are fitted to valves. Shown in Fig.3.4.

Fig. 3.4 Photographic view of the Valve fitted to tank.

3.1.5 Diaphragm pump

To pump the water from intermediate tank to filters the diaphragm pump is

used.Domestic RO plant is similar to Diaphragm pump. The capacity of pump is

1L/min.Fig.3.5 shows a Diaphragm Pump.

Fig. 3.5 Photographic view of the Diaphragm pump



3.1.6 Sediment filter

In between Diaphragm pump and Hollow fiber membrane the sediment filter is

used which is of 10inch length and pore size 5µ is used before HF membrane. To

avoid entry of sediment into the HF membrane and also increasing the life of

Hollow fiber membrane the sediment filter is used. Fig.3.6. Shows a Sediment

Filter.

Fig.3.6 Photographic view of the Sediment Filter

3.1.7 Hollow fiber membrane filter

A hollow fiber membrane of 10 inch length and 0.1µ is used in which the whole

experiment performance is based. It is the main part of EMBR.As shown in the

Fig.3.7.

Fig. 3.7 Photographic view of the Hollow fiber membrane filter



3.1.8 Stand

To maintain a gravity flow between the tanks the stand is designed and fabricated

and also it reduces the amount of power requirement for pumping liquid.

Fabrication of stand is done by using Mild steel plates. As shown in the Fig 3.8

Fig. 3.8 Photographic view of the Stand

3.1.9 Magnetic stirrer

To mix wastewater in Anoxic section the magnetic stirrer is used which consists

of a knob to set the revolution of magnet inside the tank. The rotation speed is

normally depends upon the vertex in the tank filled with the wastewater and

should provide a proper agitation. As shown in the Fig.3.9.



Fig. 3.9 Photographic view of the Magnetic Stirrer

3.1.10 Pulp and Paper industrial wastewater

The PPIW collected from the dandeli.The temperature of the wastewater is

35ºC.This wastewater is collected after bleaching process and it is collected in

plastic cans of 20L capacity and it’s sealed to prevent entry of moisture or any

foreign matter to it. Pulp and paper mill industrial wastewater was kept in freezer at

4ºC to avoid any microorganism activities. After maintaining the temperature of pulp

and paper industrial wastewater to room temperature then only the analysis is done.

Specification of the materials used in the experimentation are tabulated in table 3.1 below



Table 3.1 Shows the Materials used for experimentation

Sl No. Material Specification

1 Three Tanks

Material: Acrylic sheet(5mm thickness)

Size: Anoxic tank and Bioreactor

15x15x25 cm

Intermediate tank-15x15x20 cm

2 One Stand Material: MS(as per design)

3 Two Air pumps Capacity: 3 L/min

4 Two Diffusers Ceramic fine bubble stick type

5 One Magnetic stirrer

and beads Laboratory scale with rotation adjustment

6 Three Valve Size: ¼”

7 One Pump Type: Diaphragm

Capacity:1 L/min

8 One Sediment filter Size: 10” and 5µ

9 One HF membrane

filter Size: 10” and 0.1µ

10 Five Pipes Type: Plastic and rubber



3.2 Methodology

The Figure 3.10 shows the Methodology

Fig. 3.10 Flow chart of methodology

Study of Conventional MBR

Design of Modified EMBR

Fabrication and Assembling

Trails with Distilled water

Reaction Timing Optimization

Coagulant Dosage Fixation and Neutralization

Treatmant of Pulp and Paper Industrial wastwater with Modified EMBR

Analyzing PPIW parameters after treatment

Analysing physicochemical parameter of PPIW



3.2.1 Design of Membrane Bioreactor

Three sections are there is Conventional MBR that is

Anoxic section

Reactor section

Membrane section

To reduce the construction and operation cost of the system the MBR is designed

on the grounds of batch reactor. Reduce the power consumption in system is the

primary goal of the design. To lift the water from one section to another section

of the system a major quantity of energy is consumed. The more efforts have

given to overcome from this default in the design is by providing the difference in

head for each section instead of keeping at the same head which allows a gravity

flow and less consumption of power. In anoxic tank to give a better mixing from

bottom of tank a magnetic stirrer is used .During the reaction the biomass is

produced that floats to the top of the tank and this can be skimmed off. Using

separate intermediate tank for settlement of suspended solids. Where the alum is

used as a settling reagent to remove the suspended biomass. The reacted water

passed through the membrane by using Diaphragm. Design of EMBR shown in

Fig.3.11

Fig. 3.11 Design of Modified External Membrane Bioreactor



Hence the External Membrane Bioreactor fabricated with two equal size tanks with a

capacity of 4.5L each. The tanks are constructed using Acrylic sheet. Here the acrylic

sheets are used instead of the glass to withstand the heat produced during reaction. To

control the wastewater flow to the other tank the valves are provided. The valve is

provided just above the bottom of tank to prevent the entry of settled solids to next tank

and the water below valve is of 0.5L in each tank and the output of 3L. The volume of

the Anoxic tank and the Bioreactor is 4.5L because in the bioreactor to give the

sufficient amount of the space to the foam produced during reaction. The Effluent is

passed through the plastic membrane encased with Hollow fiber membrane 0.1 micro

metre. This hollow fiber membrane is same as the ultra filters used in domestic RO

plants. Next to diaphragm pump the sediment filter of 5 micro metres is used to prevent

the clogging in HF membrane. The treated effluent is clear water which flows at the

rate of 1L/min. Fig 3.12 shows Laboratory scale External Membrane Bioreactor.

Fig. 3.12 Laboratory scale Modified External Membrane Bioreactor



Analysis and Design of EMBR outcome:

To reduce the power consumption the batch reaction is done.

Between the sections gravity flow is provided.

In Anoxic tank the magnetic stirrer is used to provide the better mixing.

To remove the Biomass the settling tank or intermediate tank is provided.

For final filtration the Diaphragm pump is used.

Working

The External Membrane Bioreactor consists of three sections and filtration unit

consists of sediment and hollow fiber membrane.

Anoxic Tank

In this tank the nitrification and denitrification takes place. The PPIW is charged into

the top of the tank and then it is closed. The agitation is provided by using magnetic

stirrer to provide the uniform mixing which should takes place from the bottom of the

tank. By observing the total nitrogen value the reaction time with regular interval can

be optimized. It is observed that the optimized time in this tank is takes place at 3.5

hours where the reduction of nitrogen is more. Then the mixture is allowed to settle

for the 5 minutes so that any settable particles get settled and the valve is opened and

effluent is discharged into the next tank i.e. Bioreactor for further treatment. In this

treatment system the valves are fitted above the bottom of tank so that to prevent the

entry of settable particles into the next tanks.

Bioreactor

In this tank the cow dung is used as a seeding agent for the initiation of reaction and

its dosage is 1g/L. Two diffusers are connected to the two pumps by means of the

pipes which provide a continuous aeration. In the Bioreactor the biological

degradation of pulp and paper industrial wastewater takes place reducing BOD and

COD. By knowing BOD and COD the reaction time is observed. It is observed that

the more reduction of biological oxygen demand and the chemical oxygen takes place

at 10th

hour. Before discharge of effluent i.e. bioreacted wastewater to the next tank



the bioreacted wastewater is neutralized by adding saturated NaOH by setting the pH

at 7 using pH meter and a pipette and in this the alum solution is added with the

dosage of 35mL/L then mixing is done by using the air from air diffusers. Effluent is

stand for 5 minutes and discharged to the intermediate tank.

Intermediate Tank

In this all the flocculated particles gets settles down by allowing the mixed solution to

stand for half an hour. The floc formation takes place due to the addition of the alum.

In bioreactor biomass is produced during reaction and suspended particles which

forms the floc by addition of coagulant alum.

Filtration Unit

Using a diaphragm pump the supernatant is pumped to the sediment filter which

removes the particle size greater than the 5 micron meter. To protect the hollow fiber

membrane from damage sediment filter is used. The filtered water from the sediment

filter is passed to the hollow fiber membrane which is the final stage of filtration.

The filtrated effluent is collected in beaker which is the final effluent.

3.2.2 Wastewater Parameter Analysis

Following wastewater parameter analyzed,

Biological Oxygen Demand

Biological oxygen demand (BOD) is the amount of oxygen demanded by bacteria

while stabilizing decomposable organic matter under aerobic conditions. The

incubation period of BOD is 3 day at the temperature of 27ºC. BOD is calculated by

using equation(1.

BOD3 (mg/L) = (S1-S2)-(D1-D2) x

…… equation(1)

S1=First day Dissolved Oxygen of diluted pulp and paper industrial wastewater

sample

S2=Third day Dissolved Oxygen of diluted pulp and paper industrial wastewater

sample



D1=First day DO distilled water (blank)

D2=Third day DO of distilled water (blank)

Chemical Oxygen Demand

By chemical oxygen demand analysis pollution strength of wastewater can be

analyzed. A small portion of wastewater is diluted to 20ml of distilled water and

transferred to reflux flask if the COD of that wastewater is more. In this the pinch

of mercuric sulphate and ten mili liter of 0.25 normality potassium dichromate

was added to the flask and mixed well. 30 mL of Silver sulphate which is mixed

in sulphuric acid was added to refluxing flask then the mixture is allowed to

reflux for two hours. After the 2 hours of refluxed the sample is allowed to cool

down its temperature then it is titrated against ferrous ammonium sulphate. Before

titration the refluxing column is washed with small quantity of distilled water to

collect all the vapor attached to the column and the sample is transferred to

conical flask and in that the 2-3 drops of ferroin indicator was added for titration

where the color will change from yellow to greenish blue and finally wine red of

color observed at the end point and mL of titrant used is recorded. Followed the

same procedure with distilled water as blank. After observing the values the

amount of COD is calculated by using Equation (2) .Open reflux COD apparatus

(model no 2202 MIC, Mumbai) shown in Fig. 3.13.

Fig. 3.13 Photographic view of Open reflux COD apparatus



COD (mg/L) = ( ) ( )

…..equation (2)

Where

A=Reading of blank sample

B=Reading of sample taken

Electrical conductivity and Total Dissolved solids

Conductivity is defined as measure of capability of a solution to conduct electrical

current and vary with number and kind of ions present in the solution.

Specific conductance = C/R

Where

C = cell constant

R = Resistance

Total Dissolved solid measure solid in wastewater which is present in a dissolve

form. By using Electrical Conductivity and Total dissolved solid meter an

electrical conductivity and Total Dissolved solid is find out. Electrical

conductivity and Total dissolved solid meter consists of two probes in which one

probe is for temperature and other one is for measuring Electrical conductivity

and Total dissolve solids. The Temperature probe is dipped in a beaker

containing distilled water and Electrical conductivity and Total dissolve solid

probe dipped in the beaker containing sample. Instrument is switched and then the

mode setting is done as Electrical conductivity. Then the EC of the sample is

noted for corresponding temperature. Now for Total dissolve solid the mode

setting is changed to TDS then the TDS of the given sample is noted for

corresponding temperature. The photographic view of the conductivity and TDS

meter (HACK, USA) shown in Fig.3.14.



Fig.3.14 Electrical conductivity and Total Dissolved solids meter

pH

The hydrogen ion concentration in the sample can be known by knowing the pH

of that sample which describe the acidity and basicity of the sample. The pH

ranges from 0 to 14 in which the pH of solution is lesser than 7 pH then that

solution is known as the acidic one. If the pH of that solution is more than 7 then

the solution is basic one and the solution having a pH at 7 then that solution is

known as neutral solution. Using pH meter (HACK HQ 40d multi),the pH of the

sample can be known which consists of display and probe attached. The probe

which is stored in KI solution is washed with distilled water a. After washing the

probe it is cleaned with using paper then it is dipped in the solution to know the

pH. Again the probe is stored in KI solution until next use. The pH meter shown

in Fig.3.15



Fig. 3.15 Photographic view of pH meter

Spectrophotometer

The light beam's intensity can be measure by using spectrophotometer which

consists of photometers as a function of its colour known as spectrophotometers.

Colour in terms of Platinum Cobalt and Total Nitrogen (mg/L). Calibration is

done by using distilled water by setting it to zero. The Sample is taken in cuvette

and kept inside spectrophotometer to read the amount of colour and Total nitrogen

amount in given sample and its readings were displayed are noted.

Spectrophotometer (make: HACK, USA-DR 2007) is revealed in Fig 3.16

Fig. 3.16 Photographic view of Spectrophotometer



Turbidity

Turbidity indicates the clarity of water and the amount of suspended matter into

the sample. The amount of light radiance passing through the sample is measured

using turbidity meter. Turbidity measured as Nepelometric Turbidity Unit (NTU).

Turbidity meter (HACK USA 2100Q) used is shown in Fig.3.17.

For Sulphate test take an sufficient amount of sample as it require here we taken

0.1ML of sample and make up to 100ML using distilled water after that add a

5ML of Conditioning reagent and pinch of barium chloride and mixed it by using

magnetic stirrer for uniform mixing after few minutes take that sample in the

covet and note down the amount of sulphate in terms of NTU.

Fig. 3.17 Photographic View of the Turbidity meter

Jar test apparatus

Finding the dosage of Coagulant required determining the amount of settled

suspended solids by using jar test apparatus. It consists of six jars of capacity of 1

liter and six agitators with blades. The initial turbidity of the sample is noted then



the samples which are dosed with different dosage of coagulant solution are taken

into the six jars and the rotation speed can be provided as 0-300 RPM. Samples

are agitated with 100 RPM for 15 minutes and 50 RPM for 10 more minutes.

Then the mixture is allowed to stand for settlement of suspended solids by

providing 30 minutes. The supernatant solution are analysed for turbidity. More

reduction in turbidity sample which gives optimum dosage. Jar test apparatus

shown in Fig.3.18.

Fig. 3.18 Photographic view of Jar test apparatus



CHAPTER 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The results obtained for treating PPIW using Modified External Membrane

Bioreactor are discussed below

4.1 Reaction timing optimization

The External Membrane Bioreactor for treatment of PPIW is initialised by finding

out optimum reaction time. At the different time interval by considering specific

parameter removal efficiency the Optimum reaction time for each treatment unit is

determined.

Anoxic tank

Depends upon the amount of Total Nitrogen removal for different interval of time

the Reaction timing for Anoxic tank is known and it is observed at three and half

hour of reaction where the optimum reaction is observed. The results are shown in

Table 4.1 below.

Table 4.1 Reaction timing optimization for Anoxic tank

Reaction time

(hours)

Total Nitrogen

(mg/L)

0.0 365

0.5 337

1.0 329

1.5 318

2.0 351

2.5 330

3.0 312

3.5 268

4.0 285

4.5 294

5.0 278

5.5 276

6.0 288



Fig 4.1 Reaction time optimization for Anoxic tank

% efficiency at three and half an hr=365- 268/365x100=26.57%

In the Anoxic Tank the percentage reduction of Total Nitrogen is observed from the

Fig.4.1. at three an half an hour where the reduction is 268(mg/L),before it was

365(mg/L) hence the reduction efficiency in this tank is 26.57% .By considering this

time with maximum reduction in Total Nitrogen the reaction time in Anoxic Tank is

optimized.

Table 4.2 : Shows the pH ,EC and TDS in anoxic tank

365

337

329

318

351

330

312

268 285

294

278 276

288

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

To

tal

Nit

rog

en (

mg

/L)

Reaction time (Hours)

Total Nitrogen (mg/L)

Total Nitrogen (mg/L)

Reaction Time

(Hr) pH EC(µS) TDS(mg/L)

0 3.33 3913 2298

0.5 3.68 3977 2190

1.0 3.71 4108 2244

1.5 3.69 4090 2246

2.0 3.70 4076 2247

2.5 3.66 4151 2281

3.0 3.74 4164 2300

3.5 3.70 4154 2286

4.0 3.74 4211 2316



Fig 4.2: pH, EC, TDS in Anoxic tank

In the Anoxic Tank the pH , EC and TDS variation is taking place as shown in Fig.4.2

because of the some reactions which are taking place inside the Anoxic Tank due to

anaerobic condition and floc formation. The floc formation is taking place due to

vertex movement by using magnetic stirrer.

Table 4.3: Shows the Sulphate and Color in Anoxic tank

4.5 3.74 4204 2310

5.0 3.75 4189 2305

5.5 3.76 4234 2317

6.0 3.77 4219 2320

Reaction

Time(Hours)

Sulphate(NTU) Color(Pt Co)

0.0 83.5 2959

0.5 63.7 2821

1.0 82.2 2511

1.5 80.9 1560

2.0 79.6 1097

2.5 77.8 1409

3.0 77.9 1818

3.5 80.4 1096

4.0 79.3 1656

4.5 82.2 1689

5.0 80.3 1121

5.5 81.3 1017

6.0 81.4 1094

2100

2150

2200

2250

2300

2350

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

TD

S (

mg/L

)

EC

mic

ro s

iem

ens

Reaction timing (Hours)

pH

EC(µS)

TDS(mg/L)



Fig 4.3: Sulphate and Color in Anoxic Tank

The above Fig.4.3 shows that in Anoxic tank the amount of optimized time is taken

as three an half an hour for maximum reduction in Total Nitrogen but in the Fig4.3

the optimizing time for Color and Sulphate is five and half an hour.

Table 4.4: Shows the COD and BOD in Anoxic tank

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

Colo

r (

Pt

Co)

Su

lph

ate

(N

TU

)

Reaction Timing (Hours)

Sulphates(NTU)

Sulphate(NTU)

Color(Pt Co)

Reaction Timing(Hrs) COD(mg/L) BOD(mg/L)

0.0 2500 1050

0.5 1830.95 1328.57

1.0 1267.60 1121.5

1.5 1126.76 910.12

2.0 1492.95 908.78

2.5 1154.92 1138.68

3.0 901.408 928.52

3.5 761.54 904.12

4.0 890 1221.42

4.5 1803.8 1142.85

5.0 1492.95 986.82

5.5 1661.97 1159.23

6.0 1408.45 1184.23



Fig 4.4: COD in Anoxic tank

Fig 4.5: BOD in Anoxic tank

From the Fig4.4 and Fig4.5, above results it is clear that at a three an half an hour

the reduction has been taken place only in the total nitrogen, COD and BOD. In

Anoxic tank amount of reduction in total nitrogen is observed for time optimization

instead of knowing that here we observed some selected parameters. Remaining

parameters like pH where the fluctuations in the readings, EC and TDS are

2500

1830.95

1267.6 1126.76

1492.95

1154.92

901.408

761.54

890

1803.8

1492.95

1661.97

1408.45

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

CO

D(m

g/L)

Reaction Time(Hours)

COD(mg/L)

1050

1328.57

1121.5

910.12 908.78

1138.68

928.52

904.12

1221.42 1142.85

986.82

1159.23

1184.23

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6

BO

D (

mg/

)


BOD(mg/L)

BOD(mg/L)



increasing gradually, Sulphates reduction is taken place at an half an hour and here

the amount of biomass produce is more because of floc formation.

Hence from the above results we can conclude that in the Anoxic tank we can

observe a percentage reduction of COD, BOD and total Nitrogen efficiently but the

remaining parameters are not necessary.

Bioreactor:

In the bioreactor the timing for optimum reaction is determined by considering COD

and BOD which is a prime parameter. Reduction in COD and BOD is observed at

10th

hour. The results are shown below.

Table 4.5: Shows the pH, Color, Sulphate in Bioreactor

Reaction

Time(Hours) pH Color(Pt Co) Sulphate(NTU)

0 3.33 2959 83.5

4 3.73 1258 58.5

5 3.62 1262 63.1

6 3.66 1356 63.7

7 3.63 986 55.2

8 3.70 989 60.6

9 3.58 1089 63.6

10 3.82 976.9 59.3

11 3.92 929.1 55.0

12 3.65 901.42 61.3



Fig 4.6: Shows the pH, Color in Bioreactor

From the Fig 4.6 it is clear that as the time increases for reaction the Color

reduction is more and pH variation in this section is less.

Fig 4.7: Shows Sulphates in Bioreactor

The amount of reduction in Sulphates from Fig.4.7 is explained below:

Percentage reduction in sulphates = (83.5-55.0)/83.5x100 = 34.431%

In the Bioreactor the amount of sulphate reduction at a 11 hour is 34.431%

where in the anoxic tank the 23.71% for an half an hour hence after that the

more variation is take placed as the reaction time get increased. The amount of

reduction in Anoxic tank after half an hour of period is 6.826% Hence the

83.5

58.5 63.1

63.7

55.2 60.6

63.6

59.3 55

61.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Sulp

hat

e (

NTU

)

Reaction Time (Hours)

Sulphate(NTU)

Sulphate(NTU)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Colo

r (P

t C

o)

Reaction time(Hours)

Color(Pt Co)

pH

Color(Pt Co)



removal of sulphates from the first tank i.e. Anoxic tank is not that much

effective as from second tank i.e. Bioreactor.

Table 4.6: Shows the EC and TDS in Bioreactor

Reaction

time(Hours) EC(µS) TDS(mg/L)

0 3913 2298

4 3100 2830

5 3238 2906

6 3518 2994

7 3550 2015

8 3691 2082

9 2733 1103

10 2993 1239

11 3933 2260

12 3878 2181

Fig 4.8: EC in Bioreactor

3913

3100

3238

3518

3550

3691

2733 2993

3933

3878

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

4500

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

EC

Mic

ro S

iem

ens


EC(µS)

EC(µS)



Fig 4.9: TDS in Bioreactor

The percentage reduction in EC and TDS from Fig.4.9 is explained below

Percentage reduction in EC= (3913-2733) / 3913 x100 =30.155%

Percentage reduction in TDS = (2298-1103) / 2298x100 =52.00%

The amount of percentage reduction in EC and TDS is 30.155% and 52% in

the Bioreactor because of the some reaction inside the Anoxic Tank the EC

and TDS increased.

Table 4.7: Shows the optimizing the reaction time with BOD and COD

Hours BOD (mg/L) COD (mg/L)

0 1050 2500

4 979.8099 1323.94

5 744.65 1267.60

6 779.80 1295.77

7 594.061 1183.098

8 997.62 1211.26

9 998.91 1239.3

10 406.17 519.71

11 422.56 535.211

12 498.805 577.46

2298

2830

2906

2994

2015

2082

1103

1239

2260

2181

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

TDS

(mg/

L)


TDS (mg/L)

TDS(mg/L)



Fig 4.10: Shows the optimizing the reaction time with BOD

Fig 4.11: Optimizing the reaction timing for Bioreactor time with COD

From the Fig.4.10 and Fig.4.11, The amount of BOD and COD reduction is,

Percentage reduction in BOD = (1050-406.17) /1050 x100 = 61.3%

Percentage reduction in COD = (2500 – 519.71) /2500 x100 = 79.211%

1050

979.8099

744.65

779.8

594.061

997.62 998.91

406.17

422.56

498.805

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

BO

D (

mg/L

)


Bioreactor Reaction Time Optimization

BOD (mg/L)

2500

1323.94

1267.6

1295.77

1183.098

1211.26

1239.3

519.71 535.211

577.46

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

0 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

CO

D (

mg/L

)


Bioreactor Reaction Time Optimization

COD (mg/L)



The amount of BOD and COD reduction in Anoxic tank for an three and half is very

less but where in the Bioreactor is 61.3% and 79.211% for a ten hours which

describe here that because of the biological reactions in the bioreactor the removal

efficiency get increased.

4.2 Jar test for optimum dosage of Coagulants

The bioreactor effluent is rich in suspended solids and the settling of such suspended

particle is done with dosage of Coagulant to the effluent .The Coagulant used is

Alum.

Alum

The Alum dosage is determined by giving incremental dosage to bioreactor PPIW or

effluent and for each dosage the Turbidity is observed. The dosage fixation shown in

Table.4.8 and Fig.4.12 below.

Table 4.8: Shows the amount of alum dosage for the settling of Bioreactor Effluent

Jar No Alum Dosage mL/L Turbidity(NTU)

1 5 111

2 10 105.1

3 15 74.1

4 20 60.5

5 25 19.7

6 30 18.0

7 35 16.1

8 40 17.8

9 45 18.1

10 50 18.6

11 60 20.6



Fig 4.12: Shows the amount of alum dosage for the settling of Bioreactor Effluent

The dosage of alum required = 35 mL/L ; Turbidity = 16.1 NTU

Hence from the above results we can conclude that the dosage of alum is 35mL/L

which decreases the turbidity from 228 NTU to 16.1NTU and also alum take less

time for floc with suspended particles and settles down more easily.

4.3 Retention Time for treatment

Retention time is the time required to pass through the treatment process i.e.

Modified EMBR. Retention time for every section of treatment in Modified

External Membrane Bioreactor system is noted and tabulated in Table 4.9 below.

Table 4.9 : Shows the amount of retention time for each section.

Section/ process Retention Time

Anoxic Tank Three and Half an Hours

Bioreactor Ten Hour

Neutralization with NaOH Ten minutes

Adding Coagulant and Mixing Twenty minutes

Settling in Bioreactor Ten minutes

Settling in Intermediate tank Twenty minutes

Final filtration seventeen minutes

Total time of treatment Fourteen Hours and Forty Seven minutes

111 105.1

74.1 60.5

19.7 18

16.1

17.8 18.1 18.6 20.6

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 60

Jar Test for Alum Dosage

Turbidity(NTU)



4.4 Comparison of Raw and Treated PPIW with Modified

External Membrane Bioreactor:

Treating PPIW with Modified External Membrane Bioreactor yields low Chemical

oxygen demand, Biological oxygen demand, Turbidity and total nitrogen effluent.

The PPIW from Modified External Membrane Bioreactor is in range of discharge

effluent quality into streams. Color also significantly reduced from Dark brown to

light yellow. Even odor of the PPIW turned from strong to weak smell. A

comparison of before and after treatment of PPIW using Modified External

Membrane Bioreactor is shown below.

Table 4.10: Shows the Comparison of raw PPIW with the treated PPIW with

Modified External Membrane Bioreactor.

Parameters Raw Pulp and Paper

wastewater

Pulp and Paper

industrial

wastewater after

Treating

% Removal

Color (Pt Co) 2959 165 94.423%

Turbidity (NTU) 228 8.3 95.921%

Electrical

Conductivity(µS) 3913 198 94.423%

pH 3.33 3.34 ---

Total Dissolve

Solids(mg/L) 2298 125 94.56%

Sulphate (mg/L) 166400 23450 85.907%

Chemical Oxygen

Demand(mg/L) 2500 42.857 98.286%

Biological Oxygen

Demand(mg/L) 1050 35.33 96.63%



The Below Figure 4.13 Shows the Comparison of the raw PPIW with the treated

Modified External Membrane Bioreactor.

Fig 4.13: Shows the Comparison of the raw PPIW with the treated PPIW using

modified external membrane bioreactor.

Fig 4.14: Raw PPIW and treated PPIW with Modified EMBR.

2959 228 3913 2298

166400

2500 1050

165 8.3 198 125 23450 42.857

35.33

Raw Pulp and Paper wastewater Pulp and Paper industrial wastewater after Treating



Fig 4.15: Shows the treatment efficiency of PPIW in Modified External Membrane

Bioreactor

The Modified External Membrane Bioreactor effectively treats pulp and paper mill

wastewater as it contains very high amount of organics. The Fig.4.15 Shows the

removal efficiency of organics from PPIW Modified External Membrane Bioreactor

yields low volume of sludge and better treatment in less time as compared to

traditional anaerobic treatment plants.

78.00%80.00%82.00%84.00%86.00%88.00%90.00%92.00%94.00%96.00%98.00%

100.00%

Treatment Efficiency

% Removal



CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

5.1 Summary

The following summary is concluded based on the objective of proposed project i.e.

PPIW treatment using Modified External Membrane Bioreactor. The initial

characteristic of the pulp and paper industrial wastewater as; pH-3.33 , COD-2500

mg/L , BOD- 1050 mg/L, Turbidity- 228 NTU , EC- 3913 µS , TDS-2298 mg/L

,Sulphate-1,66,400 mg/L , Color 2959 Pt Co are reduced effectively in Modified

EMBR.

A brief study of Modified External Membrane Bioreactor technology is carried out to

understand the methodology and to modify for enhancing performance. A lab scale

Modified External Membrane Bioreactor is fabricated to PPIW. The fabricated

Modified External Bioreactor treating pulp and paper industrial wastewater efficiently.

5.2 Conclusions

The work carried out on treating PPIW using Modified EMBR, which leads to the

following conclusion.

In the Modified External Membrane Bioreactor the percentage reduction in

physicochemical parameters of PPIW is increased such as Color, Turbidity,

EC, pH, TDS, Sulphates, COD, BOD is 94.42%, 95.921%,, 94.423%,

94.56%,85.09%,98.286%,96.63%.

The MEMBR takes a lesser time to treat the any industrial wastewater here to

treat the PPIW it took 14 hours and 17minutes.

In the Modified External Membrane Bioreactor the removal efficiency of

Sulphates is less it can be increased by increasing the retention time of the

treatment.



5.3 Scope for Future Work

Modified External Membrane Bioreactor can be used for other Industrial Wastewater.

Potential Harmful metals can be analyse before and after treatment.



REFERENCES

1. Dilek.FB and Bese.S (2001), “Treatment of Pulping Effluent by using Alum and

Clay-Colour removal and Sludge Characteristics”, Middle East Technical University

Turkey,27(03):0378-4738

2. Anurag Garg , Narayana V V V S S, Parmesh Chaudhary and Shri Chand (2004),

“Treatment of Pulp and Paper Effluent”, Journal of scientific and Industrial

Research,Vol 63:667-671.

3. Priscilla ZuconiViana, Ronaldo Nobrega, Eduardo Pacheco Jordao and Jose Paulo

Soares de Azevedo (2005), “Optimizing the Operational Conitions of a Membrane

Bioreactor Used for Domestic Wastewater Treatment”, Brazilian Archives of Biology

and Technology, 48:119-126

4. Stahi, Lerner and Galil (2006), “Comparative study of MBR and Activated sludge in

the treatment of Paper mill wastewater”, Israel Institute of technology Haifa,

50(03):245-252.

5. Christian.Mobius H(2006), “Membrane Bioreactor for Wastewater Treatment”,Water

use and Wastewater Treatment in Paper Mills Germany ,First edition.

6. Yuzhong Zhang ,Chunming Ma , Feng Ye ,Ying Kong ,Hong Li (2007), “The

Treatment of Wastewater of Paper mill with Integrated Membrane Process”,

International journal of Membrane Science and Technology, 236(2009):349-356.

7. Pratibha Singh.(2007),“Sequential Anaerobic and Aerobic Treatment of Pulp and

Paper Mill Effluent in Pilot Scale Bioreactor”,Journal of Environmental

Biology,28(1):77-78

8. Manyuchi M.M. and Ketiwa E. (2013), “Distillery Effluent Treatment Using

Membrane Bioreactor Technology Utilising Pseudomonas Fluorescens”, Published in

Everything About Water, 2(12): 1252-1254.

9. Subtil E. L, Mierzwa J. C and Hespanhol I (2014), “Comparison between a

Conventional Membrane Bioreactor (C-MBR) and a Biofilm Membrane Bioreactor

(BF-MBR) for Domestic Wastewater Treatment”, Brazilian Journal of Chemical

Engineering, 31(03):683-691.

10. Jitendra Giri , Anjana srivastava , Pachauri Srivastava SP (2014), “Effluent from

Paper and Pulp industries and their impact on soil properties and chemical



composition of plants in uttarkhand, India”, Journal of Environmental and waste

management, 1(01):026-030.

11. Majid Hosseinzadeh, Gholaamreza NabiBidhendi, Ali Torabian and NaserMehradadi

(2014), “A study on Membrane Bioreactor for Water Reuse from the Effluent of

Industrial Town Wastewater Treatment Plant”, Iranian Journal of Toxicology,

8(24):983-990.

12. Subtil, J. C. Mierzwa and Hespanhol.I (2014), “Comparison between a Conventional

Membrane Bioreactor (C-MBR) and a Biofilm Membrane Bioreactor (BF-MBR) for

Domestic Wastewater Treatment”, Brazilian Journal of Chemical Engineering,

31(03):683-691.

13. Dayalan J and Sharon Ann Mathew (2015), “An Experimental study on Sewage

treatment using Membrnae Bioreactor”, International Journal of Engineering

Research and Technology, 4(2):769-772.

14. Saima Fazal ,Zhenxing Zhong, Lan Gao, Xuechuan Chen (2015), “Industrial

Wastewater Treatment by using Membrane Bioreactor”, Journal of Environmental

Protection,6:584-598

15. Mohammadreza Kamali,Zahra Khodaparast (2015), “Review on recent

Developmentson Pulp and Paper Mill Wastewater Treatment”,Journal of

Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety,114:326-342

16. Martin A Hubbe, Jeremy R.Metts ,Daphne Hermosilla (2015),Angeles Blanco,

“Wastewater Treatment Reclamation: A Review of Pulp and Paper Industry Practices

and Opportunities”, Journal of Bioresource,11(3):7953-8091

17. Khum Gurung, Mohammed Chaker Ncibi, Jean-Marle Fontmorin , HeHeiki Sarkka

and Mikaa Sillanpaa (2016), “Inxorporating Submerged MBR in Conventional

Activated Sludge Process for Municipal Wasstewater Treatment: A Feasibility and

Performance Assesment”, Journal of Membrane Science and Technology,Volume

6,Issue 3

18. Vashi H, Iorhemen O.T and Tay J.H.(2017),“Aerobic granulation :A Recent

Development on Biological Treatment of Pulp and Paper Wastewater”, Journal of

Waster resources Malaysia,7:11-14



19. Hanife Sari Erkan and Guleda Onkal Engin(2017), “The Investigation of Paper mill

Industry Wastewater Treatment and Activated Sludge Properties in a Submerged

Membrane Bioreactor”,Journal of Water Science and Technology.

visvesvaraya technological university jnana …

Documents