Abstract
A systematic calibration and validation procedure for the complex mechanistic modeling of anaerobic–anoxic/nitrifying (A2N) two-sludge system is needed. An efficient method based on phase experiments, sensitivity analysis, and genetic algorithm is proposed here for model calibration. Phase experiments (anaerobic phosphorus release, aerobic nitrification, and anoxic denitrifying phosphate accumulation) in an A2N sequencing batch reactor (SBR) were performed to reflect the process conditions accurately and improve the model calibration efficiency. The calibrated model was further validated using 30 batch experiments and 3-month dynamic continuous flow (CF) experiments for A2N-SBR and CF-A2N process, respectively. Several statistical criteria were conducted to evaluate the accuracy of model predications, including the average relative deviation (ARD), mean absolute error (MAE), root mean square error (RMSE), and Janus coefficient. Visual comparisons and statistical analyses indicated that the calibrated model could provide accurate predictions for the effluent chemical oxygen demand (COD), ammonia nitrogen (NH4 +-N), total nitrogen (TN), and total phosphorus (TP), with only one iteration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
APHA (2005) Standard methods for the examination of water & wastewater, twenty-first ed. American Public Health Association, American Water Works Association and Water Environment Federation, Washington, DC
Banga JR, Balsa-Canto E, Moles CG et al (2005) Dynamic optimization of bioprocesses: efficient and robust numerical strategies. J Biotechnol 117:409–419
Beraud B, Steyer J, Lemoine C et al (2008) Optimization of WWTP control by means of multi-objective genetic algorithms and sensitivity analysis. Comput Aided Chem Eng 25:539–544
Brun R, Kühni M, Siegrist H et al (2002) Practical identifiability of ASM2d parameters-systematic selection and tuning of parameter subsets. Water Res 36:4113–4127
Chen W, Lu X, Yao C et al (2015) An efficient approach based on bi-sensitivity analysis and genetic algorithm for calibration of activated sludge models. Chem Eng J 259:845–853
Copp JB (2002) The COST simulation benchmark: description and simulator manual. Office for Official Publications of the European Community, Luxembourg
Hao X, Van Loosdrecht MCV, Meijer SCF et al (2001a) Model-based evaluation of denitrifying P removal in a two-sludge system. J Environ Eng ASCE 127:112–118
Hao X, Van Loosdrecht MCV, Meijer SCF et al (2001b) Model-based evaluation of two BNR processes-UCT and A2N. Water Res 35:2851–2860
Henze M, Grady CPL, Gujer W et al (1987) Activated sludge model no.1. IAWPRC Scientific and Technical Report No. 1. IAWPRC, London
Henze M, Gujer W, Mino T et al (1999) Activated sludge model no. 2d, ASM2d. Water Sci Technol 39:165–182
Hulsbeek JJW, Kruit J, Roeleveld PJ, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2002) A practical protocol for dynamic modelling of activated sludge systems. Water Sci Technol 45:127–136
Kuba T, Van Loosdrecht MCM, Heijnen JJ (1996) Phosphorus and nitrogen removal with minimal COD requirement by integration of denitrifying dephosphatation and nitrification in a two-sludge system. Water Res 30:1702–1710
Langergraber G, Rieger L, Winkler S et al (2004) A guideline for simulation studies of wastewater treatment plants. Water Sci Technol 50:131–138
Lee DS, Jeon CO, Park JM (2001) Biological nitrogen removal with enhanced phosphate uptake in a sequencing batch reactor using single sludge system. Water Res 35:3968–3976
Li C, Zhang J, Liang S et al (2013) Nitrous oxide generation in denitrifying phosphorus removal process: main causes and control measures. Environ Sci Pollut Res 20:5353–5360
Machado VC, Tapia G, Gabriel D et al (2009) Systematic identifiability study based on the fisher information matrix for reducing the number of parameters calibration of an activated sludge model. Environ Model Softw 24:1274–1284
Makinia J, Rosenwinkel K, Spering V (2005) Long-term simulation of the activated sludge process at the Hanover-Gümmerwald pilot WWTP. Water Res 39:1489-1502
Mannina G, Cosenza A, Vanrolleghem PA et al (2011) A practical protocol for calibration of nutrient removal wastewater treatment models. J Hydroinf 13:575–595
Melcer H, Dold PL, Jones RM et al (2003) Methods for wastewater characterisation in activated sludge modeling. Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF), Alexandria
Pai T, Tsai Y, Chou Y et al (2004) Microbial kinetic analysis of three different types of EBNR process. Chemosphere 55:109–118
Peng Y, Wang Y, Ozaki M et al (2004) Denitrifying phosphorus removal in a continuously-flow A2N two-sludge process. J Environ Sci Health A 39:703–715
Petersen B, Gernaey K, Henze M et al (2002) Evaluation of an ASM1 model calibration procedure on a municipal–industrial wastewater treatment plant. J Hydroinf 4:15–38
Power M (1993) The predictive validation of ecological and environmental models. Ecol Model 68:33–50
Ramin E, Flores-Alsina X, Sin G et al (2014) Influence of selecting secondary settling tank sub-models on the calibration of WWTP models—a global sensitivity analysis using BSM2. Chem Eng J 241:28–34
Reichert P, Vanrolleghem P (2001) Identifiability and uncertainty analysis of the river water quality model no. 1 (RWQM1). Water Sci Technol 43:329–338
Shi J, Lu X, Yu R et al (2012) Nutrient removal and phosphorus recovery performances of a novel anaerobic-anoxic/nitrifying/induced crystallization process. Bioresour Technol 121:183–189
Sin G, Van Hulle SW, De Pauw DJ et al (2005) A critical comparison of systematic calibration protocols for activated sludge models: a SWOT analysis. Water Res 39:2459–2474
Sin G, De Pauw DJ, Weijers S et al (2008) An efficient approach to automate the manual trial and error calibration of activated sludge models. Biotechnol Bioeng 100:516–528
Takács I, Patry GG, Nolasco D (1991) A dynamic model of the clarification–thickening process. Water Res 25:1263–1271
Van Loosdrecht MCM, Brandse FA, De Vries AC (1998) Upgrading of waste water treatment processes for integrated nutrient removal-the BCFS® process. Water Sci Technol 37:209–217
Vanrolleghem PA, Insel G, Petersen B et al (2003) A comprehensive model calibration procedure for activated sludge models. In: Proceedings: WEFTEC 2003, 76th Annual Technical Exhibition and Conference, Los Angeles, CA, USA (on CD-ROM)
Wang Y, Peng Y, Stephenson T (2009) Effect of influent nutrient ratios and hydraulic retention time (HRT) on simultaneous phosphorus and nitrogen removal in a two-sludge sequencing batch reactor process. Bioresour Technol 100:3506–3512
Zhang W, Hou F, Peng Y et al (2014) Optimizing aeration rate in an external nitrification–denitrifying phosphorus removal (ENDPR) system for domestic wastewater treatment. Chem Eng J 245:342–347
Zhang J, Jia W, Wang R et al (2016) Microbial community characteristics during simultaneous nitrification-denitrification process: effect of COD/TP ratio. Environ Sci Pollut Res 23:2557–2565
Zhu A, Guo J, Ni B et al (2015) A novel protocol for model calibration in biological wastewater treatment. Sci Rep-UK 5:8493
Acknowledgements
This research has been supported by the Major Science and Technology Project of Water Pollution Control and Management in China (2012ZX07101005), the National Science and Technology Support Program in China (2015BAL01B01), and the Scientific Research Foundation of Graduate School of Southeast University (YBJJ1643). We thank the anonymous reviewers for their constructive comments that improved the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Responsible editor: Marcus Schulz
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dai, H., Chen, W., Dai, Z. et al. Efficient model calibration method based on phase experiments for anaerobic–anoxic/nitrifying (A2N) two-sludge process. Environ Sci Pollut Res 24, 19211–19222 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9437-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-9437-z