Skip to Main Content
By simulating a PNA MABR under different influent flow rates and total ammonia concentrations, the performance of the reactor can be demonstrated under numerous nitrogen loadings and concentrations which is essential for determining how many reactors are needed to treat a given wastewater flow. From these simulations, we observed that increasing the flow rate to the MABR decreased its HRT and increased the nitrogen loading rate for each influent total ammonia concentration tested. As the nitrogen loading rate increased for every influent ammonia-nitrogen concentration, the TIN removal percentage decreased and never increased, Figure 2 (bottom). This decrease in TIN removal percentage was abrupt for lower influent total ammonia concentrations, occurring at loading rates less than 3 g N/m2/d for influent ammonia concentration less than 50 mg N/L, and more gradual for larger influent concentrations. When comparing the reactor's performance against the stoichiometric nitrogen removal for AOO and AMX, the TIN removal percentage never reached the theoretical removal percentage of 89% for any nitrogen loading rate or influent concentration because the biofilm was loaded with oxygen below the stoichiometric oxygen demand for PNA, 1.75 g O2/g N (Strous et al. 1998), to create oxygen-limiting conditions to prevent NOB growth. The effluent TIN concentration also increased with increased nitrogen loading rates (Figure S-2). These findings are unsurprising and can be observed in other biofilm-based reactors such as rotating biological contactors and packed towers.
Figure 2

Comparison of TIN removal percentages for varied total ammonia loading rates and influent ammonia-nitrogen concentrations (bottom) and comparison of the percentage of nitrite consumed by NOB for varied total ammonia loading rates and influent ammonia-nitrogen concentrations (top). Starred points correspond to the scenarios described in Table 1. The air loading to the reactor in each figure was maintained at a 1:1 ratio of influent oxygen to total ammonia nitrogen.

Figure 2

Comparison of TIN removal percentages for varied total ammonia loading rates and influent ammonia-nitrogen concentrations (bottom) and comparison of the percentage of nitrite consumed by NOB for varied total ammonia loading rates and influent ammonia-nitrogen concentrations (top). Starred points correspond to the scenarios described in Table 1. The air loading to the reactor in each figure was maintained at a 1:1 ratio of influent oxygen to total ammonia nitrogen.

Close modal
Table 1

Staging scenarios at different total ammonia loadings and concentrations

ScenarioNHx loading rate (g N/m2/d)
NHx concentration (mg N/L)
O2 Loading (g O2/m2/d)Concentration in the biofilm layer closest to the membrane
TIN removal %
TIN removal rate (g N/m2/d)
consumption by NOB %Outcome
O2 (mg O2/L)NHx (mg N/L) (mg N/L)
2.0
40 
2.0 0.0050 1.4 0.15 71
1.4 
0.023 Optimal amount of membrane surface area 
B: Equivalent NHx loading as Scenario A, but lower NHx concentration 2.0
20 
2.0 0.0057 0.29 0.24 52
1.0 
20 Not enough membrane surface area: large NOB activity 
C: Equivalent NHx concentration as Scenario A, but larger NHx loading 4.6
40 
4.6 0.0064 0.34 2.9 48
2.2 
23 Not enough membrane surface area: large NOB activity 
D: Larger NHx loading rate and concentration 4.6
70 
4.6 0.0065 0.43 3.9 67
4.4 
0.27 Acceptable amount of membrane surface area (given the large NHX concentration), but AMX beginning to be outcompeted 
E: Equivalent NHx concentration as Scenario A, but smaller NHx loading rate 0.66
40 
0.66 0.0035 7.2 0.024 71
0.47 
0.00 Too much membrane surface area: low removal rate 
ScenarioNHx loading rate (g N/m2/d)
NHx concentration (mg N/L)
O2 Loading (g O2/m2/d)Concentration in the biofilm layer closest to the membrane
TIN removal %
TIN removal rate (g N/m2/d)
consumption by NOB %Outcome
O2 (mg O2/L)NHx (mg N/L) (mg N/L)
2.0
40 
2.0 0.0050 1.4 0.15 71
1.4 
0.023 Optimal amount of membrane surface area 
B: Equivalent NHx loading as Scenario A, but lower NHx concentration 2.0
20 
2.0 0.0057 0.29 0.24 52
1.0 
20 Not enough membrane surface area: large NOB activity 
C: Equivalent NHx concentration as Scenario A, but larger NHx loading 4.6
40 
4.6 0.0064 0.34 2.9 48
2.2 
23 Not enough membrane surface area: large NOB activity 
D: Larger NHx loading rate and concentration 4.6
70 
4.6 0.0065 0.43 3.9 67
4.4 
0.27 Acceptable amount of membrane surface area (given the large NHX concentration), but AMX beginning to be outcompeted 
E: Equivalent NHx concentration as Scenario A, but smaller NHx loading rate 0.66
40 
0.66 0.0035 7.2 0.024 71
0.47 
0.00 Too much membrane surface area: low removal rate 
Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal