Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
HWAHAK KONGHAK Vol. 39, No. 1, February, 2001, pp. 116-122(Journal of the Korean Institute of Chemical Engineers)
������ �� �� � �� ��� ��III. ������ ��
����������*������ ����†
����� �����, *���(2000� 8� 31 ��, 2000� 12� 13 ��)
The Removal of Aquacultural Wastes by Foam Separator from Sea WaterIII. The Effect of Superficial Air Velocity
Byong-Jin Kim, Jung-Hoon Lee, Sung-Koo Kim*, Yong-Ha Kim, Gyeongbeom Yi and Kuen-Hack Suh†
Department of Chemical Engineering, *Department of Biotechnology & Bioengineering, Pukyong National University, Pusan 608-739, Korea
(Received 31 August 2000; accepted 13 December 2000)
�
����� ���� �� � �� �� ���, �� ���, ��� �� � !, "#, $%&'( ��) *+ ,
� -��� .� �/012 �3 � �4���#� 5�6 78 ,� -��� �/ 9(2 :; <=> �����
?@�� �A BC2 :; <D. �4���#� EF6 7G ���� �/�#) �/H+ EF <=I JKLM N�
<D. O �� ���, "#, ��� �� � !� �/�#) �/H� 5�M ���P �Q <=> $%&'( ��M
stripping RP6 �� �/STD. U VW6 Q?X ����M 96% Y�� Z+ ?@�� ��H2 I[\TD.
Abstract − Experimental investigations on the effect of the superficial air velocity(SAV) on the removal of aquacultural waste,
such as protein, total suspended solids(TSS), chemical oxygen demand(COD), turbidity and total ammonia nitrogen(TAN) from
sea water were carried out by using a foam separator. The foam separator as an aerator was also evaluated for increasing dissolved
oxygen concentration. The increase in SAV, increased the removal rate and removal efficiency of protein, but, decreased protein
enrichment ratio. The changes of removal rates and efficiencies of TSS, COD and turbidity were similar to proteins. TAN was
removed by stripping. Dissolved oxygen(DO) saturation of the effluent from the foam separator was higher than 96.6%.
Key words: Foam Separation, Superficial Air Velocity, Aquacultural Waste, Protein, TSS, COD, Turbidity, TAN, DO
†E-mail: [email protected]
1. �
������� � � � � ���� ���� ���� ��
��� ���� �-� �� ���� !� "#� "$�% �&
' ()* ���� +� ,-( . ������� ./� 0"#�
12��' 3"#� 4�,%5 67 892(:[1] ; ����� <
= >?@A( BC,D >?( )(,3 <)( 0E, % F��[2]
GH�% �)� +� IJKL[3]- MNO PI�� KL[4] Q9 R
� �S� T)�3 U .
�N� �= VW,% PI� + XY ��� ���Z ���[
\] �^% _@2 `��� a= ��K bc' ,D d#� �
�K[ e�,^ fg# ����[ �hc � U#i =j [5].
([ (),D k�. lm� + �N� M=* ��� n� �X��
o ����p( q( r_, 2)��^3 U�-[6-9] st�� r_%
u�[ sv�� ,3 U�: 7� -w�x yz,% =�[ sv�
� ,% r_% L� {% |�( .
�}��~#% �� ���' �,D ��% �� �� ~#�x �
� ���' �,D ��% ��� �2M~9 ���� X2� <
�o -;O�� [10]. �}��~#% �� ��p�x �. +�*
>? a� +� ,-� ����� �* XY 4�[11], �W� 4�
[12] Q� r_�x# �� >?a�� r_��� .
� r_�x% ��tv� �����[ K�,D =� ~� XY ,
tM 3��, C�2 �� �_�, �#, ���g� �Z R� k� �
��� r~ KL>?' �h,D �}��~#� �� k� ���� K
L ̀ �' ��,��: ������ )��� �� ��' ��,� .
2. �
2-1. ����
� r_�x K�,D �)* ���� |�. % Fig. 1�x �%
116
�� ����-���� � 117
l
¡Z R( ��Z )� M��( ¢£,% ���� ¤¥�% separation
column9 XY ' ¦§* ��( ��Z ���3 ¨� L©�x A
@* L©�� "$�% foam riser� ª��a �«� O¬ 5 cm, !
( 50 cm� acrylic pipe[ �),D K�,��: ���� )2� 1 L
� .
Foam riser�t M®¯ ��' �°,D ªt% �� ~�� ±l
m²³3 ªt% ´�� �®²³% foam collector% O¬ 5 cm, !(
10 cm� acryl pipe� O¬ 2 cm� µ¶�' �= ��( M¶�#i K
�,� . M¶�9 M®�� 2 cm acrylic pipe[ �),� .
����� ,t�% ��¯ M� D9�(G3, pore size: 3-15µm)[
()* �����[ ¢·²¸ ��� �3 ¹ª,º VW,D ���
�* ��8»( Gs� ¼ � Uº ,� . ��� ��� ��½¾[
(),��:, �� M�� ��½¾� needle valveZ M��� @¿À
Á[ (),D @¿,� .
|��% ��½¾[ (),D � vt�x ª�* M��� ��
,3, n��% ,t�x M®�#i ,��: ��% }� ,t�x
��\��o &N� ¢£' M#,� .
2-2. ���� � �
|��% |K k��Z M�,#i ,� Ã,D =�� t¬s�Ä
t~ lmD9� k�.�x VW* k� ���' ÅƲ¸ |�� �
),� . |�� K@� �)* =�% t�^b ǰ� ���% F
��x XY ��� �®�^ fÈ . |��� � � Table 19 R
�: B#Z pH% ÉÉ 26Ê1 oC, 7.9Ê0.1(Ë .
|�� ���2 �N²Ì' 2.05 min�� 3�,3 ��[ 500, 1,000,
1,500, 2,000, 2,500 mL/min�� ÍC²¸ ��,��: ÉÉ� �} �
�M~� 0.424, 0.85, 1.27, 1.70, 2.12 cm/sec(Ë .
2-3. ��
|�� K@� �)* �� "$�� XY "#� �Æ� Lowry’s
method[13][ (),��: =�+� XY � "# �� UV280
method[14][ (),D �h,� . ΠtM3��� standard method
[15]� �w GF/CD^� D9* Ï I�(B( �®�^ f' ÐÑ^
ÒN�� ÓÔ,D �Æ,� . C�2 �� �_�� ÕÖ�� KMnO4
p[16]� �w ²J ×Ø Ù² �Æ,��: �#� �Æ� �#�
(HACH, 2100AN)[ (),� .
Î ���g� �� �Æ� ���g (B yÚ� ?Û(ORION Re-
search Inc., 9512BN)( tܯ Ion meter(ORION Research Inc., Mode
720A)[ (),D (B yÚ� ?Ûp[15]� �= �Æ,� . )��
�% )��� ���(YSI Inc. Model 52)[ (),D M¶�� "#
[ ��* Ï M®�� "#% 30Ý ÌÞ�� r~ ��,D �vv«
�x� ß¹à' Ø,� . É ²J� ¶# ��% 100µm� aperture[
()* ¶# �Æ�(COULTER Electronics, COULTER MULTISIZER
II)[ �),D ��,� .
2-4. �� ��
XY , tM 3��, C�2 �� �_�, �#, ���g� � Q
� KL~#% M¶�Z M®�� É ��� "#Z �� VW�' �
�,D � (1)[17]' (),D ��,� .
(1)
D�x −ra% É ��� KL~#(g/m3ámin â% NTU/min), Ci,aZ
Co,a% É ��� M¶� ã M®�� "#(g/m3 â% NTU)(: Qi%
M¶�� M�(m3/min)(: Qf% ������x VW�� M®¯ �
�� M�(m3/min)( . V% ������ ��� )2(m3)( .
������ Îä )��� ?å ��% � (2)[ (),D _,� .
(2)
D�x KLa% Îä )��� ?å ��(min−1), τ% ���2 �N²
Ì(min), Ci,DO% M¶�� )��� "#(g/m3), Co,DO% M®�� )�
�� "#(g/m3)(: Cs,DO% )���� �C"#(g/m3)( .
3. �� � ��
3-1. ��� ���� ��
XY � ���Z ���[ �æ �^3 U% _@2 `ç�� a=
�á� �� "$�º �:[18] d#� ��K[ e�,^ f3
# ����[ ��,º =j [7]. =�� k�.�x XY � �N�
�� ̄�J + �N� èØ,^ é* 9ê� �J- ��� �\��
U% �N� �C,^ é* XY ( lm�� )®�� VW* . �
�@� ¬7�% d#� �J% ��,^ f�- �@� �)¯ �N�
x �®�% ��9 �� ë� /� � �= VW* . XY ��
ra
Ci a, Qi⋅ Co a, Qi Qf–( )⋅–V
--------------------------------------------------------=–
KLa 1τ---
Co DO, Ci DO,–( )Cs DO, Co DO,–( )
------------------------------------⋅=
Fig. 1. Schematic diagram for the removal of aquacultural waste fromsea water by using foam separator.1. Separation column 17. Foam outlet2. Foam collector 18. Feeding tank3. Air distributor 19. Mechanical stirrer4. Liquid inlet 10. Peristaltic pump5. Air inlet 11. Air pump6. Bulk outlet 12. Rotameter
Table 1. Water quality of feeding sea water
Component Concentration
Salinity 30.00%Protein 27.61 g/m3
Total suspended solid 57.33 g/m3
Turbidity 26.87 NTUChemical oxygen demand 18.08 g/m3
Total ammonia nitrogen 10.72 g/m3
HWAHAK KONGHAK Vol. 39, No. 1, February, 2001
118 �����������������������
� XY � � ��� �W�� �= �N� s* ì�( !� ��
�g� �=�:[19] �� �_�' Ò�²¸ í~* KL� �_¯ .
Fig. 2% �}��~#� XY KL~# ã KL»� � % î&'
-;ï F( . ðñ�x �% ¡Z R( �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec
�x 2.12 cm/sec� Ò�\� <ò,D XY � KL~#Z KL»�
4.04 g/m3ámin, 30.0%�x 10.43 g/m3ámin, 77.3%� Ò�,� . ð
ó- �}��~#� 5� Ò�\� <= XY KL~#% 2.5�� Ò
�,% F�� �g �}��~#� Ò�ô� KL~#� Ò�ô(
�� F�� -;õ .
�}��~#� Ò�\� �w KL~#Z KL»( ¦§,D Ò�
,% F� �}��~#� Ò�\� �w �á� � 2( Ò�,
3 (� a= öÜ�% XY � k( Ò�,% ÷v[11, 20, 21]� �
* F�� Wɯ .
�}��~#� Ò�ô� <= XY KL~#� Ò�ô( �� F
� ø·2a ùa� �* F�� �}��~#� Ò�� �� �á�
�� Ò�� �w öܼ � U% öÜ�% XY � k( Ò���
)� ~� XY "#� ú��û� (� �w �� �á� 2ü ö
Ü�% XY � k( ú��% ÷v[21]� �* F�� Wɯ . â
�}��~#� Ò�, ��Ì� L�� ýgþ Dó ��( x� ·
�� ��� ÿ�� �^º �û� ���� Ò�� <= �á� �
� 2( <ò,D Ò�,^ f% ÷v[20]� �* F�� �J¯ .
Fig. 3� �}��~#� ÍC� �� �� W�~#Z M¶�� XY
"#Z ��� XY "#� <a "$<� ÍC[ -;ï F( .
ðñ�x �D^% F9 R( �� W�~#% �}��~#� Ò�\
� �w Ò�,% F�� -;õ�: �� W�~#� Ò�ô� �}
��~#� ��i � �^% F�� -;õ . ðó- "$<% �}
��~#� Ò�\� �w P�� ú��% F�� -;õ .
�}��~#� Ò�� �w ��� W��( Ò�,3 "$<� ú
�,% F� ���% ���� Ò�� �w ��� M® ~#� �w
þx ��( "$t�x ¦§ ��Z ��� ���^ é,D �� ~
� �� ¦§�( Ò�,% ÷v�� (� a= ��� "## ú�,
% F�� �J¯ .
�������x !� KL~## +�,- �}��~#� ��
�* KL~#� Ò�% �®�% ���� Ò�� �* F�� PI
�' 3"#� KLc � {�û� !� "$<[ �% F# +�, .
ðóû� !� KL~#[ �3�,D �}��~#[ Ò�² ¬7
��' ��� "$c � U#i foam collector� �Ì' Ò�²¸S
c F�� Wɯ .
3-2. � �� ��� ���� ��
=��x �N� �= VW,% 3�� + �èØ �J- ��� �
= VW,% Î tM� 3��� ��� g��� ¢2a �Þ' �
L- )���� ?å' �=,D �� s* 0 �' �C² �
U� Ð�� �N� W��� ¢2a î&' �� � U [22]. 3�
�� "#� !' ¬7 W��2 �C . � biofouling' MV,D
���g KL ~#[ ú�² �# U3[19], 3��� st�� M
�� 3��� XY ��' \M,3 U� ٲ KL,^ f3 �
c ¬7 �W�� �= �N� M=* ���g[ VW²³û�[22] k
�. lm� +� 3��� KL% 67 +�, .
Fig. 4% �}��~#� Î tM 3��� KL~# ã KL»� �
% î&' -;ï F( . ðñ�x �% ¡Z R( �}��~#�
Ò�� �� KL~#� ÍC% XY KL~#� ÍCZ L� ¦ª
* ¬&' -;OË . �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec�
Ò�\� �w Î tM 3��� KL~#Z KL»� 16.63 g/m3ámin,
59.4%�x 24.39 g/m3ámin, 87.0%� Ò�,� . Î tM 3��� K
L~#� XY KL~#Z M�,º �}��~#� î&' �% F
� ����[ MV,% ��( XY (3 tM 3��� �á� �
� öܯ XY � (B2�� öÜ�� KL�% ��[23]� rM
* ÷v� �= �á� �� öÜ�% XY � Ò�� <ò,D K
L�% 3��( Ò�,� Ð�a F�� �J¯ .
Fig. 5% �}��~#� ÍC� �� M®� "#Z KL~#� Î
Fig. 2. The changes of protein removal rate and removal efficiency onsuperficial air velocity.
Fig. 3. The changes of foam generation rate and enrichment ratio onsuperficial air velocity.
Fig. 4. The changes of TSS removal rate and removal efficiency onsuperficial air velocity.
���� �39� �1� 2001� 2�
�� ����-���� � 119
tM 3��/XY <� ÍC[ -;ï F( . ðñ�x �% ¡Z R
( M®�� Î tM 3��/XY "#<% 1.16-1.47� �Ã� L�
ª�,º -;õ�: KL~#� <% �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x
1.27 cm/sec� Ò�\� �w 4.44�x 2.44� ú�,��- ð (v�
�}��~#� s=x% 2.34-2.51� �Ã�x L� ª�* F�� -
;õ .
M¶�� Î tM 3��/XY "#<% 2.08(Ë�: (� <= M
®�� "#<� � �º -;-% F�� �g �á� �� öÜ K
L�% XY � Xà �ü Î tM 3��� k( � ÿ % F'
Õ � UË . �}��~#� Ò�\� �w Î tM 3��/XY K
L~#� <� ú�,% F� M¶� ~� �±,% 3��( XY
9 �·,D KL¼ � U% k � �gx -;-% ÷v�� XY
KL~#� Ò�c�i (� ¦§,D KL¼ � U% 3��� k(
t�=^� Ð��� WÉ�: � q� 3��( M¶��w# ��
* KL� (�� F�� �J¯ .
3-3. �� ���� ��
�#% �' ��º ,% ��' Î�,% F�� 1 µm (,� tM
3��9 ��� )� � # �æ �\,: �� ��#[ ��,%
Ô#(:[24] k�.�x% 60 g/m3(,� "#[ �.,3 U [25].
Fig. 6� ÉÉ �}��~#� ÍC� �� �# KL~# ã KL»
� ÍC[ -;ï F(: Fig. 7� M®�� �#/XY "#<Z K
L~#� �#/XY <� ÍC[ -;ï F( . ðñ�x �D^%
¡Z R( �}��~#� Ò�� �� �#� KL» ã KL~#�
ÍC% Î tM 3��� KL~# ã KL»� ÍCZ L� M�*
�«� -;õ . ̀ � �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec�
Ò�\� �w Î tM 3��� KL»( 59.4%�x 87.0%� Ò�
* F9 L� M�,º �#� KL»# 60.2%�x 90.3%� Ò�,
D L� ¦ª* KL»' -;O% F�� -;õ . (F�� �g �
#[ MV,% � + vüt�' Î tM 3��( �^,% F��
Wɯ .
Fig. 7�x �% ¡Z R( M®�� �#/XY "#<% �}��
~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec� Ò�\� �w 0.55�x 0.41�
ú�,% F�� -;õ�: KL~#<% Î tM 3��� XY K
L~#� s* <Z <Äc Ð 50% �#� � [ -;OË .
3-4. �� ��
Fig. 8� M¶�Z É �}��~#� ÍC |��x ��� M®��
¶¬ ¬d ¶# ��(a) ã �2 ¶# ��(b)Z ¶� ¬d KL»
� ÍC(c)[ -;ï F( . ðñ�x �% ¡Z R( M¶�Z M®�
� ¶# ��% ¶� "#� ¿sà� �(� U�- ð �«% L� ¦
ª,º -;õ�: ¶�% 0-15µm� �Ã�x ��,��: 2.632µm
a ¶�� �^,% �»( �. � F�� -;õ .
¶� ¬� ÍC� �� ¶�� KL»� ÍC% ?�2�� � �
(% {Ë�- 0.84 cm/sec(v� �}��~#� s=x% ¶¬( �
�i, 0.42 cm/sec� �}��~#� s=x% ¶¬( �'�i KL»
( !� F�� -;õ . (ó* ÷v� �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec
ª ¬7 v ,% ��� �= VW,% t�( +�� �* !"��
�g ¥L> ¶�� KL»( #�^- 0.84 cm/sec(v� �}��
~#� s=x% t�� �* î&( � ÿº �),D ¬( � ¶�
� KL»( Ò�,% F�� Wɯ .
Fig. 9% �}��~#� ÍC� �� �$ ¶�� KL»9 Fig. 8�
x -;% ¶# �� + �. � �»' �^,% 2.632µm� ¬'
�^% ¶�� KL»' #²* F( . ðñ�x �% ¡Z R( �}
��~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec� Ò�\� �w ¶�� KL
»# 73.1%�x 93.8%� Ò�,��: 2.632µm¶�� KL»� Î
¶�� KL»9 M�2a �([ �(^% fÈ . (F�� �g ?
�[17]�x -;% ¡Z R( 2.632µm� ¬' �^% ¶�[ ¶�
� KL`�� U� ?�¶�� s* së¬�� �)c � U&'
Õ � UË .
Fig. 5. The concentration ratio of TSS to protein of effluent(Co) and theremoval rate ratio of TSS to protein.
Fig. 6. The changes of turbidity removal rate and removal efficiency onsuperficial air velocity.
Fig. 7. The concentration ratio of turbidity to protein of effluent(Co)and the removal rate ratio of turbidity to protein.
HWAHAK KONGHAK Vol. 39, No. 1, February, 2001
120 �����������������������
3-5. �!" �# $%& ���� ��
�èØ �J�x )®�L- �� O�x '?� �=�^ fg VW
,% )� M��� "#� !' ¬7 ;�îk� �W�� W.' £
�²¸ )���[ ú�²³3 ;�îk� �W�� ªt% �ù¹�
� �N�º �' MV²³�# * [26].
)� M�� "#� ^ë�x C�2 �� �_�' ��,D �}�
�~#� ÍC� �� �� ���� KL ~# ã KL»' Fig. 10�
#²,� . ðñ�x �D^% ¡Z R( �}��~#� Ò�\� �
� C�2 �� �_�� KL~#Z KL»� ÍC% (x -;% X
Y (- tM 3��� KL ~#Z R( Ò�,% F�� -;õ .
(% XY ( C�2 ���_�' Ò�²³% M��(3 �N� �
= VW,% tM 3��� vü t�( M�� 3��a F[22]� �
* ÷v�� Wɯ .
Fig. 11� �}��~#� ÍC� �� M®�� "#Z KL~#�
C�2 �� �_�/XY <� ÍC[ -;ï F( . ðñ�x �%
¡Z R( M®�� C�2 �� �_�/XY "#<% �}��~#
� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec� Ò�\� �w 0.79�x 0.95� Ò�
�Ë�: KL~#� <% 3��� ¬7Z% §s� 0.35�x 0.57�
Ò��Ë .
M¶�� C�2 �� �_�/XY "#<� 0.66a F9 <Äc Ð
M®�� "#<� � !� F�� �g ����� �= KL�% M
��� �»� XY � <= ��:, (% XY 9 3��()� )
� M��� XY � <= öÜ�( �,D �á� �� q( öÜ
�^ é,� Ð��� Wɯ . C�2 �� �_�/XY � KL~
#<� �}��~#� Ò�c�i �^% F� XY � <= öÜ�
( �,D öÜ�^ é* )� M��( �á� �� Ò�� �w X
Y � /M�^ f� �� Ò�� � q( öÜ�Ë� Ð���
�J¯ .
3-6. '()*+ �# ���� ��
�}��~#� ÍC� �� �� ���� ���g� �� KL
~# ã KL»' Fig. 12� -;OË . Fig. 12�x �D^% ¡Z R
( ���g� �� KL~#Z KL»� �}��~#� Ò�\�
Fig. 8. The changes of the differential particle distributions(a), the cumu-lative particle distributions(b) and the particle removal efficiency(c)on superficial air velocity.
Fig. 9. The changes of particle removal efficiency on superficial air velocity.
Fig. 10. The changes of COD removal rate and removal efficiency onsuperficial air velocity.
Fig. 11. The concentration ratio of COD to protein of effluent(Co) andthe removal rate ratio of COD to protein.
���� �39� �1� 2001� 2�
�� ����-���� � 121
�w �Þ� Ò�,% F�� -;õ .
�+� ���g% <(B� ���g(NH3)Z (B� ���g(NH4+)
�«� ß�' (�3 U�: B#Z pH� �w �± <»( åw� .
����� �* ���g� KL% <(B� ���g� ¬7 stripping
89� �= KL�3[24] (B� ���g� ¬7 �á� �� ö
ܯ �� � + &(B� � � �?�2�� t�% ��
[23]� �= KL¯ . �?�2 tÜ� �* ���g KL% �� O
&(B� Ò�� ¦§��S KL~#� Ò�,3, stripping� �* �
��g KL% �á� �� 2� <ò,º ¯ [24]. � r_�x
���g� �� � ��*� �}��~#� î&' ÿº �%
F�� �g stripping� �* ���g� KL� �?�2 t� �*
KL� � � F�� �J¯ .
Fig. 14% M®� "#Z KL~#� ���g� �/XY <� Í
C[ -;ï F��x M®�� ���g� �/XY "#<% 0.42
cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec� �}��~#� 5� �\� �w 0.036�
x 0.056�� 1.5� �# ���: KL~#� <% 0.004�x 0.017
� 3.5�� � ô�� Ò�,� .
KL~#� ���g� �/XY <� � ��*9% å� � ô
�� Ò��% F� ���g� KL� XY � öÜ� % stripping
� �= ì+2�� KL�% F( � q % F' -;O% ÒLw3
, � U .
3-7. ,-�# ./ 01 ��
�+ W�� W�' M^,� Ã= ��* )���[ -�� ,:
`� =��� ¬7 )���� t�� 67 .ú,3 u�� � �
!� )���[ -�� * [25]. �wx =��� s* )���� �
�� 67 +�,: �� �� . % )��� ���# !� 8»'
-;ï [6, 7, 26].
Fig. 14% �}��~#� ÍC� �� M¶�Z M®�� )���
"# ÍCZ Îä �� ?å �� KLa[ -;ï F( . Îä �� ?
å ��% �/ �-� ¢£. � @A' së,% � �x ð à(
��i ��� ?å8»( !&' -;ï [23].
ðñ�x �% ¡Z R( �}��~#� Ò�� �� Îä �� ?
å��� ÍC% XY KL~#, ���g KL~# Q9 L� M�
* �«� Ò�,% F�� -;õ . (% �}��~#� Ò�\�
�w ���% ��Z �á� �� 2( Ò�,D �� ~� )�
��� ���� � q( ?å�� -;-% ÷v[27]�� Wɯ .
� r_� �9 2.05 min� 0� ���2 �N²Ì�x M¶�� )
��� �C#� 56.5-58.5% �#� �º ��1�# 2_,3 M®�
� 96.6-99.1%� !� )��� �C#[ -;O% F�� �g ��
�� . % XY , tM3��9 R� k� ���' KL\9 ¦²
� �N� 3 -�* )���[ 8»2�� ��c � U% ô�.
�# �)¼ � U&' Õ � UË .
4. � �
� r_�x% ��tv� �����[ (),D �}��~#� Í
C� �� =� ~� XY , tM 3��, C�2 �� �_�, �#,
���g� �Z R� k� ���� r~ KL>?' �h,D
&9 R� �9[ �Ë .
(1) �}��~#� Ò�\9 <ò,D XY KL~# ã KL»�
�,��: �}��~#� 0.42 cm/sec�x 2.12 cm/sec� �\�
�w XY � KL~#Z KL»� 4.04 g/m3ámin, 30.0%�x 10.43 g/
m3ámin, 77.3%� Ò�,� .
(2) �� W�~#% �}��~#� �\� �w �,% F��
-;õ�- M¶�� XY "#Z ��� XY "#� <a "$
<% ú��% F�� -;õ .
(3) Î tM 3��, �#, C�2 �� �_�� KL~# ã KL»
� ÍC% XY ��9 M�* ¬&�� -;õ .
Fig. 12. The changes of TAN removal rate and removal efficiency onsuperficial air velocity.
Fig. 13. The concentration ratio of TAN to protein of effluent(Co) andthe removal rate ratio of TAN to protein.
Fig. 14. The changes of overall oxygen mass transfer coefficient andsaturation efficiency on superficial air velocity.
HWAHAK KONGHAK Vol. 39, No. 1, February, 2001
122 �����������������������
ca-
o,
o,
n
for
,
ey,
.),
an-
M.
sign
cul-
rk
n-
n-
(4) ¶� ¬� ÍC� �� ¶�� KL»� ÍC% 0.84 cm/sec(
v� �}��~#� s=x% ¶¬( ��i, 0.42 cm/sec� �}��
~#� s=x% ¶¬( �'�i KL»( !� F�� -;õ .
2.632µm� ¬' �^% ¶�[ ¶�� KL`�� U� ?�¶��
s* së¬�� �)c � U&' Õ � UË .
(5) ���g� �% stripping� �= KL��: !� �}��
~#�x � q� ���g� KL�Ë .
(6) �}��~#� Ò�� �w Îä �� ?å��� Ò�,��:
96.6%(v� !� �C»' -;OË .
�42�� � r_� �9 =� ~� k� ���� �±,% XY
��' (),% ������� XY , tM3��9 R� k�
���' KL\9 ¦²� )��� ��. �# �)¼ � UË�:
�}��~#� �c�i PI�� KL~#Z )��� ?��
Ò�,� .
����
−r : removal rate [g/m3ámin or NTU/min]
Q : flowrate [L/min]
C : concentration [g/m3 or NTU]
KLa : overall mass transfer coefficient [min−1]
2345 6�
τ : hydraulic residence time [min]
78�
a : component
f : foam state
i : influent
o : effluent
s : saturation state
� �
� r_% =k��5Vù�x ²h* 19996 ���7 5V �8�
�=x �h�Ë�:, (� ��� Dó�] ú�9+� .
����
1. Clarke, A. N. and Wilson, D. J.: “Foam Flotation,” Marcel Dekker,
INC, New York, 53(1972).
2. Rubin, E.: in M. P. Freeman and J. Fitz Patrick(Eds.) “Foam
Fractionation - Some Recent Studies. In Theory, Practice, and Pro-
cess Principles for Physical Separations,” Proceedings of the Engi-
neering Foundation Conference, Engineering Foundation, New York,
USA(1981).
3. Lemlich, R.: in R, Lemlich(Ed.) “Adsorptive Bubble Separation
Techniques: Principles of Foam Fractionation and Drainage,” A
demic Press, New York, 33(1972).
4. Choi, Y. H., Lee, J. D. and Choi, S. J.: HWAHAK KONGHAK, 35, 63
(1997).
5. Cho, D. and Chang, H. N.: Korean J. Chem. Eng., 15, 445(1998).
6. Suh, K. H. and Lee, M. G.: J. Korean. Fish. Soc., 28, 599(1995).
7. Chen, S.: Aquacultural Engineering, 13, 183(1994).
8. Suh, K. H., Lee, H. G., Kim, B. J., Cho, M. C., An, S. H. and Ch
J. Y.: J. Korean Environmental Science, 7, 41(1998).
9. Weeks, N. C., Timmons, M. B. and Chen, S.: Aquacultural Engineer-
ing, 11, 251(1992).
10. Suh, K. H., Lee, M. G., Lee, M. S., Kim, B. J., Kim, E. J. and Ch
M. C.: J. Korean Fish. Soc., 30, 334(1995).
11. Brown, A. K., Kaul, A. and Varley, J.: Biotechnology and Bioengineer-
ing, 62, 278(1999).
12. Suh, K. H., Shim, H. K. and Yun, J. W.: Kor. J. Biotechnology and
Bioengineering, 11, 46(1996).
13. Lowry, O. H., Rosebrough, N. J., Farr, A. L. and Randall, R. J.:J.
Biotech., 193, 265(1951).
14. Bollag, D. M. and Edelstein, S. J.: “Protein Methods,” Wiley-Liss,
New York, 46(1991).
15. APHA, AWWA and WEF: “Standard Methods for the Examinatio
of Water and Wastewater,” 18th ed., EPS Group(1992).
16. Korean Institute of Industry and Technology: “Standard Methods
the Examination of Environmental Pollution,”(1990).
17. Suh, K. H., Kim, B. J., Bong, S. H., Lim, J. H., Kim, Y. H. and Kim
S. K.: HWAHAK KONGHAK, 38, (2000).
18. Cho, D. and Cornee, M.: Korean J. Chem. Eng., 16, 371(1999).
19. Wheaton, F. W., Hochheimer, J. N., Kaiser, G. E., Klones, M. J., Lib
G. S. and Easter, C. C.: in M. B. Timmons and T. M. Losordo(Eds
“Aquaculture Water Reuse System: Engineering Design and M
agement: Nitrification Filter Principle,” Elsevier, Amsterdam, 101(1996).
20. Urizee, F. and Narsimhan, G.: Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 51,
384(1996).
21. Urizee, F. and Narsimhan, G.: Separation Science and Technology,
30, 847(1995).
22. Chen, S., Stechy, D. and Malone, R. F.: in M. B. Timmons and T.
Losordo(Eds.) “Aquaculture Water Reuse System: Engineering De
and Management: Suspended Solids Control in Recirculating Aqua
ture Systems,” Elsevier, Amsterdam, 61(1996).
23. Chen, S.: Ph. D. Dissertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, New Yo
(1991).
24. Tchobanoglous, G. and Schroeder, E. D.: “Water Quality,” Addiso
Wesley Publishing Company, California, 56(1985).
25. Nigtingale, J. W.: “Technical Report of Karmer,” Chin and Mayo
Inc., Washington(1976).
26. Suh, K. H. and Lee, M. G.: J. Korean. Fish. Soc., 30, 239(1995).
27. Bailey, J. E. and Ollis, D. F.: “Biochemical Engineering Fundame
tals,” 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 464(1986).
���� �39� �1� 2001� 2�