Advertisement

Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy

, Volume 16, Issue 8, pp 1757–1765 | Cite as

Dynamic modeling and analysis of biotrickling filters in continuous operation for H2S removal

  • Wasim Ahmed
  • Zarook M. ShareefdeenEmail author
  • Nabil Abdel Jabbar
Original Paper

Abstract

A number of important biotrickling filter (BTF) models are reviewed. For our study, a theoretical model, based on H2S removal in a differential BTF under batch mode, was selected among the models reviewed. Using a cascade of BTF units in series, in this work, we have extended the model for continuous operation under dynamic conditions and the model accuracy is verified under a limiting case. The modified model was successfully simulated and used in the performance evaluation of a continuous BTF. Sensitivity analysis of the BTF performance in a continuous operation revealed that liquid–gas velocity ratio (LGVR) has negligible effects as compared to the effects of inlet concentration of H2S and gas velocity. The modified model extends the applicability of the model for full-scale design, process identification and control systems of a BTF in a continuous operation.

Keywords

Biotrickling filter H2Dynamic modeling Full-scale design Sensitivity analysis Batch operation Continuous Operation 

List of symbols

Anw

Non-wetted area (m2)

Aw

Wetted area (m2)

A

Interfacial area (m−1)

a

Specific interfacial area (m−1)

aw

Specific wetted area (m2/(m3 of packed bed))

C

H2S concentration (g m−3)

Cg0

Gas phase inlet concentration of H2S (g m−3)

Cgi1

Gas phase concentration of H2S at gas–liquid interface (g m−3)

Cgi2

Gas phase concentration of H2S at gas-biofilm interface (g m−3)

CLi2

Liquid phase concentration of H2S at liquid-biofilm interface (g m−3)

Cwb

Concentration of H2S in the wetted biofilm (g m−3)

Cnwb

Concentration of H2S in the non-wetted biofilm (g m−3)

Dg

H2S diffusion coefficient in air (m2 h−1)

DL

Diffusivity of H2S in trickling liquid (m2 h−1)

Dp

Nominal size of packing (m)

F

Volumetric flow rate (m3h−1)

Fr

Froude number

FT

Biofilm thickness (m)

FT

Discretized biofilm thickness (m)

G

Superficial mass velocity of gas (kg m−2 h−1)

gc

Gravitational constant (m h−2)

H

Henry’s constant (−)

i, j

Index for finite elements in the dynamic model

kg1

Mass transfer coefficient from gas to liquid (m h−1)

kg2

Mass transfer coefficient from gas to non-wetted biofilm (m h−1)

kL

Mass transfer coefficient in liquid (m h−1)

L

Superficial mass velocity of liquid (kg m−2 h−1)

N

Number of biofilm layer subdivisions

Re

Reynolds number

Rmax

Maximum reaction rate (g m−3 h−1)

V

Volume (m3)

Vg/L

Gas–liquid volume ratio

We

Weber number

Greek letters

\( \mu \)

Viscosity (kg m−1 h−1)

\( \rho \)

Density (kg m−3)

\( \sigma_{\text{p}} \)

Surface tension of packing (kg h−2)

\( \sigma \)

Surface tension of water (kg h−2)

Subscripts

g

Gas phase

L

Liquid phase

Abbreviations

BTF

Biotrickling filter

LGVR

Liquid–gas velocity ratio

PUF

Polyurethane foam

VOC

Volatile organic compound

References

  1. Alonso C, Suidan MT, Kim BR, Kim BJ (1998) Dynamic mathematical model for the biodegradation of VOCs in a biofilter: biomass accumulation study. Environ Sci Technol 32(20):3118–3123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Delhomenie MC, Heitz M (2005) Biofiltration of air: a review. Crit Rev Biotechnol 25:53–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Devinny JS, Ramesh J (2005) A phenomenological review of biofilter models. Chem Eng J 113:187–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dvorak BI, Lawler DF, Fair JR, Handler NE (1996) Evaluation of the Onda correlations for mass transfer with large random packings. Environ Sci Technol 30(3):945–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Estrada JM, Kraakman NJRB, Munoz R, Lebrero R (2011) A comparative analysis of odour treatment technologies in wastewater treatment plants. Environ Sci Technol 45(3):1100–1106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gabriel D, Deshusses MA (2003) Retrofitting existing chemical scrubbers to biotrickling filters for H2S emission control. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(11):6308–6312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kim S, Deshusses MA (2003) Development and experimental validation of a conceptual model for biotrickling filtration of H2S. Environ Prog 22(2):119–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lafita C, Penya-Roja JM, Sempere F, Waalkens A, Gabaldon C (2012) Hydrogen sulphide and odor removal by field-scale biotrickling filters: influence of seasonal variations of load and temperature. J Environ Sci A 47(7):970–978CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Lee S, Heber AJ (2010) Ethylene removal using biotrickling filters: part II. Parameter estimation and mathematical simulation. Chem Eng J 158:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Liao Q, Tian X, Chen R, Zhu X (2008) Mathematical model for gas-liquid two-phase flow and biodegradation of a low concentration volatile organic compound (VOC) in a trickling biofilter. Int J Transf 51:1780–1792Google Scholar
  11. Mudliar S, Giri B, Padoley K, Satpute D, Dixit R, Bhatt P, Pandey R, Juwarkar A, Vaidya A (2010) Bioreactors for treatment of VOCs and odours—a review. J Environ Manag 91:1039–1054Google Scholar
  12. Sharvelle S, Arabi M, McLamore E, Banks MK (2008) Model development for biotrickling filter treatment of graywater simulant and waste gas. I. J Environ Eng 134(10):813–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. The Mathworks (2013) fsolve. http://www.mathworks.com/help/optim/ug/fsolve.html. Accessed 11 Nov 2013
  14. Welty JR, Wicks CE, Rorrer GL, Wilson RE (2008) Fundamentals of momentum, heat, and mass transfer, 5th edn. Wiley, New JerseyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wasim Ahmed
    • 1
  • Zarook M. Shareefdeen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Nabil Abdel Jabbar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Chemical EngineeringAmerican University of SharjahSharjahUAE

Personalised recommendations