H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT
BACKGROUND H2S biofiltration was carried out using expanded schist as packing material completed with a synthetic material (UP20). A comparison of different hydrodynamic configurations was made based on biofilter performances and pressure drop measurements. Three biofilters (namely BF52, BF102 and B...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986) 2015-01, Vol.90 (1), p.50-56 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 56 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 50 |
| container_title | Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986) |
| container_volume | 90 |
| creator | Courtois, Amaury Andrès, Yves Dumont, Éric |
| description | BACKGROUND
H2S biofiltration was carried out using expanded schist as packing material completed with a synthetic material (UP20). A comparison of different hydrodynamic configurations was made based on biofilter performances and pressure drop measurements. Three biofilters (namely BF52, BF102 and BF160) differing in bed height (52 cm, 102 cm and 160 cm, respectively) and diameter (14 cm, 10 cm and 8 cm, respectively) were designed in order to contain the same volume of expanded schist (8 L).
RESULTS
Biofilters were operated for more than 6 months at a constant flow rate (1.5 Nm3 h−1 corresponding to an empty bed residence time of 19 s). Elimination capacities and removal efficiencies were calculated according to loading rates varying from 0 to 57 g m−3 h−1 (inlet concentration up to 300 mg m−3). Biofilter performances were modeled and biokinetic constants were calculated using the Ottengraf model and a modified Michaelis–Menten model. In terms of elimination capacity, biofilter configurations can be ordered from the most to the least efficient: BF160 > BF102 > BF52 (maximum removal rates of 36.4, 30.3 and 25.1 g m−3 h−1, respectively).
CONCLUSION
From the Ottengraf model, it was calculated that the specific surface area covered with biofilm, relative to BF52, was 21% and 45% higher for BF102 and BF160, respectively. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/jctb.4456 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01204731v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3610809111</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-g4026-a9342f36728e586aca1e143cea9c19bbd65ec3ef07f789ee05e19243f4dfe3e63</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kE9P20AQxVcVlRpoD3yDlXrqwWT_eW33RiLAbaMiShDH1XgzGzYYO3jXEL597briMJrRzO89jR4hp5ydccbEfGdjdaZUqj-QGWdFliit2RGZMaHzRKRZ-okch7BjjOlc6BmJpbillW-dr2MH0bcN7YNvthQPe2g2uKHBPvgQKQS6B_s4np4gYueh_k594-oeG4u0df_OA18NZdvG-W0_GQYKcdyECE2kF4s_68_ko4M64Jf__YTcXV6sl2Wyur76sTxfJVs1_JtAIZVwUmcixzTXYIEjV9IiFJYXVbXRKVqJjmUuywtEliIvhJJObRxK1PKEfJt8H6A2-84_QfdmWvCmPF-Zcce4YCqT_IUP7NeJ3Xftc48hml3bd83wnuE6LXLOOBMDNZ-oV1_j27snZ2ZM34zpmzF983O5XozDoEgmxRAiHt4V0D0ancksNfe_r0z5a3Gj8lKZXP4F-jCJMw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1659810102</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Courtois, Amaury ; Andrès, Yves ; Dumont, Éric</creator><creatorcontrib>Courtois, Amaury ; Andrès, Yves ; Dumont, Éric</creatorcontrib><description>BACKGROUND
H2S biofiltration was carried out using expanded schist as packing material completed with a synthetic material (UP20). A comparison of different hydrodynamic configurations was made based on biofilter performances and pressure drop measurements. Three biofilters (namely BF52, BF102 and BF160) differing in bed height (52 cm, 102 cm and 160 cm, respectively) and diameter (14 cm, 10 cm and 8 cm, respectively) were designed in order to contain the same volume of expanded schist (8 L).
RESULTS
Biofilters were operated for more than 6 months at a constant flow rate (1.5 Nm3 h−1 corresponding to an empty bed residence time of 19 s). Elimination capacities and removal efficiencies were calculated according to loading rates varying from 0 to 57 g m−3 h−1 (inlet concentration up to 300 mg m−3). Biofilter performances were modeled and biokinetic constants were calculated using the Ottengraf model and a modified Michaelis–Menten model. In terms of elimination capacity, biofilter configurations can be ordered from the most to the least efficient: BF160 > BF102 > BF52 (maximum removal rates of 36.4, 30.3 and 25.1 g m−3 h−1, respectively).
CONCLUSION
From the Ottengraf model, it was calculated that the specific surface area covered with biofilm, relative to BF52, was 21% and 45% higher for BF102 and BF160, respectively. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-2575</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-4660</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jctb.4456</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</publisher><subject>biofilm ; biofiltration ; EBRT ; Engineering Sciences ; expanded schist ; H2S</subject><ispartof>Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986), 2015-01, Vol.90 (1), p.50-56</ispartof><rights>2014 Society of Chemical Industry</rights><rights>2015 Society of Chemical Industry</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0001-6496-3787 ; 0000-0002-2834-6113</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjctb.4456$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjctb.4456$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,776,780,881,1411,27901,27902,45550,45551</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://imt-atlantique.hal.science/hal-01204731$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Courtois, Amaury</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andrès, Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dumont, Éric</creatorcontrib><title>H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT</title><title>Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986)</title><addtitle>J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol</addtitle><description>BACKGROUND
H2S biofiltration was carried out using expanded schist as packing material completed with a synthetic material (UP20). A comparison of different hydrodynamic configurations was made based on biofilter performances and pressure drop measurements. Three biofilters (namely BF52, BF102 and BF160) differing in bed height (52 cm, 102 cm and 160 cm, respectively) and diameter (14 cm, 10 cm and 8 cm, respectively) were designed in order to contain the same volume of expanded schist (8 L).
RESULTS
Biofilters were operated for more than 6 months at a constant flow rate (1.5 Nm3 h−1 corresponding to an empty bed residence time of 19 s). Elimination capacities and removal efficiencies were calculated according to loading rates varying from 0 to 57 g m−3 h−1 (inlet concentration up to 300 mg m−3). Biofilter performances were modeled and biokinetic constants were calculated using the Ottengraf model and a modified Michaelis–Menten model. In terms of elimination capacity, biofilter configurations can be ordered from the most to the least efficient: BF160 > BF102 > BF52 (maximum removal rates of 36.4, 30.3 and 25.1 g m−3 h−1, respectively).
CONCLUSION
From the Ottengraf model, it was calculated that the specific surface area covered with biofilm, relative to BF52, was 21% and 45% higher for BF102 and BF160, respectively. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry</description><subject>biofilm</subject><subject>biofiltration</subject><subject>EBRT</subject><subject>Engineering Sciences</subject><subject>expanded schist</subject><subject>H2S</subject><issn>0268-2575</issn><issn>1097-4660</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kE9P20AQxVcVlRpoD3yDlXrqwWT_eW33RiLAbaMiShDH1XgzGzYYO3jXEL597briMJrRzO89jR4hp5ydccbEfGdjdaZUqj-QGWdFliit2RGZMaHzRKRZ-okch7BjjOlc6BmJpbillW-dr2MH0bcN7YNvthQPe2g2uKHBPvgQKQS6B_s4np4gYueh_k594-oeG4u0df_OA18NZdvG-W0_GQYKcdyECE2kF4s_68_ko4M64Jf__YTcXV6sl2Wyur76sTxfJVs1_JtAIZVwUmcixzTXYIEjV9IiFJYXVbXRKVqJjmUuywtEliIvhJJObRxK1PKEfJt8H6A2-84_QfdmWvCmPF-Zcce4YCqT_IUP7NeJ3Xftc48hml3bd83wnuE6LXLOOBMDNZ-oV1_j27snZ2ZM34zpmzF983O5XozDoEgmxRAiHt4V0D0ancksNfe_r0z5a3Gj8lKZXP4F-jCJMw</recordid><startdate>201501</startdate><enddate>201501</enddate><creator>Courtois, Amaury</creator><creator>Andrès, Yves</creator><creator>Dumont, Éric</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><general>Wiley</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7QR</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>1XC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-3787</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2834-6113</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201501</creationdate><title>H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT</title><author>Courtois, Amaury ; Andrès, Yves ; Dumont, Éric</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-g4026-a9342f36728e586aca1e143cea9c19bbd65ec3ef07f789ee05e19243f4dfe3e63</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>biofilm</topic><topic>biofiltration</topic><topic>EBRT</topic><topic>Engineering Sciences</topic><topic>expanded schist</topic><topic>H2S</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Courtois, Amaury</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Andrès, Yves</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dumont, Éric</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Chemoreception Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><jtitle>Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Courtois, Amaury</au><au>Andrès, Yves</au><au>Dumont, Éric</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT</atitle><jtitle>Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986)</jtitle><addtitle>J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol</addtitle><date>2015-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>90</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>50</spage><epage>56</epage><pages>50-56</pages><issn>0268-2575</issn><eissn>1097-4660</eissn><abstract>BACKGROUND
H2S biofiltration was carried out using expanded schist as packing material completed with a synthetic material (UP20). A comparison of different hydrodynamic configurations was made based on biofilter performances and pressure drop measurements. Three biofilters (namely BF52, BF102 and BF160) differing in bed height (52 cm, 102 cm and 160 cm, respectively) and diameter (14 cm, 10 cm and 8 cm, respectively) were designed in order to contain the same volume of expanded schist (8 L).
RESULTS
Biofilters were operated for more than 6 months at a constant flow rate (1.5 Nm3 h−1 corresponding to an empty bed residence time of 19 s). Elimination capacities and removal efficiencies were calculated according to loading rates varying from 0 to 57 g m−3 h−1 (inlet concentration up to 300 mg m−3). Biofilter performances were modeled and biokinetic constants were calculated using the Ottengraf model and a modified Michaelis–Menten model. In terms of elimination capacity, biofilter configurations can be ordered from the most to the least efficient: BF160 > BF102 > BF52 (maximum removal rates of 36.4, 30.3 and 25.1 g m−3 h−1, respectively).
CONCLUSION
From the Ottengraf model, it was calculated that the specific surface area covered with biofilm, relative to BF52, was 21% and 45% higher for BF102 and BF160, respectively. © 2014 Society of Chemical Industry</abstract><cop>Chichester, UK</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons, Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/jctb.4456</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6496-3787</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2834-6113</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0268-2575 |
| ispartof | Journal of chemical technology and biotechnology (1986), 2015-01, Vol.90 (1), p.50-56 |
| issn | 0268-2575 1097-4660 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_01204731v1 |
| source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
| subjects | biofilm biofiltration EBRT Engineering Sciences expanded schist H2S |
| title | H2S biofiltration using expanded schist as packing material: influence of packed bed configurations at constant EBRT |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-06T10%3A24%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=H2S%20biofiltration%20using%20expanded%20schist%20as%20packing%20material:%20influence%20of%20packed%20bed%20configurations%20at%20constant%20EBRT&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20chemical%20technology%20and%20biotechnology%20(1986)&rft.au=Courtois,%20Amaury&rft.date=2015-01&rft.volume=90&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=50&rft.epage=56&rft.pages=50-56&rft.issn=0268-2575&rft.eissn=1097-4660&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jctb.4456&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E3610809111%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1659810102&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |