The hydraulic characteristic of an anaerobic rotating biological contactor (AnRBC) were studied by changing two important hydraulic factors effective in the treatment performance: the hydraulic retention time (τ) and rotational disk velocity (ω). The reactor hydraulic performance was analyzed by studying hydraulic residence time distributions (RTD) obtained from tracer (Rhodamine B) experiments. The experiments were conducted based on a central composite face-centered design (CCFD) and analyzed using response surface methodology (RSM). The region of exploration for the process was taken as the area enclosed by τ (60, 90 and 120 min) and ω (0.8 and 16 rpm) boundaries. Four dependent parameters, deviation from ideal retention time (Δτ), dead volume percentage and dispersion indexes (Morrill dispersion index (MDI) and dispersion number (d)), were computed as response. The maximum modeled Δτ and dead volume percentage was 43.03 min and 37.51% at τ and ω 120 min and 0 rpm, respectively. While, the minimum predicted responses (2.57 min and 8.08%) were obtained at τ and ω 60min and 16 rpm, respectively. The interaction showed that disk rotational velocity and hydraulic retention time played an important role in MDI in the reactor. The AnRBC hydraulic regime was classified as moderate and high dispersion (d=0.09 to 0.253). As a result, in addition to the factors studied, the reactor geometry showed significant effect on the hydraulic regime.

Anaerobic Rotatory Biological Contactor Hydraulic Characteristics Tracer Experiment Response Surface Methodology

Levenspiel O, Chemical reactor engineering, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York (2000)
Fogler Scott H, Elements of chemical reaction engineering, 3rd Ed., Prentice Hall PTR (2001)
Metcalf & Eddy, Wastewater engineering, 4th Ed., McGraw Hill, New York (2003)
Yamaguchi T, Ishida M, Suzuki T, Process Biochem., 35(3), 403 (1999)
Kargi F, Eker S, Enzyme Microb. Technol., 32(3-4), 464 (2003)
Najafpour GD, Zinatizadeh AAL, Lee LK, J. Biochem.Eng., 30, 297 (2006)
Bode H, Seyfried C, J. Water Sci. Technol., 17, 197 (1984)
Newell B, Bailey J, Islam A, Hopkins L, Lant P, J. Water Sci.Technol., 37, 43 (1998)
Williams SC, Beresford J, J. Water Sci. Technol., 38, 55 (1998)
Burrows LJ, Stokes AJ, West AD, Martin CF, J. Water Res., 33, 367 (1999)
Martin AD, Chem. Eng. Sci., 55(23), 5907 (2000)
Kornegay BH, Andrews JF, J. WPCF., 460 (1968)
Clark JH, Moneg EM, Asano T, J. WPCF., 896 (1978)
Wu YC, Smith ED, J. Environ. Eng. Div.
Hsueh KP, Hao OJ, Wu YC, J. WPCF., 63, 67 (1991)
Banerjee G, J. Water Res., 31, 2500 (1997)
Saratha1 Y, Koottatep T, Morel A, J. Environ. Scien., 22, 1319 (2010)
Karama AB, Onyejekwe OO, Brouckaert CJ, Buckley CA, J. Water Sci. Technol., 39, 329 (1999)
Zhang J, Huck PM, Anderson WB, Optimization of a full-scale ozone disinfection process based on computational fluid dynamics analysis, in 11th gothenburg symposium, Chemical Water and Wastewater Treatment VIII. Orlando, Florida, USA (2004)
Bas D, Oyaci BIH, J. Food Eng., 78, 836 (2007)
Akhbari A, Zinatizadeh AAL, Mohammadi P, Irandoust M, Mansouri Y, Chem. Eng. J., 168(1), 269 (2011)
Palma LD, Merli C, Paris M, Petrucci E, J. Bioresour. (2003)
Tawfik A, Klapwijk A, El-Gohary F, Lettinga G, J. Biochem.Eng., 25, 89 (2005)
Kuehl R, Design of Experiments: Statistical principles of research design and analysis, 2nd Ed., C.A: Duxbury Press (2000)
Khuri AI, Cornell JA, Response surfaces: Design and analyses, 2nd Ed., Marcel Dekker, New York (1996)
Montgomery DC, Design and analysis of experiments, 3rd Ed., Wiley, NewYork (1991)
Mason RL, Gunst RF, Hess JL, Statistical design and analysis of experiments, eighth applications to engineering and science, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York (2003)
Ahmad AL, Ismail S,Bhatia S, J. Environ. Sci. Technol., 39, 2828 (2005)
Myers RH, Montgomery DC, Response surface methodology: Process and product optimization using designed experiments, 2nd Ed., Wiley, New York (2002)
Montgomery DC, Design and analysis of experiments, 4th Ed.,Wiley, New York (1996)