Comparison of RBC and SBR systems for the treatment of sewage from small communities

Joseph C. Akunna, W. Shepherd

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

  • 6 Citations

Abstract

This paper describes a study which was carried out to evaluate the performance of two types of small sewage-treatment plant which are commonly available in the UK, i.e. a rotating biological contactor and a sequencing batch reactor. Both systems produced an effluent quality of less than 20 mg/l BOD and 30 mg/l SS; however, the sequencing batch reactor was more consistent in producing a better effluent (i.e. BOD<10 mg/l and SS<20 mg/l) than the rotating biological contactor. The sequencing batch reactor also demonstrated a greater tendency to remove nutrients, although the special design features which were used in this study were believed to have enhanced the rate of nutrient removal.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)147-151
Number of pages5
JournalWater and Environment Journal
Volume15
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - May 2001

Fingerprint

Reactor
Sequencing
Batch
Nutrients
Rotating
Red blood cells
Evaluate

Cite this

Akunna, Joseph C.; Shepherd, W. / Comparison of RBC and SBR systems for the treatment of sewage from small communities.

In: Water and Environment Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 05.2001, p. 147-151.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{09c255542ad4489a8d2de2eead25dca4,
title = "Comparison of RBC and SBR systems for the treatment of sewage from small communities",
abstract = "This paper describes a study which was carried out to evaluate the performance of two types of small sewage-treatment plant which are commonly available in the UK, i.e. a rotating biological contactor and a sequencing batch reactor. Both systems produced an effluent quality of less than 20 mg/l BOD and 30 mg/l SS; however, the sequencing batch reactor was more consistent in producing a better effluent (i.e. BOD<10 mg/l and SS<20 mg/l) than the rotating biological contactor. The sequencing batch reactor also demonstrated a greater tendency to remove nutrients, although the special design features which were used in this study were believed to have enhanced the rate of nutrient removal.",
author = "Akunna, {Joseph C.} and W. Shepherd",
year = "2001",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1111/j.1747-6593.2001.tb00322.x",
volume = "15",
pages = "147--151",
journal = "Water and Environment Journal",
issn = "1747-6593",
number = "2",

}

Comparison of RBC and SBR systems for the treatment of sewage from small communities. / Akunna, Joseph C.; Shepherd, W.

In: Water and Environment Journal, Vol. 15, No. 2, 05.2001, p. 147-151.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of RBC and SBR systems for the treatment of sewage from small communities

AU - Akunna,Joseph C.

AU - Shepherd,W.

PY - 2001/5

Y1 - 2001/5

N2 - This paper describes a study which was carried out to evaluate the performance of two types of small sewage-treatment plant which are commonly available in the UK, i.e. a rotating biological contactor and a sequencing batch reactor. Both systems produced an effluent quality of less than 20 mg/l BOD and 30 mg/l SS; however, the sequencing batch reactor was more consistent in producing a better effluent (i.e. BOD<10 mg/l and SS<20 mg/l) than the rotating biological contactor. The sequencing batch reactor also demonstrated a greater tendency to remove nutrients, although the special design features which were used in this study were believed to have enhanced the rate of nutrient removal.

AB - This paper describes a study which was carried out to evaluate the performance of two types of small sewage-treatment plant which are commonly available in the UK, i.e. a rotating biological contactor and a sequencing batch reactor. Both systems produced an effluent quality of less than 20 mg/l BOD and 30 mg/l SS; however, the sequencing batch reactor was more consistent in producing a better effluent (i.e. BOD<10 mg/l and SS<20 mg/l) than the rotating biological contactor. The sequencing batch reactor also demonstrated a greater tendency to remove nutrients, although the special design features which were used in this study were believed to have enhanced the rate of nutrient removal.

U2 - 10.1111/j.1747-6593.2001.tb00322.x

DO - 10.1111/j.1747-6593.2001.tb00322.x

M3 - Article

VL - 15

SP - 147

EP - 151

JO - Water and Environment Journal

T2 - Water and Environment Journal

JF - Water and Environment Journal

SN - 1747-6593

IS - 2

ER -