Performance of non-activated carbon biofilter in water treatment
Le, Quyen (2020)
2020
All rights reserved. This publication is copyrighted. You may download, display and print it for Your own personal use. Commercial use is prohibited.
Julkaisun pysyvä osoite on
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2020082419841
https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:amk-2020082419841
Tiivistelmä
This study aims to a biological technology called biofilm, which is normally used in water
treatment. The non-activated carbon is used as the media of the biofilm while a circular
system is operated continuously from the cultivation to a lab-scale treatment while efficiency of flowrate is also experimented.
The biofilm using non-activated carbon as media was cultivated for 2 months before applying for a water lab-scale treatment with water from a lake at the end of an agricultural runoff. The water was normally changed every single week. The measurement of biofilm capacity depends on 6 parameters including pH, UV254, DOC, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite and nitrate, which aims to figure out the biofilm’ interference on organic matter content and nitrogen’s component content. On average, after one week, at the flowrate of 7.9 ml/min, the UV254 and dissolved organic carbon removal rate is respectively 19,37% and 52.11%, which points out a normal charcoal biofilter has a good removal rate when compared to other normalmaterial biofilters but it’s less practical and effective than activated materials. As for nitrogen removal, the biofilm is good at converting and eradicating ammonia nitrogen and nitrite nitrogen, but it can’t lower the nitrate nitrogen content. Furthermore, the flow rate was also changed in order to check how the water velocity can affect the treatment of biofilm as well as determine which flow rate would be the best choice for apply in reality. Beside the velocity used initially, two other flowrates tested were 2.4ml/min and 13.1 ml/min.
Overall, the non-activated carbon biofilter should be used as a supplementary part in nitrogen removal system because of its efficiency in converting ammonia and nitrite except nitrate. Meanwhile, for removing organic matter in drinking water treatment, the activated materials still have their own preeminence so that the use of the activated materials should be dominantly considered compared to non-activated ones. On the other hand, the water velocity can really affect the organic removal and the nitrogen components conversion. Spectacularly, the most stable and efficient flow rate is 2.1 ml/min compared to the 2 other experimented flowrates.
treatment. The non-activated carbon is used as the media of the biofilm while a circular
system is operated continuously from the cultivation to a lab-scale treatment while efficiency of flowrate is also experimented.
The biofilm using non-activated carbon as media was cultivated for 2 months before applying for a water lab-scale treatment with water from a lake at the end of an agricultural runoff. The water was normally changed every single week. The measurement of biofilm capacity depends on 6 parameters including pH, UV254, DOC, ammonia nitrogen, nitrite and nitrate, which aims to figure out the biofilm’ interference on organic matter content and nitrogen’s component content. On average, after one week, at the flowrate of 7.9 ml/min, the UV254 and dissolved organic carbon removal rate is respectively 19,37% and 52.11%, which points out a normal charcoal biofilter has a good removal rate when compared to other normalmaterial biofilters but it’s less practical and effective than activated materials. As for nitrogen removal, the biofilm is good at converting and eradicating ammonia nitrogen and nitrite nitrogen, but it can’t lower the nitrate nitrogen content. Furthermore, the flow rate was also changed in order to check how the water velocity can affect the treatment of biofilm as well as determine which flow rate would be the best choice for apply in reality. Beside the velocity used initially, two other flowrates tested were 2.4ml/min and 13.1 ml/min.
Overall, the non-activated carbon biofilter should be used as a supplementary part in nitrogen removal system because of its efficiency in converting ammonia and nitrite except nitrate. Meanwhile, for removing organic matter in drinking water treatment, the activated materials still have their own preeminence so that the use of the activated materials should be dominantly considered compared to non-activated ones. On the other hand, the water velocity can really affect the organic removal and the nitrogen components conversion. Spectacularly, the most stable and efficient flow rate is 2.1 ml/min compared to the 2 other experimented flowrates.