1

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

PERFORMANCE AND STABILITY OF ANAEROBIC HYBRID REACTOR

SUBJECTED TO HYDRAULIC LOAD FLUCTUATIONS
Yusron Sugiarto1, 2, Pratin Kullavanijaya3, *, and Pawinee Chaiprasert1, *
1
King Mongkuts University of Technology Thonburi, School of Bioresources and
Technology, Bangkhuntien, Bangkok 10150, Thailand
2
Brawijaya University, Agro-industrial Biotechnology, Malang 61140, Indonesia
3
King Mongkuts University of Technology Thonburi, PDTI, Bangkok 10150, Thailand
*
Corresponding author: pratin@pdti.kmutt.ac.th, pawinee.cha@kmutt.ac.th

11ABSTRACT
12In this study, a 5.5-L anaerobic hybrid reactor
13(AHR) was periodically subjected to hydraulic
14load fluctuations via the reduction of retention
15time (HRT) from 3.0 to 2.0 and 1.0 d for the
16periods of 8.0 to 72.0 h. The obtained results
17demonstrated the significant capability and
18resilience of AHR in withstanding those
19transient fluctuations. A temporal and minimal
20effect was found when subjected to the short
21period of 8.0-24.0 h while, the longer and lower
22HRT of 1.0 d seemed to promote more acid
23accumulation, sudden drop of pH and methane
24composition. However, for all conditions, AHR
25could rapidly recover and resume to its previous
26operational stability within 1.0-2.4 d.
27Keywords: AHR, biogas energy, biomethane,
28hybrid reactor, hydraulic load fluctuation
29INTRODUCTION
30Currently, anaerobic technology is one of the
31most attractive energy-conversion technologies
32from its ability of coupling waste treatment and
33methane recovery. Because of employing rather
34high concentration of biomass, in the different
35forms of biofilm, floc or granule, the anaerobic
36digester (AD) can be operated at high loading
37capacity; up to 15.020.0 kgCOD/m3.d (Frankin,
382001). However, the less energy is needed in
39anaerobic process while, less excess sludge is
40also generated comparing to the aerobic one
41(Lettinga, 1995). During the past decades,
42various types of ADs have been continuously
43developed. Among those digester, anaerobic
44hybrid reactor (AHR), consists of sludge bed
45locates in the lower part and packed bed locates
46in the upper part, is a promising technology.
47In general, AD including the AHR is usually
48designed to operate at a certain loading capacity
49and r stable characteristics of influent feedstock.

50While, the operational loading is often lower

51than the designed maximum organic loading
52(OLR).Therefore, this steady-state assumption is
53seldom achieved and often fluctuated, which
54further result to the overall performance of
55digester or even its failure. On the other hand,
56the real situations, the fluctuations of influent
57characteristics caused by sudden change of
58influent properties and/or flow rate are often
59promoted in many waste-origins, i.e. cassava
60starch processing plant, palm oil mill effluent
61plant and food processing plant (Chavalparit and
62Ongwandee, 2009; Chua et al., 1996). These
63variations might be because of many factors
64such as the process low efficiency, operating and
65control problems, and the surrounding
66environments e.g. contamination of rain water.
67Similarly, other variations such as process
68nature, operators skill, can also exhibit the
69different situations; either as a short/transient
70overloading, which only lasts few hours, or
71rather longer step variation of days. Because of
72that, the ADs are being expected to withstand
73these load fluctuations.
74From previous works, many efforts had been
75focused to investigate the effect of feeding
76variation on performance and stability of various
77types of ADs i.e., anaerobic fixed film reactor,
78anarobic fluidized bed reactor, anaerobic
79sequencing batch reactor (Bezera et al., 2009;
80Borja and Banks., 1995; Nachaiyasit and
81Stuckey, 1996). Different fluctuations in terms
82of influences quality, feeding rate and/or
83organic loading, exhibit differently response for
84each digester type. Hydraulic load variation
85seems to promote more complex problem and
86results in process souring and failure easily.
87Moreover, the merit function of attached growth
88zone during load fluctuation had also been
89reported (Chua et al., 1996; Patel and
90Madamwar, 2000). However, the performance
91and capability of AHR treating cassava

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

1wastewater under the transient hydraulic load

2fluctuation is limited. Therefore, this work was
3undertaken to investigate the effect of transient
4hydraulic load fluctuations on performance and
5stability of AHR, as well as microbial response
6and system recovery.
7MATERIAL AND METHODS
8AHR set-up and inoculation
9A 5.5-L AHR, with diameter of 9.4 cm and
10height of 86.5 cm, was set-up as depict in Fig. 1.
11This reactor was inoculated with sludge at initial
12concentration of 10.0 gVSS/L. Semi-synthetic
13wastewater with constant concentration was
14continuously fed in the upward direction using
15perlistatic pump. Biogas counter, using water16replacement method, was also connected for
17monitoring of daily produced biogas.
18Wastewater used as feedstock
19To avoid the variation of wastewater quality, the
20semi-synthetic wastewater was applied in this
21study. This wastewater was synthesized by using
22raw wastewater from casava starch production
23plant as a basis. The feed concentration and
24alkalinity were constantly controlled at about
2512.0-13.0 gCOD/L and 1.5 g/L(using NaHCO 3),
26respectively. This wastewater was alway kept
27under 4C in controlled-temperature refrigerator
28and used throughout the experiment.
29Experimental conditions and analysis
30For the experiments, AHR was start-up initially
31via stepwise increse of OLR. After achieving the
65
66
67
68

32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45

46Figure 1 Schematic configuration of AHR

47(1=feed tank; 2=sludge zone; 3=packed zone;
484=effluent tank; 5=gas counter; 6=to gas
49composition analysis; 7=frame of nylon fibre
50use as supporting media)
51

52defined steady-stated condition at OLR of 4.0

53kgCOD/m3.d, AHR was subsequently analysed
54for the initial characteristics; performance,
55stability and microbial activity. Thereafter, the
56AHR was experimentally subjected to individual
57transient change of hydraulic loads as the details
58shows in Table 1. For example, period I, HRT
59was reduced from 3.0 to 2.0 d for 8 h.
60Performance and stability of AHR was then
61regularly monitored. After digester recovered
62and resumed to its previous capability with at
63least one time of normal HRT, the next
64fluctuation condition was similar experimented .

Period
Time
HRT (d)
OLR (kg COD/m3.d)
Table 1
Experimental conditions usedP-I
in this study 0-90 d
10-3.0
0-4.0
P-II
91-120 d
3.0
4.0
P-III
8h
2.0
4.6
P-IV
16 h
2.0
5.2
P-V
24 h
2.0
5.8
P-VI
72 h
2.0
6.0
P-VII
24 h
1.0
8.0
P-VIII
After AHR resume to its normal operational perfor
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

50
51
522removal efficiency and its effluent concentration of AHR
Figure 2Table
COD
Performance of AHR during
53 start-up period (I-II)
HRT
CODremoval
biogas
Methane
pH
Alkalinity
TVA
54(%)
(d)
(%)
(L/d)
(mg/L)
(mg/L)
55
10
95.49.3
1.47
743.3
7.20.2
2,20065
1,04030
6
96.57.3
2.59
732.5
7.40.1
2,40035
1,10045
56
4
90.76.4
3.78
731.5
7.30.3
2,39050
97060
57
3
94.02.1
6.02
722.2
7.40.1
2,40065
1,05056
58
59
12For rountine analysis, the operating and control 60As shown in Table 2, AHR exhibited rather high
13parameters such as pH, chemical oxygen 61COD removal efficiency which was
14demand (COD), alkalinity (Alk), total volatile 6290.76.4 - 96.57.3%. This high COD reduction
15acid (TVA), biogas and its composition were 63promoted rather low effluent concentration
16monitored. Most of analysis were proceeded 64which was approximately 609128 mg/L.
17following the standard method (APHA, 1999). 65While, the daily produced biogas was
18Moreover, the volatile acid composition during 66approximately 1.5-6.0 L/d which yielded as
19each transient condition was also analyzed using 67methane between 0.21 to 0.32 m3/kgCODremoval
20a gas chromatography equipped with a flame 68for the initial and at OLR of 4.0 kgCOD/m 3.d,
21ionization detector (Shimadzu, model-GC-FID 69respectively. Biogas consisted of methane
2214b).While, biogas composition was analyzed 70approximately 722.17%. The digester stability
23using gas chromatography equipped with a 71was maintained at each consecutive load. These
24thermal conductivity detector (Shimadzu, 72stabilities depicted as pH, Alk, and TVA to be
25model-GC-9A). At the initial and the end of the 73approximately 7.00.1, 2,200239 and
26experiment, the distribution of microbial groups 741,053138 respectively. These parameters
27involed and their activity were determined as 75illustrated the stability of AHR.
28well as its washing out in term of volatile solid.
the steady state at OLR of 4.0
29Specific methanogenic and non-mthanogenic 76After maintaining
3
77
kgCOD/m
.d,
AHR
was consequently subjected
30activities of the attached- and suspended-growth
78
to
transient
hydraulic
fluctuation (period III31biomass were also examined via serum vial
32technique using 0.1% of acetic acid and glucose 79VII). As of the result in Fig. 2, it was found that
80at the small fluctuation and HRT of 2.0 d (P-III 33as substrate, respectively.
81P-V) AHR was positively responded with higher
34RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
82gas production and COD removal efficiency.
35For AHR start-up, OLR was stepwise increased 83This might be because of the increase of organic
36from 0.5 to 4.0 kgCOD/m3.d. HRT was reduced 84load and the stimulated more active of microbial
37initially from 10.0 d to 3.0 d with constantly 85groups involved. However, the longer period
38controlled of COD concentration. Performance 86(VI) and shorter HRT (VII), a slight depress of
39of AHR at each stable state of start-up (P-I&II) 87AHRs stability which depicted as an increase of
40is summarized in Table 2.
88effluent concentration and acid accumulation.
89
41
90
42
91
43
92
44
93
45
94
46
95
47
96
48
97
49
98
1
2
3
4
5
OLR
6 (kgCOD/m3.d)
7
1.0
2.0
8
3.0
9
4.0
10
11

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

1
48
2
49
3
50
4
514 Biogas compositions; methane and CO2 composition
Figure
5
52
6
53
7
54
8
55
9
56
10
57
11
58
12
59
13
60
14
61
15
62
16
63
Figure 3 Biogas production and methane
17
64 yield at individual load fluctuations
18
65
19The COD removal efficiency at this period was 66
20reduced approximately 4.5-7.8%. While, the gas 67When applied small fluctuation, about 8 h, 16 h,
21production significantly increased with the 68and 24 h at HRT equaled to 2.0 d, AHR
22increase of organic load at each transient 69positively responded with a temporary no
23fluctuation (Fig. 3). This produced biogas was 70negative effect or deterioration. Moreover, the
24increased slightly when short transient load 71higher performance depicted as higher COD
25applied. However, this production was then 72removal efficiency in packed zone than that of
26dropped steeply to its baseline levels when the 73in the suspended zone was significantly found
27normal operation was maintained. During each 74which approximated 3.5-10.2% increase for 8.028transient load, the methane content in biogas 7572.0 h periods. This finding also confirmed the
29was approximately 70.20.2%. However, it was 76important role of packed media especially under
30significantly reduced to lower than 60% after 77the sudden load fluctuations. Similarly, Chua et
31subjecting HRT of 1.0 d. This observation was 78al. (1997) reported the benefits of attached
32corresponding well with the increase of CO 2 79biofilm of anaerobic fixed-film digester to
33content in biogas which was 27.20.2. This 80hydraulic shock loads which reduced HRT from
34imbalance stability was sudden promoted at this 815.0 to 2.5, 1.25, 1.0 and 0.5 d, respectively. They
35period (P-VII) (Fig.4)
82suggested that the ability of this type of reactor
36
83to cope with the imposed shocks was due to the
84fixed biofilm, which was not washed out during
37
85critical hydraulic shock loadings.
38
86
39
87
40
88
41
89
90
42
91
43
92
44
93
45
94
95
46
96
47
97

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

1
56
Figure 5 AHRs stability
2
57depicts as pH and TVA/Alk at individual load fluctuations
3
58
4
59
5
60The intermediates products during the anaerobic
6In Fig. 5, the levels of pH during P-III to P-V 61bio-degradation of an organic compound are
7and HRT of 2.0 d were stable around 7.0-7.3. 62mainly acetic acid, propionic acid, butyric acid,
8However at P-VI-VII, the pH in packing zone 63iso-butyric, valeric acid, and ethanol. Among
9dropped until 6.5. On further reduction of HRT 64these, acetic acid and propionic acid are
10to 1.0 d, the pH in suspended zone sharply 65predominant and usually prohibited higher
11decreased to 6.3 due to accumulation of TVA 66inhibitory. As it can be seen from Table 3, the
12until 2.7 g/L (as acetic acid). However, this 67problems was promoted at low HRT (1.0 d) and
13parameter was still maintained at stable level 68often provided more seriously unfavourable
14toward the increasing flow rate for the effluent. 69environmental. Retarding acids concentration,
15Similar to pH, TVA/Alk responded relatively 70acetic and propionic acid, increased during each
16when applied hydraulic load fluctuations. The 71fluctuation, especially at period VI and VII. At
17stable ratio was maintained at approximately 72P-V, these acid concentrations in packing zone
180.35-0.40 for the small fluctuated, while an 73reached 2.7 and 1.2 g/L, respectively. Similar
19imbalance of this ratio which higher than 0.5-1.0 74result was also observed for propionic acid.
20was observed especially at high load fluctuation. 75Lower VFA formation in the packing zone can
21However, this temporal effect was rapidly 76be explained by the advantages of immobilized
22resumed to its normal operation. These clearly 77microorganism culture. Buyukkamaci et al.
23response of the controlled parameter under 78(2004) concluded that this immobilization zone
24shock load was also reported for another type of 79provides high cell concentrations which further
25digester. The sudden and seriously drop of 80benefits to acid utilization and elimination of
26digesters performance was found at high OLR 81biomass washout.
27and especially suspended growth system. Borja 82From the result, the packed zone at the top of
28and Banks (1995) studied the effect of sudden 83AHR was well able to retain the biomass inside.
29increase of flow rate by 100-150% of a normal 84The suspended solid concentration in the
30on performance of fluidised bed reactor fed with 85effluent was increased at each fluctuation which
31synthetic ice-cream wastewater at HRT of 8 h 86was 0.32-0.87 gVSS/L for the normal and small
32and OLR of 15.6 kg COD/m 3.d. They found the 87fluctuation (P I-PV) and shortly increased to
33sharp decreases of pH (from 7.1 to 6.6), drop of 880.80-1.37 gVSS/L for P-VII-VII. However, the
34alkalinity, increases in effluent VFA and COD 89washout was rapidly resumed to the normal
35relatively to the change. Although the biogas 90level. This finding also illustrated the additional
36production was increased, its methane content 91filtration function of packing zone of AHR in
37was then decreased significantly. This change 92retaining activated biomass inside.
38was directly consequent to an inhibition of 93
39methanogenesis.
94
40
95
41
96
42
97
43
98
44
99
45
100
46
101
47
102
48
103
49
104
50
105
51
106
52
107
53
108
54
109
55
110

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

1
56treating cassava wastewater with usually
2
57promotes hydraulic transient loads.
3
58
4
59
Table
5
604
Microbial
performance
of
suspended6
61 and attached- biomass in AHR
7
62
Methanogenic activity
Non-Methanogenic activity
Time
8
63
(gCOD-CH4/gVSS.d)
(gCOD/gVSS.d)
9
64
suspended
biomass
attached
biomass
suspended
biomass
attached biomass
10
65
0.14
1.05 66
2.50
2.42
11After P-II
12After P-VII
0.11
1.03 67
2.90
2.81
13
68
14
15Not only quantitative parameters were analyzed, 69ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
16in this study, the microbial quality in terms of 70Authors gratfully thank to the office of the
17activities was also measured for both the 71National Research Council of Thailand (NRCT)
18suspended- and attached biomass. Table 4 shows 72and King Mongkuts University of Technology
19the microbial performance of biomass after P-II 73Thonburi for the grant and facility supports,
20(initially) and P-VII (partially inhibited). As of 74repectively. The appreciation is also exteded to
21the result, it was found that after subjected to 75Beasiswa Unggulan Depdiknas and Brawijaya
22hydraulic load fluctuation, microbial activities 76University for financial supporting to
23of AHR was slightly affected. Methanogenic 77Mr. Yusron Sugiarto for his master degree study
24activity was still maintained at approximately 78in Thailand.
250.11 and 1.03 gCOD/gVSS.d for suspended- and
26attached-biomass respectively. While, the non- 79REFERENCES
27methanogenic activity was slightly increased 80Bezerra, J.A.D. Rodrigues, S.M. Ratusznei, M.
Zaiat and E. Foresti. 2009. Effects of feed
28from about 2.50 to 2.90 and 2.42 to 2.81 81
time, organic loading and shock loads in the
29gCOD/gVSS.d for the suspended- and attach- 82
83
anaerobic whey treatment by an AnSBBR
30biomass, respectively. This finding might be
84
with circulation. Applied Biochemistry and
31because of the load fluctuation was transient
Biotechnology. Volume 157. pp. 140158.
32applied and resulted to partially inhibit even at 85
33lowest HRT (P-VII). This inhibition was also 86Borja R. and Banks C.J. 1995 Response of an
34shortly maintained. Therefore, a minimal effect 87
anaerobic fluidized bed reactor treating ice35was inferred to microbe which well protective 88
cream wastewater to organic, hydraulic,
36forms of biofilm.
89
temperature and pH shocks. Biotechnology.
37CONCLUSIONS
90
Volume 39. pp. 251259.
38As of the obtained results, AHR provoked a
91Buyukkamaci, N., Ayse Filibeli. 2004. Volatile
39significant capability and resilience when
92
fatty acid formation in an anaerobic hybrid
40subjected to transient hydraulic load fluctuation. 93
reactor. Process Biochemistry. Volume 39.
41A small deterioration, with about 3.0-5.0%
94
pp.14911494.
42lower of COD removal efficiency, of digester
95Chavalparit,O and M. Ongwandee. 2009. Clean
43performance was found when applied a short
96
technology for the tapioca starch industry in
44period fluctuation, whereas more drastic
97
Thailand. Journal of Cleaner Production.
45inhibition was observed for the longer period.
98
Volume 17. pp.105110.
46When a shortest transient HRT of 1.0 d was
99Chua, H.; W. F. Hu., P. H. F. Yu and M. W. L.
47applied, the removal efficiency of suspended
Cheung. 1996. Responses Of An Anaerobic
48and packed zone dropped to 71.4% and 94.2%, 100
101
Fixed-Film Reactor To Hydraulic Shock
49respectively. Volatile acid accumulation was also
102
Loadings, Journal Bioresource Technology.
50found at this condition and resulted to digesters
103
Volume 61. pp. 79-83.
51failure. However, this AHR still could recover to
52its baseline performance within less than 1.0 and 104Frankin, R.J. 2001. Full-scale experiences with
532.4 d for period III-V and period VI-VII,
105
anaerobic treatment of industral wastewater.
54respectively. This finding demonstrated clearly 106
Water Science and Technology. Volume 44.
55that AHR is an optimal and practical digester for 107
pp.1-6.

1
2

AND 7

TH

INNOVATIONS FOR RENEWABLE ENERGY 2010

SEE FORUM MEETING 20th 23rd September, 2010, Hanoi, Vietnam

1Lettinga, G. 1995. Anaerobic digestion and

2
wastewater treatment systems. Antonie Van
3
Leeuwenhoek. Volume 67. pp. 328.
4Patel H. and Madamwar D. 2000
5
Biomethanation of low pH petrochemical
6
wastewater using up-flow fixed film
7
anaerobic bioreactors. World Journal of
8
Microbiology and Biotechnology. Volume
9
16. pp. 6975.
10Nachaiyasit, S and Stuckey D.C. 1997. The
11
Effect of Shock Loads On The
12
Performance Of An Anaerobic Baffled
13
Reactor (Abr). 2. Step and Transient
14
Hydraulic Shocks at Constant Feed
15
Strength. Water Research. Volume 31. pp.
16
2747 2754.
17
18
19