Activated Sludge 0001

A Unified Model of the Activated Sludge Process
Author(s): Brian L. Goodman and Andrew J. Englande, Jr.

Source: Journal (Water Pollution Control Federation), Vol. 46, No. 2 (Feb., 1974), pp. 312-332
Published by: Water Environment Federation
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25038126 .
Accessed: 26/09/2013 14:45
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Water Environment Federation is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal
(Water Pollution Control Federation).
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
A unified model of the activated
sludge process
Brian L. Goodman and Andrew j. Englande, Jr.
the activated sludge waste treat of the following general form :

SINCEment process was developed in England = ?
AXV aSo bXv
during the early 1900's, many variations of
the original process have been developed where
and used in wastewater treatment.1 In = vss accumulation
AXV rate, lb/day;
1912, H. W. Clarke at
the Lawrence Ex
So
= BOD5
fed, lb/day;
perimental Station, Mass., studied waste = mixed
Xv liquor vss, lb;
purification through its aeration in the a = vss synthesis rate, lb/lb bod5
presence of Dr. G. J.
microorganisms.
fed/day ; and
Fowler, consulting chemist for the Rivers b = vss oxidation rate, lb/lb vss/day.
Committee of the Manchester Corporation,
observed some of the Lawrence experiments In 1952, Hoover and Porges4 reported the
and suggested to Edward Arden and development of an empirical formula for
William Lockett of the Davyhulme Sewage the composition of activated sludge micro
Works, Manchester Corporation that they organisms. This formula, C5H7NO2, yields
carry out similar experiments. High puri a molecular weight of 113, which is cor
fication levels were achieved by Arden and rected to 124 when it is necessary to account
Lockett through use of an aeration process for the inert inorganic or ash content of the
that incorporated the recovery of flocculant microorganisms. This formula and the
solids and their recycle to the aeration metabolic balances presented by these
stage. Arden and Lockett reported these researchers were
important contributions
results to the Society of Chemical Industry to the understanding of the activated
in April 1914, in a paper entitled "Experi sludge process and subsequent modeling
ments on the Oxidation of Sewage Without efforts.
the Aid of Filters." These researchers sub In 1954, Eckenfelder and O'Connor5 pro
sequently carried out larger scale experi posed a mathematical model for activated
ments, and they reported the results to the sludge wastewater treatment. This model
Society of Chemical Industry in November was subsequently modified and expanded
1914, in a paper entitled "Oxidation of in publications by Eckenfelder6""12 during
Sewage Without the Aid of Filters." the period from 1960 to 1971. These publi
It was not until the early 1950's, however, cations established a nomenclature and
that activated sludge process fundamentals mathematical approach to activated sludge
came under close scientific study. Helmers process design that is widely used.
et al.2 reported in 1951 that the rate of In 1962, McKinney13 advanced a mathe
activated sludge growth for three industrial matical model for complete mixing acti
wastes was observed to be proportional to vated sludge (cmas) treatment systems.
the biochemical oxygen demand (bod) Among others, further publications by
reduction as long as nutritional deficiencies McKinney14^16 followed in 1968, 1969, and
did not exist. In 1951 Heukelekian et al.z 1970. These publications established a
proposed the evaluation of activated sludge second nomenclature and mathematical
volatile suspended solids (vss) accumula approach to activated sludge process de
tion rate through the use of a relationship sign that is also widely used.
312 Journal WPCF

Activated Sludge Model
AERATION
ENDOGENOUS
STATE
(10'Z?BLE
MATTER
!ORCAt"C
CONCENTRATION
?HCROOGRAf QF QF?- KmFV

MASS -
<?MaVKSF MaKeV
FIGURE 2.?Aeration only (

McKinney13 ).
Bacteriological Research
In 1942, Monod17 published the results

of his studies on continuous bacterial
FIGURE 1.?Relationship of microorgan culture. He used an aeration only (no cell
ism growth and food concentration. and maintained his
recycle) apparatus
cultures in a microbe-limiting condition
rather than a food-limiting condition. An
When began to utilize and
Eckenfelder excess of substrate was always present, and
publish complete mixing equations exten the of substrate
removal or
(degradable
sively, using the nomenclature and basic
ganic material) was a function of cell mass
approach previously so widely dissemi and time, with the concentration of cell
a considerable amount ot confusion
nated, mass being controlled by the dilution rate.
developed. This became especially true Monod's did not correlate
relationships
as use was made of the
increasing complete CMAS data satisfactorily when applied by
mixing mode. Today complete mixing has Garrett and Sawyer18 in 1952 because it
become the activated sludge process variant was necessary to operate at a food-limited
of choice in a majority of industrial waste condition in order to achieve a low effluent
treatment applications and in a very sig bod. to use the
Subsequent attempts
nificant number, perhaps a majority, of have met with no
Monod relationships
municipal or domestic waste applications. success for this reason.
greater
It seemed that the confusion inherent in
the existence of two apparently different
Comparison of Process Mathematical
cmas mathematical models was severely Models
retarding the application of this extremely
desirable and widely applicable process Aeration only.
variant. Further, it seemed that no real
Substrate removal. For aeration only acti
conflict between these models actually
vated sludge systems operating in the de
existed. A detailed study of both mathe
matical models has shown them to be identi clining growth phase (Figure 1) the rate of
substrate removal is controlled by the sub
cal. The present paper seeks to present
strate concentration remaining. In Figures
this finding through a logical, stepwise 2 and 3 it can be seen that a materials bal
development and comparison of the two
models with respect to substrate removal, AERATION
solids accumulation, and oxygen require
ments. Both aeration only and aeration
with return cmas systems are con
sludge
sidered. The necessary bridging mathe
matics and are also
equalities presented.
Finally, a unified nomenclature and cmas
model are advanced. Verification of the
model through the use of a variety of full
scale, long-term operating data has been FIGURE 3.?Aeration only
carried out and is also presented. (Eckenfelder40).
Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 313

Goodman and Englande
anee with respect to substrate removal at equilibrium can be expressed as
McKinney Eckenfelder
dS
= =
QFi QF + KmFV (la) QSo QSe + (2a)
-^V
Dividing by Q : Because :
= F + dS
=
Fi KmFt (lb)
-jt
kXvSe (2b)
Rearranging :
Substituting :
Fi = F(? +KJ) (le) QS.

-
QSe
=
kXvSeV (2c)
and: Dividing by Q :
Fi ?
F = (Id) So S?
=
kXvSet (2d)
Kmt+ 1
Rearranging :
=
S0 5.(1 + kXvt) (2e)
and:
=
S<
kXvt + 1 (20
The substrate removal rate coefficients (Km, k) used in the two mathematical models
are determined as illustrated in Figure 4 from which :
F
= Fi-
KmF (3a) /v<3e
XJ
(4a)
Rearranging : Rearranging :
? Fi- F *Jo ?Je

=
Km
tF (3b) kX,
tSe
(4b)
Active mass accumulation. With reference to Figures 2 and 3, it may be seen that the
active mass leaving the aeration only system is balanced by the net production of active
mass within the system.
=
VK.F- MaKeV ? = VakXvSe -
QMa (5a) ^hV (6a)
U jd
Dividing by Q : Dividing by Q
- xX
Ma = tK8F KjtMa (5b) takXvSe-r^kbt (6b (
UJd
Rearranging : :
Rearranging
K.F xXv = akXvSe
M a = (5c) i+ h (6c)
1+Ke J7
t t
The activated sludge solids synthesis coefficient, a, can be determined from either of the
data plots presented in Figure 5.
314 Journal WPCF

Fj- F AX
AXV .
/S.-S.\
(7a) (8a)
X v -(^y.+i
\ I a a
Because : Because :
AXV 1
=
K,' fdK (7b) Xv t (8b)
Substituting : Substituting :
Ft- F o o ? e
+? (7c) / "V xvt
(8c)
X,
-ffl' -t=\-xr)
Rearranging and solving for a, Rearranging and solving for "a",
fdKet + 1 _ bt + 1
a = (7d)
Fj- F ?Jo ê
(8d)
Xv X.
The activated sludge degradable solids oxidation coefficients (Ke, ki,) can be determined
from data plots presented in Figures 5 and 6.
From Equation 7c: From Figure 6 :

?
AX Vt,_ // ^0
So Se \
= -(f?KJ + 1) (9a)
?e
kb (10a)
^V^
A ? a xJi. vv \
\ xX vt /
xJi. vt
Solving ?or'Ke: From Equation 8b :
Fi- F X.
(9b) AXC
t (10b)
= a-~xV-x
Ke
U
Substituting and rearranging :
Xv /s.-s.\
kbxXv (10c)
?-T-)
Solving for kb
a (So - Se)
= Xv
kb
xt (10d)
Note that the coefficient, a, as used in the preceding relationships, actually stands for
either of two coefficients, a or a5, depending on the substrate unit of measurement used.
a is used when the substrate units are bodw or cod and "a5" when bod5 units
Commonly,
are used. A more complete discussion of this subject is presented in a later section.
In order to avoid redundancy, it should be pointed out that all aeration only relation
ships are quite similar to aeration with sludge return relationships. In order to convert
an aeration with sludge return equation to the equivalent aeration only equation, it is
only necessary to substitute the aeration value, /, for the sludge age value, tsy where
period
ever it appears. Thus, it would seem logical to proceed, at this point, to a complete com
parison of the two mathematical models based on the aeration with sludge return system.
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 315

It is contended that the preceding comparisons, coupled with those that follow, adequately
demonstrate the identical nature of the two models considered regardless of the activated
sludge process variant involved.
Aeration with sludge return.
Substrate removal. As in the case of aeration only systems, the removal of substrate in
aeration with sludge return systems, operating in the declining growth phase, is controlled
by the substrate concentration remaining. With reference to Figures 7 and 8, it can be
seen that a materials balance with respect to substrate removal at equilibrium can be
as :
expressed
= =
QFi + QrF (Q+ Qr)F + KmFV (11a) QS0+ QrS
QrSe (Q+ Qr)Se+ (12a)
^V
Canceling QrF : Canceling QrSe :
= dS
= QSe + (12b)
QFi QF + KmFV (lib) QSo
-^V
=
Dividing by Q: Substituting dS/dt kXvSe:
=
Fi = F + KmFt (lie) QSo QSe + kXvSeV (12c)
Rearranging : Dividing by Q :
Fi = F(l + KJ) (lid) S0 = Se + kXvSet (12d)

And : Rearranging :
F = v i (lie) S0 = Se(l + kXvt) (12e)

f'
And:
s- = (12f)
kxf+i
It should be noted that Equation lie is identical to Equation Id and Equation 12f is
identical to Equation 2f. Thus, it can be seen that substrate removal is unaffected by
recirculation in the activated sludge process.
Active mass accumulation. With reference to Figures 7 and 8, it can be seen that an
active mass balance around the treatment may be as :
system expressed
McKinney
= -
KsVF (<2 Qw)Mae Dividing by V:
+ QwMaw+KeMaV (13a)
Where AMa
=
0, =~
KSF + KeMa (13d)
~- = -
(Q Q?)Ma, + QwMaw (13b) s
:
Rearranging
Substituting: ^ p
=
M0 (13e)
= - MaV r^-
K. VF + KeMa F (13c) + K.
-f-
316 Journal WPCF

?ckenfelder
kxX*jt = c^ - uxX?ir a a \ Dividing by F:

A??V abSrQ kb?r-V (14a)
u u
active mass as : ? xX
Expressing buildup
= (14b)
AJ7 ? Rearranging
:
By substitution : a
g
XJi. v X2\. v t
(14e)
U kbxXvV fdlih
VT/= ahSrQ
cn --?
(14c) G
-Q
Any consideration of solids production and accumulation in activated sludge systems

must begin with an evaluation of the basic energy-synthesis relationship. This relation
ship can be expressed in terms of the oxygen equivalence of the biologically degradable
substrate (Figure 9) :
E _ E
=
f FT~s (15)
S E
(16)
Y=X~t
E
E =
T
-S ?~? (17)
1
T
In terms of mass units, synthesis can be expressed as the reciprocal of the oxygen equiv
alence of the protoplasm synthesized :
=
Sm 777 (18)
Thus, on a bodw or cod basis, the vss formed per unit of substrate metabolized can be
expressed as
E
a = (19)
-î
In a like manner, on a bod5 basis, the vss formed per unit of substrate metabolized can
be expressed as
.-?
=_zy?0D.\ < '
b" Vbod5/
Or
E
a& - ^21)
b"{\ \Q-Kt)
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 317

Volatile mass accumulation. The accumulation of volatile suspended mass in an acti

vated sludge system can be computed as :
=
M V = -
KSFV -^-+KJMVV (22a) AXVV ciiSrQ kbxX.V (23a)
Dividing by V: Dividing by V:
?1
KSF =^ + KJMV (22b) AXV
= ?? ?
kbxXv (23b)
Rearranging : Because :
= KSF
(22c)
AX. .
M,
+ k: (23c)
f
Because :
Substituting :
= Xv = a$Sr ? v
Ke xKe (22d) -77
~j~
kbXAv (23d)
And: Rearranging :
asSr
u =
1+ - (22e) Xv (23e)
(1 fi)K?. 1
+ xkb
: =
Substituting Substituting xkb b (From Figure 5) :
a^Sr
KSF
t
1 (22f) =
u Xv (23f)
7+' 1 - Ke
ts + (1 fd)Kets + *
For activated sludge systems as commonly designed and operated, a nonbiodegradable

residue of cellular metabolsim is assumed to accumulate at the same rate as the rate of
endogenous respiration.
-
Me = (1 fd)KeMJs (McKinney) (24)
In the case of soluble wastes, the volatile solids (vs) concentration can be expressed as:
Mv = Ma + Me (McKinney) (25)
= ?
Because Me Mv Ma, the endogenous mass accumulation in the Eckenfelder
mathematical model is, from Equations 23e and 14e :
a$Sr abSr
Me (Eckenfelder) (26)
+ xkb t; + kb
j,
Note that in the preceding relationships a is substituted for a5 when Sr is expressed in

terms of bodw or cod. Note also that where vss are the treatment as a
entering system
waste component, their biologically nondegradable fraction, if any, must be added to
Equations 22f and 23f.
318 Journal WPCF

K.F
=-
Mv OsSr
+ - =
I 1+ (1 fd)KetsKe Xv (28)+
+ r-^? ^ b
+^ (27) G
Inert inorganic mass accumulation. The accumulation of inorganic inert mass results
from the entrapment of influent inorganic solids within the treatment system and the
buildup of inert inorganic end products of endogenous metabolism :
Ma = fuMojt?+ fndi(Ma + Me) (McKinney) (29)

?t
The concentration of inorganic inert mass can also be calculated indirectly as
Mu =^ - X.
(30)
Total solids accumulation. The total mixed liquor suspended solids (mlss) concentration
is computed as the sum of the active, endogenous, and inert fractions accumulated at the
operating point sludge age.
= =
MT Ma + M e+ Mi + Mu (31a) XT Xv + X{ (32a)
Also : Alternatively :
= + fndi(Ma +l Me) XT =
MTi fiSSin/j- (31b) (32b) ^ v
J
Therefore, alternatively :
=
MT Ma + Me + MTi (31c)
The rate of solids accumulation is expressed as
Mr Xt
AMT = -r (33) AXT =
(34)
-^
ts (jr
Effluent biochemical oxygen demand. It should be noted that the effluent bod5 results
from the presence of unmetabolized influent bod and respiring microorganisms in the treat
ment system effluent. Thus, effluent bod can be computed as the sum of the unmetabo
lized bod and the oxygen equivalence of the protoplasm oxidized during the test period.
= F -
BOD5e + b"(l 6T*?0
=
Ma BOD?? Se + UXve (36)
(35)
?Mr.(fd)
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 319

It should be noted that Equations 35 and 36 yield only the carbonaceous effluent bod.
Nitrogenous bod must also be considered.
Oxygen requirements. In order to maintain the treatment system in an aerobic condition,
sufficient oxygen must be provided to meet the microbial synthesis and oxidation as well
as chemical oxidation demands.
= - =
OuV a?(Fi F)Q + b"fdKeMaV (37a) RrV ab'SrQ + b'XvV + k?Q (38a)
Dividing by V: = 0 :
Assuming VQ
Mft- F)
0u = + b?fdKeMa (37b) RrV = ab'SrQ+ b'XvV (38b)
Because:
Dividing by Q:
E
=
, ,_ f Rrt ab'Sr + VXJL (38c)
Dividing by Xvt:
Substituting:
Rr
E at'St
f (38d)
_xricj+b
- and canceling :
Multiplying by X,
+ b"fdKeMa (37d) ab'Sr

Rr =^ + b'Xv (38e)
Because :
b = xkb (38f)
And:
6' = ?>"6 (38g)
Substituting :
= -^r-' + i"x*?X.
Rr (38h)
The determination of the oxygen demand rate coefficients (a',b') is illustrated by Figure
10.
The Unified Model
A suggested nomenclature for use in the unified model is presented in the notation
section. Utilizing the suggested nomenclature and the relationships developed in the
section of this paper, a unified complete mixing mathematical model was
preceding
constructed as follows :
Substrate removal.
s- - (39>
kXTi
This equation applies both to aeration only and aeration with sludge return systems.
320 Journal WPCF

(McKINNEY 15) ECKENFELDER
ir_
Xut
KmSe = An kSe
Xvt
ts0
kXv
tse
kX,
FIGURE 4.?Biochemical oxygen demand removal

rate coefficients
Active mass accumulation.
a$KmSe , . . v
=
Ma z- (aeration only) (40)
7 + kb
=-?-
Ma (aeration and sludge return) (41)
+ kb
Either "a" or "as" may be used.
Endogenous mass accumulation.

= ?
Me (1 fd)kbMat (aeration only) (42)
= ?
Me (1 fd)kbMats (aeration and sludge return) (43)
Inert mass accumulation.
=
MTi fiM0 + fndi(Ma + Me) (Aeration only) (44)
=
MTi fiM0- + fndi(Ma + Me) (aeration and sludge return) (45)
Total mass accumulation.

=
MT Ma + Me + MTi (46)
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 321

(McKINNEY (ECKENFELDER
Xu
Ke=-!? , OR,Jk'
fd x
Xw Xyt /
|r Kefd \t +J_
-f a / a
Xv \
aS1 -
I
= aSr -
K0 X '
t
Ke
= x- , OR, b = fdKe = K' , OR, xKG
NOTE: fri -= xi
d XMAX
FIGURE 5.?Mass accumulation rate coefficients.
This equation applies to both aeration only and aeration with sludge return systems.
= Mt
AMT ?r~
i (aeration only) (47)
= Mt
AMt ???ts (aeration and sludge return) (48)
Effluent biochemical oxygen demand.
= -
BOD5e Se + ?"(1 erk*)Ma(fd) (aeration only) (49)
= ? Ma
BOD5a Se + b"(\ e-~kbt)-rz-MTe(fd) (aeration and sludge return) (50)
Mt
Oxygen requirement.
?5 \S0 Se) 7 // /. L -Mjr
=-
Rr + b"fdkhMa (51)
This equation applies to both aeration only and aeration with sludge return systems.
322 Journal WPCF

(ECKENFELDER
LOG10xxy
xXw
? L0G10
xXv xXut -
xXv
REMAINING
= k
AXM xXJ^-- D
xX?t
=~ -
AXv kbxXv
xXvl
LOGioTJT"
AXV =h v2
t2- t,
OR
xX?
LOG.
= -
Xv aSr k? xXvt
V I + kh Xt
=
kD kb' (2.302585)
aSr
DegradabIe MLVSS
?^xKp = KP
= Initial MLVSS
kb
FIGURE 6.?Mass accumulation rate coefficients.
Rates, Factors, and Coefficients the difficulty of obtaining accurate sub

strate concentration measurements, es
Substrate removal rate coefficient, Km.
pecially at
low concentration levels, an
The substrate removal rate coefficient Km
average Km value of 15 hr-1 at 20?C seems
has been variously reported as 15 hr-"1 reasonable for municipal wastewater.
(Mohanrao19 and Von der Emde20), 8.5 hr^1 With reference to Equations 3b and 4b,
(Goodman21), and 7.2 hr_1 (McKinney and it can be seen that Km equals kXv. Data
Ooten15). Recent analysis of a large body from the Amherst,22 New Orleans,23 Salem,24
of pure oxygen pilot plant data22~26 by the and Cincinnati26 pilot plant studies were
senior author yielded a mean Km value of used to construct Figure 11. It should be
17 hr_1 with a range of 2 hr-1 to 67 hr_1. noted that virtually every point falls on a
Average Km values for each of these studies dine the slope of which is 1.0. Thus, for a
were: 15 hr"1 (Amherst, Mass.22), 17.5 hr^1 Km value of 15 hr^1, the expected values of
(New Orleans, La.23), 8.75 hr""1 (Salem, k for various values of Xv would be as
Ore.24), 25 hr^1 (Cedar Rapids, Iowa25), and indicated in Table I. These values are
23.3 hr-"1 (Cincinnati, Ohio26). Considering plotted in Figure 12 along with data derived
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 323

SEDIMENTATION
QF QFj- KmFV
, -
VMa ts (KSVF KeMaV?
FIGURE 7.?Aeration with sludge return

(McWimey13).
BOD,,OR SOLUBLE
COD,MG'l
from the previously referenced pure oxygen
studies. Assuming an essen
pilot plant FIGURE of the energy:
9.?Determination
tially constant daily substrate loading on total energy ratio and Mc
the treatment low values of Xv (Burkhead
system,
food : Kinney14).
imply high microorganism (f:m)
values or, to state the matter differently,
low sludge age values. With reference to
Ej of the influent biodegradable organic
13 and 14, it may be seen that the
Figures matter, T, is utilized for energy to synthe
degradable fraction (x) of the mixed liquor size the remaining biodegradable organic
volatile suspended solids (mlvss) (Xv) in matter, S. Frequently, the energy-syn
creases with increasing f:m values, and the thesis has been assumed to be
relationship
percentage of the mlvss that are active 0.333 energy and 0.666 synthesis. From
decreases with increasing sludge age. Thus,
it is not surprising that k increases as Xv
decreases (Figure 12).
Sludge synthesis rate coefficients, a and
a5. Various values of a and a5 (Table II)
have been advanced. Inspection of Equa
tions 19 and 20 sheds some light on the pos
sible causes of the variability noted. In
terms of oxygen some fraction,
equivalence,
Xvt
SEDIMENTATION
+ b
Xvt
R a'XvSr h' y
xvt
--
QSe QS0 kXvSeV
XV r iaSr , *K
,__^+ b
Rr Xv
FIGURE 8.?Aeration with sludge return FIGURE I0.?Oxygen demand rate co

(Eckenfelder40). efficients (Eckenfelder10).
324 Journal WPCF

AMHERSTn TABLE L?Values of k for Various Values of

100 o MILL CREEK26 =
(When Km hr"1).
x NEWORLEANS 23
90 o 2*
SALEM,ORE.
Xv
(mg/l) (hour-i)
80
1,000 0.0150
70
2,000 0.0075
60 3,000 0.0050
4,000 0.00375
5,000 0.0030
6,000 0.0025
10 7,000 0.00214
8,000 0.00188
30
9,000 0.00166
20 ? 10,000 0.0015
10 /
/ 0l? chemical composition of the microbial mass

0 10 20 30 HO 50 60 70 80 90 100
(and, thus, its oxygen equivalence) is a
Km
function of the chemical nature of the sub
FIGURE 11.?Relationship of Km to kXv. strate and the F M : ratio. Considering the
demonstrated range of variability, a value
of 1.415 is considered reasonable.
Table III, it is clear that this is not always
The ratio of bodu to bod5 has often been
the case.
taken as 1.5:1. This is based on a Kbod
The oxygen equivalence value of the
value of 0.1, or, in other words, 0.68 bodu
synthesized microbial mass has often been
equals bod5. Present-day municipal waste
taken as 1.415 lb/lb (kg/kg). Based on the
waters often display Kbod values of 0.15
empirical formula C5H7N02 advanced by to 0.18, and industrial-commercial wastes
Hoover and Porges4 :
are highly variable in this respect.
C5H7NO2 + 502 -> Experimental data published by
McKinney and Ooten15 and Reynolds and
5C02 + NH3 + 2H20 (52)
Yang27 are plotted in Figure 15, with the
It has shown been(Burkhead and and Yang data transformed to
Reynolds
McKinney14) that this value can vary at bod5 for comparative purposes. Utilizing
least from 1.07 to 1.77 and that the actual
TABLE IL?Sludge Yield Per Unit of
Substrate Metabolized*
McKinney13 0.7
McKinney and Ooten16 0.7
Reynolds and Yang27 (0.6)
Servizi and Bogan32
VALUES
CALCULATED
PILOT
OXYGEN
PURE PLANT
DATA2 Carbohydrates (0.6)
Aromatics and aliphatic acids (0.5)
Heukelekian et al.3 0.5
Gellman and Heukelekian38 0.5
Sawyer39 0.5
Burkhead and McKinney14
Carbohydrates (0.8)
Noncarbohydrates (0.5)
Hoover and Porges4 0.5
Eckenfelder and O'Connor6 (0.6-0.7)
*
Numbers in parenthesis calculated on the basis
FIGURE of K and XT. of COD - BOD? and KBOi> = 0.1.
12.-Relationship
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 325

TABLE III.?Substrate Utilized for Energy This relationship is illustrated in Figure 16

where 20?C values are plotted.
Substrate E/T
Correction for temperature. Values of
Carbohydrates* -0.25-1 Km and kb are usually stated for a tempera
Amino acids* 0.48 = 0.38
Average ture of 20?C. The 20?C values, X2o, can
Fatty acids* _0.42J
be corrected for other temperatures, KT,
Butanol and benzoic
acid* 0.52
over the range of 5 ? 35?C through the
Allt 0.33 use of Equation 54 :
Carbohydratest -0.46-1
= =
Amino Acidst 0.64 Average 0.54 KT i?2o(1.075^20) (54)
Fatty Acidst _0.52J
Benzoic AcidJ 0.49 Degradable and nondegradable micro
bial fractions, fdf /?d, and The de
* fndl.
Burkhead and McKinney.14 gradable organic fraction, fd} of the active
t McKinney.13 mass in the treatment system has been
t Servizi.33 stated as
-
0.76 0.77.11-13-15 Thus, the
corresponding nondegradable organic frac

the average E/T value of Burkhead and of mass
tion, fndJ active would be
McKinney14 (0.383), a KBot> of 0.15 and a 0.24
?
0.23. The nondegradable inorganic
b" value of 1.415, a is computed as 0.44
fraction, /?dl, of microbial mass is usually
and as is computed as 0.53. as
taken 0.1.13>15
Sludge oxidation rate coefficient, kb. A
considerable amount of evidence is accumu
lating that indicates that the rate of sludge Verification of the Model
oxidation decreases with increasing sludge
Operating data (2.5 yr) for a complete
age. McKinney and Ooten15 noted this
mixing activated sludge wastewater treat
effect but did not quantify it. Ecken
ment plant have been presented by
felder28 and Spicka29 have noted this same
McKinney et al.u Analysis of these data
relationship in evaluating the fraction of
indicated good agreement between observed
effluent bod attributable to the effluent
and calculated values. The mlss concen
suspended solids (ss).
trations averaged 4,167 mg/1 for the period
Analysis of the data of Schmidt30 indi
studied versus, 4,107 mg/1 calculated.
cates that kb is related to sludge age ac
Effluent BOD5 concentrations averaged 12
cording to Equation 53 :
mg/1 versus 16 mg/1 calculated. Excellent
= between observed and calcu
khts kbl(0.7Sloî1^2) (53) agreement
0.7 -
0.6
0.5
O.il?
0.3
0.2
0.1 -
0 I 2 3 ^ 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16
F/M(Xv BASIS)
FIGURE 13.?Relationship of x to F:M (soluble substrate).
326 Journal WPCF

(Xv Basis;
iooL
I
V
\
o CALCULATED
VALUES
'
DATA & JENKINS
OFECKH0FF
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
FIGURE 14.?Relationship of percent active mass to sludge age

( soluble substrate ).
lated oxygen uptake rates during even the Smith35 studied complete mixing in both
course of a single day was reported. Thus, pilot and full-scale treatment plants.
the process model presented was shown to Smith's data indicated close agreement
be capable of predicting, with high ac between actual operating data and that
curacy, both long- and short-term system predicted by the process mathematical
performance and characteristics. Thus, not model examined in the present paper.
only is the model useful in the design of Goodman21 has presented the results of
complete mixing systems but it is quite nine full-scale studies of complete mixing
valuable in the analysis of real time operat treatment systems. These data are sum
ing data as well. marized in Table IV. Again, it can be
SLOPE
0.254
0-478
10 15
t, HOURS
FIGURE 15.?Determination of a and kh.
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 327

shown to be as close as one could reasonably

expect given the expected magnitude of
possible sampling and analytical errors.36
It is, thus, submitted that the McKinney
Eckenfelder cmas mathematical model has
been adequately verified.
Model Application Example
In order to illustrate the use of

the McKinney-Eckenfelder mathematical
o model, a portion of the Grand Island, Neb.,
cmas treatment plant data previously dis
\e cussed by McKinney et al.u, in terms of
\o annual averages, was selected for detailed
computation. The month of July 1969 was
\ e selected for this purpose as reasonably
representative of the average operating
V
conditions during the year. Average operat
ing conditions during July 1969 at Grand
Island were3 :
0.3
0.2 0.?
0.5
- '
kh DAY 1. Primary effluent = ono ,,
Z7 s/ 393 mg/1
bod5, Fi
FIGURE 16.?Effect of sludge age on the
2. Primary effluent
.^ = 472 ,,
rate of endogenous oxidation, fc&. -mt mg/1
ss, Mo
3. Aeration tank con
T = 23 3?C
seen that very good agreement exists tents temperatu
temperature,
between calculated and observed values. 4. Aeration. detention =
, 3.8 hr
The data cited here, taken together, cover /
,
period,
the range of commonly encountered sludge - irM ,
5. Raw waste flow = 5101
age values from a low of 2 to 4 days mgd
et a/.34) to high values of up to
rate, Q
(McKinney
40 days (Goodman21). Agreement between Commonly observed values for the vari
observed and calculated values have been ous coefficients and factors required in the
TABLE IV.?Full-Scale CMAS System Data21
General Influent Mixed Liquor
Mr Rr
(mg/1) (mg/l/hr)
T Km kb BODB SS
(days) (days) ?C day day (mg/1) (mg/1)
Ob Calcu Ob Calcu
served lated served lated
1.18 28 26 313 0.12 190 240 4,700 4,559

1.18 28 26 313 0.12 240 260 5,000 5,201
1.18 28 22 235 0.09 200 260 5,700 5,047
1.22 20 14 132 0.08 310 480 6,000 6,389
1.00 25 20 203 0.09 145 165 3,396 3,566
1.00 40 25 291 0.05 214 173 7,130 6,948
1.00 15 17 163 0.13 303 274 3,660 4,014 11.8 12.4
0.50 20 18 176 0.10 110 108 3,898 4,015 7.9 8.9
0.33 10 20 203 0.20 184 160 4,300 4,696 19.0 23.0
328 Journal WPCF

were assumed as follows : BOD5 removed = 388

computations (5.101) (8.34)
= = 16,506
1. Km 360-day^1 at 20?C lb/day (7,394 kg/day)
2. kb = 0.48 at Q2 required
day^1 1-day sludge _ 10,842
age BOD5 removed 16,506
3. a6 = 0.7 at KBOd = 0.1, = 0.66
S/T lb/lb (kg/kg)
= 0.666 and b" = 1.415
= (Note :Monthly average O2 supplied/BOD5
4. Xbod 0.15
removed = 0.50 lb/lb (kg/kg). During the
5. U = 0.24
last third of the month, 02 supplied/?OD5
6. /,-
=
0.55 removed = 0.66 lb/lb (kg/kg).)
System operating and performance charac Summary

teristics can be computed as
The mathematical models for complete
=
Rm23.3 360 (1.07523-3-20) mixing activated sludge wastewater treat
= 457 or 19-hr-1 ment advanced by McKinney13-14 and
day-1 12 have been
Eckenfelder11' compared in
393 detail and found to be identical. In
F = = 5-37
mg/1
19(3.8) + ? addition, bridging mathematics and equali
ties have been developed and presented that
0.666
5 = 0.57 permit either system of mathematics to be
-
1.415(1 10-?-15^) readily translated into terms of the other.
It is hoped that the comparisons and equali
(Note: 1969 average ab = 0.57) ties presented will suffice to reduce or elimi
= 0.57 (457) (5.37) = 1'627mg/1 nate confusion caused by the existence of
^ 1+ 0.36 two seemingly dissimilar models of the same
process.
= 0.24 = 281 mg/1
Me (0.36) (1,627) (2) A unified cmas model has been presented
that draws on both the McKinney and
= 0.55 + 0.1(1,627 + 281) Eckenfelder models in terms of the nomen
MTi (472)
^g clature used. It is readily acknowledged
=
3,477 mg/1 that the selected nomenclature represents
the author's own
= 281 + = only preferences. Any
MT 1,627 + 3,477 5,385 mg/1 can
system of nomenclature be used as
observed = long as the implications of the McKinney

(Note: MT 5,374 mg/1)
Eckenfelder model are recognized and
= 5.37 + -
bod5c 1.415(1 ?rosees)) suitably conveyed by the selected nomen
clature. It is to be hoped that other
researchers will be moved to adopt both a
= *<?-70>(iH)<37>
15 mg/1 standardized nomenclature and a view
point permit an extension

that will of the
(Note: BOD5e reported on the basis of six so that a more complete
concepts presented
tests during the month = 6
mg/1) understanding of process fundamentals can
be gained.
,_0.333
~ _~~ In addition to those proofs previously
"5 _ 0.405
i i0-o.i5<5) 21
advanced,34- another proof of the mathe
_ 0.405 matical predictability of cmas system is

r~ (388)
presented. It is, further, to be hoped that
0X58
minor differences of opinion will be set
+ 1.415 (0.76) (0.36) (1,627) aside and that those in the field of waste
= or 68 mg/l/hr
1,625 mg/l/day water treatment will make an effort to
= =
1,625 (0.8)(8.34) 10,842 lb 02/day utilize fully the abundance of presently
(4,922 kg/day) available information.
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 329

9. Eckenfelder, W. W., of Biological

Acknowledgments Jr., "Theory
Treatment of Trade Wastes." Jour. Water
The
Credits. authors would like to Poll. Control
Fed., 39, 240 (1967).
assistance the 10. Eckenfelder, W. W., and D.
acknowledge the throughout Jr., Ford, L.,
"Water Pollution Control." Pemberton
work reported here by Ross E. McKinney, Tex.
Press, Austin, (1970).
Parker Professor of Civil Engineering, Uni 11. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., "Water Quality Engi
versity of Kansas, Lawrence, and W. neering for Practicing Engineers." Barnes
& Noble, New York, N. Y.,
Wesley Eckenfelder, Jr., Distinguished (1970).
of Environmental 12. Bernard, J. L., et al., "Design Optimization for
Professor, Department Activated and Extended
Sludge Aeration
and Water Resources Engineering, Vander Plants." 6th Intl. Water Res.
Poll. Con}.,
bilt University, Nashville, Tenn. Without Jersusalem, Israel (1972).
their cooperation, this work could not have 13. McKinney, R. E., "Mathematics of Complete
been Mixing Activated Sludge." Trans. Amer.
completed.
Soc. Civil Eng., 128, Part III, Paper No.
This paper was presented at the 45th
3516 (1963).
annual conference of the Water Pollution 14. Burkhead, C. E., and McKinney, R. E., "Appli
Control Federation, Atlanta, Ga., October cation of Complete-Mixing Activated Sludge
to
8-13, 1972. Design Equations Industrial Wastes."
at Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 40, 557 (1968).
Authors. Brian L. Goodman was,
15. McKinney, R. E., and Ooten, R. J., "Con
the time of this paper, head of the Process
cepts of Complete-Mixing Activated Sludge."
Control Section, Civil-Sanitary Division, Trans. 19th Annual Conf. San. Eng., Bull.
Black & Veatch, Consulting Engineers, Eng. Architecture No. 60, Univ. of Kansas,
Lawrence
Kansas City, Mo. Andrew J. Englande, (1969).
16. McKinney, R. E., "Design and Operation of
Jr., is an assistant professor, Department
Complete-Mixing Activated Sludge Systems."
of Environmental Health Sciences, School
EPCS-Reports, 1, 3, 1 (1970).
of Public Health and Tropical Medicine, 17. Monod, J., "Research on Crossing of Bacterial
Tulane University, New Orleans, La. Cultures." Herman et Cie, Paris (1942).
18. Garrett, M. T., and Sawyer, C. N., "Kinetics of
Removal of Soluble BOD by Activated
References Sludge." Proc. 7th Ind. Waste Conf., Purdue,
Univ., W. Lafayette, Ind., Ext. Ser. 79, 36, 3,
1. "Pioneers of Activated Sludge: Arden, Lockett 51 (May 1952).
and Fowler." Surveyor (June 17, 1967). 19. Mohanrao, G. J., "Hi-Lo Activated Sludge
2. Helmers, E. N., et al.t "Nutritional Require Process for Subdivision Sewage Treatment."
ments in the Biological Stabilization of MS thesis, M. I. T., Cambridge (1957).
Industrial Wastes, II. Treatment with 20. Von der Emde, W., "Aspects of the High Rate
Domestic Sewage." Sew. & Ind. Wastes, 23, Activated Sludge Process." In Advances in
884 (1951). Biological Waste Treatment," Macmillan,
3. Heukelekian, H., et al., "Factors the New York, N. Y. (1963).
Affecting
of Sludge Production in the Acti 21. Goodman, B. L., "Activated Sludge Treatment
Quantity
vated Sludge Process." Sew. & Ind. Wastes, of Small Waste Volumes." 6th Intl. Water
23, 945 (1951). Poll. Res. Conf., Jerusalem, Israel (1962).
4. Hoover, S. R., and Porges, N., "Assimilation of 22. "UNOX System Plant Study at District No.
Dairy Wastes by Activated II. The No. 16 Wastewater Treatment Plant, Town
Sludge,
Equation of Synthesis and Rate of Oxygen of Amherst, New York." Union Carbide
Utilization." Sew 6* Ind. Wastes, 24, 306 Corporation (Jaunary 1972).
(1952). 23. "New Orleans, La., Wastewater Treatment
5. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., and O'Connor, D. J., Plant, Pilot Plant Report." Union Carbide
"The Aerobic Treatment of Organic Wastes." Corporation (Undated).
Proc. 9th Ind. Waste. Conf.% Purdue Univ., 24. "Salem, Oregon, Waste Treatment Plant,
W. Lafayette, Ind., Ext. Ser. 89, 39, 2, 512 Pilot Plant Information." Union Carbide
(March 1955). Corporation (Dec. 1971).
6. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., and O'Connor, D. J., 25. "UNOX System Pilot Study at Cedar Rapids
"Biological Waste Treatment." Pergamon Pollution Control Plant." Union Carbide
Press, Oxford, Eng. (1961). Corporation (March 1971).
7. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., "Theory and Practice 26. "Pilot-Plant Evaluation of the UNOX System
of Activated Sludge Process Modifications." for the Cincinnati Mill Creek Plant." Union
Water Sew. Works, 108, 4, 145 (1961). Carbide Corporation (November 1970).
8. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., "Industrial Water 27. Reynolds, T. D., and Yang, J. T., "Model of
Pollution Control." McGraw-Hill Book Co., the Completely-mixed Activated Sludge
New York, N. Y. (1966). Process." Proc. 21st Ind. Waste Con}., Purdue
330 Journal WPCF--=

Univ., W. Ind., Ext. Ser. 121, 50, demand

Lafayette a'?synthesis oxygen rate,
3, 696 (May 1966). bodu or cod basis, lb 02/lb sub
28. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., "A Discussion." In
strate synthesized
"Advances in Water Pollution Research,"
Proc. 4th Intl. Conf., Pergamon Press, Ox *a'5?synthesis oxygen demand rate,
ford, England, 592 (1969). bod5 basis, lb 02/lb substrate
29. Spicka, L, "A Discussion." In "Advances in
synthesized
Water Pollution Research," Proc. 4th Intl.
b?endogenous respiration rate, vss
Conf., Pergamon Press, Oxford, England,
591 (1969). basis, lb vss oxidized/lb vss re
30. Schmidt, R. K., "Parameter Responses to maining/day
Influent Suspended Solids in the Activated
V?endogenous respiration oxygen
Treatment Process." Ph. D. disserta
Sludge demand rate, lb 02/lb vss oxi
tion, Univ. of Texas, Austin (1970).
31. Eckhoff, D. W., and Jenkins, D., "Activated dized/day
Sludge Systems?Kinetics of the Steady and *b"?oxygen equivalent of degradable
Transient States." Univ. of California, vss, lb 02/lb degradable vss
Berkeley (Dec. 1967). BODM?Ultimate of 20-day biochemical
32. Servizi, J. A., and Bogan, R. H., "Free Energy
as a Parameter in Biological
oxygen demand (bod2o)
Treatment,"
BOD5?five-day bod
Jour. San. Eng. Div., Proc. Amer. Soc. Civil
Engr., 89, Paper No. 3539 (1963). *BOD5<??effluent bod5
33. Servizi, J. A., "Biological Oxidation and Syn COD?chemical oxygen demand
thesis as functions of Substrate Free Energy as
E?energy, expressed oxygen up
of Oxidation." Ph. D. dissertation, Univ. of
Seattle take, mg/1
Washington, (1963).
34. McKinney, R. et "Evaluation of a F?substrate, as bod5,
E., al., expressed
Complete Mixing Activated Sludge Plant." mg/1 or lb
Jour. Water Poll. Control Fed., 42, 1, 737 Fi?influent substrate, bod5 or bod20,
(May 1970).
35. Smith, H. S., "Homogeneous Activated Sludge."
mg/1
Water 6a Sew. Works and f:m?food (substrate) to mass ratio,
114, (July, Aug.,
Oct. 1967). expressed as lb BOD5/lb total mass
36. "Standard Methods for the Examination of or volatile mass/day
Water and Wastewater." 13th Ed., Amer. fraction of in
N. Y.,
/?nonbiodegradable
Pub. Health Assn., New York, (1971).
fluent vss, lb nonbiodegradable
37. Wastewater Treatment Plant Operation Rec
vss/lb vss
ords, Grand Island, Nebr. (1969).
38. Gellman, I., and Heukelekian, H., "Studies of *fd?biodegradable fraction of micro
Biochemical Oxidation by Direct Methods. bial organic mass, lb biodegrad
III. Oxidation and Purification of Industrial
able microbial organic mass/lb
Wastes by Activated Sludge." Sew and Ind.
Wastes, 25, 1196 (1953).
microbial organic mass
39. Sawyer, C. N., "Bacterial Nutrition and Syn */??inert fraction of influent ss, lb
thesis." Biological Treatment of Sewage and inert influent ss/lb influent ss
Industrial Waste." I, Reinhold, New York, inert fraction of influent
N. Y.
fa?inorganic
(1956). inert influent
ss, lb inorganic ss/
40. Eckenfelder, W. W., Jr., "Activated Sludge and
Extended Aeration." Process in lb influent ss
Design
Water Quality Engineering?New Concepts inert fraction of micro
*fndi?inorganic
and Developments." Vanderbilt Univ., Nash bial mass, lb inert
inorganic
ville, Tenn. (1971). microbial mass/lb microbial mass
/o?bod5 equivalence of effluent vss,
Notation lb BOD5/lb effluent vss
fv?volatile fraction of mlss, lb vss/lb
Symbols
MLSS
a?Mass rate, bodm or cod
yield
G?sludge age, days
basis, lb vss produced/lb sub K?bod bottle reaction rate, Kbod,
strate metabolized common log basis
*a5?mass yield rate, bod5 basis, lb
Ke?endogenous oxidation rate, mg/1
vss produced/lb substrate me
degradable mass oxidized per
tabolized mass remaining
mg/1 degradable
*
Denotes symbol used in the unified model. per day
-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 331

KJ?endogenous oxidation rate, mg/1 equivalence of the substrate total

vss oxidized per mg/1 vss re oxygen demand converted to mi
maining per day crobial protoplasm
*Km?overall bod removal rate, bod5 or *5e?effluent soluble substrate con
bod2o basis, mg/1 bod removed centration, BOD5 or bod20 basis,

per mg/1 bod remaining per day mg/1
rate, active mass in mass units
Ks?synthesis mg/1 Sm?synthesis expressed
formed
per mg/1 oxygen demand *S0?influent substrate concentration,
remaining per day BOD5 or bod20 basis, mg/1
KT?value of specified reaction rate at Sr?substrate removed, mg/1
specified temperature (T) SSinf?influent ss concentration, mg/1
K20?value of specified reaction rate at T?temperature, ?C
20?C T?total energy equivalence of sub
k?bod removal rate, bod5 or bod2o strate as the sum of
expressed
basis, mg/1 bod removed per mg/1 energy (E) and synthesis (S)
vss per day oxygen equivalence
k??immediate oxygen demand rate, *??aeration period, hour or day basis
mg/1 per unit time *ts?sludge age, days
*kb?endogenous oxidation rate, mg/1 V?volume
degradable mass oxidized per vss?volatile suspended solids

mg/1 degradable mass remaining X?solids
per day Xi?inert solids concentration, in
khl?value
of kb at 1-day sludge age organic, mg/1
kbt?value of kb at specified sludge age X0?influent 55 concentration, mg/1
v.) Xt?total ss concentration, mg/1
*Ma?active mass concentration, vss AXt?total ss accumulation rate, mg/1
basis, mg/1 per day
active mass concentra Xv?vss concentration,
Mae?effluent mg/1
tion, mg/1 AXV?vss accumulation rate, mg/1 per
of active mass
Maw?concentration day
wasted, mg/1 vss concentration, mg/1
XVe?effluent
*Me?endogenous
mass concentration, x?degradable fraction of vss, lb
vss basis, mg/1 degradable vss/lb vss
Ma?inert inorganic mass concentra
tion, mg/1 Equalities

*ikf0?influent ss concentration, mg/1 ?
= a
a' 1
*Mt?total mass concentration, mg/1
mass accumulation
*?Mt?total rate,
= E/BODu\ BODu itf
a5 b a
per day
mg/1
ss concentration,
r\BOD5/ :) BOD5
*MTe?effluent mg/1
ss E _ ?02 uptake _" ?02 uptake
*MTi?inert concentration, mg/1 =
0U?oxygen uptake rate, mg/1 per T BODu CODsolubie
unit time
flow rate, volume = -
Q?influent per kb
x
unit time
Qr?recycle flow rate, volume per fCm tCJx. x)
unit time
=
flow volume Ks aKm
Qw?waste sludge rate,
per unit time Xt
=
rate, per AXT
*Rr?oxygen uptake mg/1
T
unit time
or basis X v
S?substrate, bod5 bod20 -
AXV
5?synthesis expressed as the oxygen
332 Journal WPCF


Activated Sludge 0001

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Activated Sludge 0001

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Unified Model of the Activated Sludge Process

Author(s): Brian L. Goodman and Andrew J. Englande, Jr.

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

the activated sludge waste treat of the following general form :

312 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

?HCROOGRAf QF QF?- KmFV

FIGURE 2.?Aeration only (

In 1942, Monod17 published the results

Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 313

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

anee with respect to substrate removal at equilibrium can be expressed as

Fi = F(? +KJ) (le) QS.

? Fi- F *Jo ?Je

314 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

From Equation 7c: From Figure 6 :

Solving ?or'Ke: From Equation 8b :

-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 315

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

Aeration with sludge return.

Fi = F(l + KJ) (lid) S0 = Se + kXvSet (12d)

F = v i (lie) S0 = Se(l + kXvt) (12e)

316 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

kxX*jt = c^ - uxX?ir a a \ Dividing by F:

Any consideration of solids production and accumulation in activated sludge systems

-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 317

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

Volatile mass accumulation. The accumulation of volatile suspended mass in an acti

For activated sludge systems as commonly designed and operated, a nonbiodegradable

Note that in the preceding relationships a is substituted for a5 when Sr is expressed in

318 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

Ma = fuMojt?+ fndi(Ma + Me) (McKinney) (29)

The concentration of inorganic inert mass can also be calculated indirectly as

The rate of solids accumulation is expressed as

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

+ b"fdKeMa (37d) ab'Sr

The Unified Model

320 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

(McKINNEY 15) ECKENFELDER

FIGURE 4.?Biochemical oxygen demand removal

Active mass accumulation.

Either "a" or "as" may be used.

Endogenous mass accumulation.

Total mass accumulation.

-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 321

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

FIGURE 5.?Mass accumulation rate coefficients.

Effluent biochemical oxygen demand.

322 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

FIGURE 6.?Mass accumulation rate coefficients.

Rates, Factors, and Coefficients the difficulty of obtaining accurate sub

-Vol. 46, No. 2, February 1974 323

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

FIGURE 7.?Aeration with sludge return

FIGURE 8.?Aeration with sludge return FIGURE I0.?Oxygen demand rate co

324 Journal WPCF

This content downloaded from 205.133.226.104 on Thu, 26 Sep 2013 14:45:47 PM

AMHERSTn TABLE L?Values of k for Various Values of