Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 22


discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265208578







Suresh Sundaramurthy ravi kant Tripathi

Maulana Azad National Institute of Technol Maulana Azad National Institute of Technol


All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Suresh Sundaramurthy
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 29 February 2016
ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011



S. Suresh*, Ravi Kant Tripathi and M. N. Gernal Rana

Department of Chemical Engineering, Maulana Azad National Institute of Technology,
Bhopal-462 051, India.
*Corresponding author e-mail: sureshpecchem@gmail.com/sureshs@manit.ac.in

ABSTRACT Keywords: Sequencing batch reactor,

laboratory scale-SBR, pilot-scale-SBR,
This review mainly focuses an
wastewaters, parameters.
overview of sequential batch reactor
(SBR) technology as an alternative method
for treating industrial effluents. SBR
Industrialization and population
technology has been gaining popularity,
growth continued, the problem of many
mainly because of aerobic-anaerobic
toxic organic compounds and
phases in one unit with aeration costs and
eutrophication has proven to be treatable
low sludge production. SBR is a time-
using biological treatment process.
based treatment technology as compare to
Biodegradation is found to be environment
the conventional area-based activated
friendly and cost effective treatment in
sludge processes. The review carried out
comparison to chemical processes.
here shows the efficiency and flexibility of
Anaerobic or aerobic wastewater treatment
this technology, as it is able to treat
is traditionally applied for treatment of
different kinds of effluents such as
medium to high strength wastewaters [1].
tannery, paper mill, automobile, distillery,
In biological treatment processes, the
aquaculture, brewery, dairy, dye & textile,
sludges are generated which useful and can
petrochemical, polyaromatic hydrocarbon,
be recycled as fertilizer, building material
complex chemical wastewater and other
and bio-fuel. However, biological
types of industrial wastewater etc., under
treatment processes also have some
different conditions. The review includes
disadvantages: Transformation rates of
relevant experiments carried out at the
insoluble inorganic matter by
laboratory, pilot/full scales-SBR and also
microorganisms are too low to be of
putting the effectiveness of sequential
practical importance. Thus, insoluble
systems for treatment of industrial
inorganic matter is typically removed by
wastewater, through displaying results
preliminary physical unit operations for
presented in literature on the performance
further treatment and disposal. Besides,
of these systems. The SBR treatment
biological treatment processes are not
process is increasingly recognized as the
efficient for treating wastewater containing
core method of an advanced technology
high concentration of chemical substances
for environmental protection and resource
of high toxicity.
preservation and it represents, combined
In 1920s, sequential batch reactors
with other proper methods, a sustainable
(SBRs) are used all over the world. The
and appropriate wastewater treatment
Europe and China as well as the United
system for developing countries.
States are being used successfully to treat
both municipal and industrial wastewater.
High strength wastewaters are currently

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 64

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

produced from various industrial plants technology), which promote the

including dairy, paper mill, tanneries and mineralization of the industrial wastewater
textiles, are using SBRs as practical containing toxic compounds seem to be
wastewater treatment alternatives [2]. promising. Full-scale SBRs treating
Generally, untreated wastewater contains municipal wastewater have been
high levels of organic material, numerous investigated and shown to have high
pathogenic microorganisms, as well as treatment performance for BOD, resulting
nutrients and toxic compounds. in excellent effluent quality [10].
Wastewaters generated from these 1.1. SEQUENCING BATCH
processes contain a large number of REACTOR (SBR)
pollutants at high concentrations and have Among the activated sludge system,
adverse environmental impacts. SBR system is gaining increasing
According to a 1999 U.S. EPA report [3], popularity in terms of lab-scale scientific
an SBR is no more than an activated studies to full-scale applications for
sludge plant that operates in time rather domestic and industrial wastewater
than space Irvine and Davis [4] and Liu treatment plants. The advantages of SBR
and Liu [5] described its operation. system [2] are as follows: Simple and cost
SBR technology differs in various effective; Ability to combine aerobic and
ways from conventional technologies used anoxic phases in a single reactor; High
in biological treatment of wastewater. The degree of process flexibility in terms of
flexibility of operation (change of sequence and cycle time; Near ideal
sequence phase and metabolic function), quiescent settling conditions; More
possibility of operation at low retention resistant to fluctuating influent loading.
time, control over microbial population Fig. 1. Fill and draw were carried out by
and running with various reactor peristaltic pumps and mixing by overhead
configurations. The initial application of stirrers with stainless steel paddles. Air
SBR is reported in sewage treatment was supplied by a compressor at via a
especially for nutrient removal [6-7]. The solenoid valve to a coarse bubble diffuser,
SBR system is distinguished by controlled flow was regulated by a flow meter.
short term unsteady state conditions Operation of the peristaltic pumps, stirrers
leading in the long run to a stable steady and solenoid valves were controlled by
state with respect to composition and means of a timer, the operation sequence is
metabolic properties of the microbial shown in Fig. 2. The reactors were run at
population growing in the reactor [8]. constant temperature. A SBR is an
Nitrification, denitrification and activated sludge system running on the fill
clarification, can be carried out in the same and draw principle. In the SBR operation,
reactor. Finally, flow equalization and the aeration and sedimentation processes
attenuation of peak pollutant loads are are carried out sequentially in the same
inherent in the SBR. tank rather than simultaneously in separate
The wastewater generated from tanks as for the conventional activated
various industries constitute with various sludge system [2, 11]. The operation of the
organic substances, inorganic salts, organic SBR system is commonly carried out
solvents, etc. which result in high COD, sequentially in five phases namely, FILL,
low BOD, high salt content (TDS), toxic REACT, SETTLE, DRAW and IDLE,
[9] and inhibitory substances in respectively.
wastewater which inhibit the biological The design and operation of
process when they serves as microbial industrial wastewater treatment plants are
substrates. Alternative approaches like a challenge to wastewater and process
discontinuous processes (SBR engineers. SBR is an a novel

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 65

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

environmental biotechnology has been Omil et al. [19] described the design
extensively reported in SBR and is tailored of full scale-SBR for treatment of dairy
for treating a wide variety of wastewaters. wastewater for 61.4% total nitrogen
Norcross [12] and Ketchum [13] reported removal is possible in a very effective and
the design and physical features of SBR. economical way. Some of characteristics
Singh and Srivastava [11] reviewed and removal efficiency of dairy
operational flexibility of SBR for the wastewater by SBR are shown in Table. 1.
treatment of wide range of effluent under Mohsani and Bazari [20] reported that
different operational conditions, together removal of dairy wastewater using
with its modifications of SBR systems. Liu laboratory scale ASBR (Anaerobic SBR).
and Liu [5] reviewed the instability Fig 3. shows that the percentage removal
problem of aerobic granular sludge SBR of COD at various influent COD (mg/l)
from the perspective of filamentous with hydraulic retention time (HRT).
growth in the system. When influent 1000 mg/l COD, the
Excellent COD, BOD, TS, TKN, TP, removal was increase to decrease with
oil & grease and other removals were increase of influent COD upto 2500mg/l.
observed when the laboratory/pilot/full Mohsani and Bazari [20] found to be
scale-SBRs was used to treat an agro influent COD (1000 mg/l) have maximum
industrial wastewater, palm oil refinery reduction of COD wherelse, decrease with
effluent [14]; Piggery [15-16]; Dairy [17- increasing influent COD (mg/l) and also
23]; Petrochemical [24]; Textile [25-30]; when dissolved oxygen increased with 3 to
Complex chemical [31]; Tannery [32]; 7.5 mg/l, the percentage reduction was
Aquaculture [33]; Paper mill [34]; increased with increasing DO level in the
Brewery [35-36]; Automobile [37]; Work dairy wastewater. The maximum COD
Camp Wastewater [8]; Coke oven [38]; reduction was greater than 90% with
River sediments [39]; Distillery [40]. minimum influent COD (mg/l).
In this paper, focused on the Sirianuntapiboon et al. [21] examined
overview of sequencing batch reactor for treatment efficiencies in two types of SBR
various industrial wastewaters and systems. The conventional SBR and
understands the various effects of chemical attached microbial (MSBR) systems for
oxygen demand (COD), biological oxygen treatment of dairy wastewater. For the
demand (BOD), Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen MSBR system, plastic media with a total
(TKN), total phosphorus (TP), Total solids surface area of 2.7 m2 was installed on the
(TS), oil & grease and other performances. bottom of the reactor. Both SBR reactors
2. APPLICATION OF SBR TO (each of 25 l capacity) were made from
TREATMENT OF VARIOUS acrylic plastic. The dimensions of each
INDUSTRIAL WASTEWATERS reactor were 0.29 m 0.35 m, the working
2.1. Dairy wastewater volume being 20 l. Sirianuntapiboon et al.
Dairy industry wastewaters are [21] attached growth system was applied
characterized by their high content in in the conventional SBR reactor by
nutrients, especially nitrogen (400 mg/l installing plastic media on the bottom of
TKN and 20-50 mg/l TP). The SBR the SBR reactor to increase the system
system would be more suitable to treat efficiency, bio-sludge quality and to
daily industry wastewater because of its reduce the excess bio-sludge. Fig. 4. shows
ability to reduce nitrogen compounds by both SBR and MSBR systems for removal
nitrification and denitrification [41], efficiencies with different organic loading
however, SBR system still has some (g BOD/m3 d). The COD, BOD5, total
disadvantages such as high sludge volume TKN and oil & grease removal efficiencies
index [42]. of the MSBR system, under a high organic

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 66

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

loading of 1340 g BOD5/m3 d, were Mohan et al. [22] setup laboratory

89.30.1, 83.00.2, 59.40.8, and scale-AnSBR (Anaerobic SBR) to be used
82.40.4%, respectively, while they were to treat wastewater generated in the dairy
only 87.00.2, 79.90.3, 48.71.7 and industry. Volatile fatty acid (VFA), biogas
79.310%, respectively, in the production are estimated at organic
conventional SBR system. The amount of loading (3.5 kg COD/m3 day) was 1.05
excess bio-sludge in the MSBR system mmol H2/ m3 min and 3010 mg/l
was about 3 times lower than that in the respectively. The percentage reduction
conventional SBR system. Fig. 5. shows COD with 65% with influent 10400 mg/l
that hydraulic retention time affects the COD. Whichard et al. [7] investigated the
various removal efficiencies of COD, treatability of a wastewater from dairy
BOD5, TKN and oil & grease in SBR and industry in a laboratory scale-SBR. 98%
MSBR system for treatment of dairy COD removal, 98% soluble inorganic
wastewater. At HRT ~12 days maximum nitrogen removal and 79-84% total solids
removals was found and after that, there removal efficiency was achieved in the
was slight variation in the removal reactor. Finally, Ghough et al. [44]
efficiencies. Sirianuntapiboon et al. [21] developed an equation for BOD prediction
concluded that while compared to in dairy wastewater treated by SBR at the
conventional SBR, the MSBR efficiencies 95% confidence level.
were higher because of reduced the excess 2.2. Dye & textile wastewater
bio-sludge means of attached growth. In The kind of industrial activity
this study, the conclusion was that an SBR associated with textiles can lead to major
is a good system for the primary and negative impact on the environment, both
secondary treatment of diary wastewater. in terms of pollutant discharge as well as
A similar result was obtained by Neczaj et of water and energy consumption. The
al. [23] for dairy and leachate in a major pollutant types identified in textile
laboratory scale-ASBR (Anaerobic SBR). wastewater are organic load, colour,
Mohamed and Saed [43] demonstrated nutrients (N and P), sulfur, toxicants, and
treatment of dairy wastewater by refractory organics [45]. Dye colour is
laboratory scale-SBR. The cycle of period sensitive to redox and anaerobic treatments
in SBR: 30 min aeration feed, 12 h are effective at decolourising [46]. There
reaction with oxygen, 1h settling period are cases in the literature describing the
without oxygen, 30 min draw without effective performance of the SBR
oxygen and 15 min idle phase. Mohamed technology for the treatment of dye/textile
and Saed [43] was found to be 96.7% wastewater [25-30]. In experimental
NH3-N, 94% COD and 96% SS removal. studies with laboratory scale SBR and 60-
Dugba and Zhang [17] evaluated the 70 days retention time, [25] reached
temperature-phased anaerobic sequential removal efficiency of 76.4% TOC, 60-
batch reactor (AnSBR) for dairy 70% COD and 78.1% SS. Fongsatitkul et
wastewater treatment. Thermophilic al. [26] investigated textile wastewater by
(55oC)-mesophilic (35oC) system was s ingle process as well as in association
tested at different hydraulic retention time with chemical oxidation at different
(HRT) (3 and 6 days) and loading rates (2- conditions. Single biological(SBR)
8 g/l day). Both thermophilic and process, the high reduction in 83.3%COD,
mesophilic system was found to be more 94.1% TKN, 77.4% TP and 35.5% colour
effective in solids removal, biogas was found in the period of 60 days. They
production and coliform bacteria concluded that process was found to be
destruction. independent of variation in the anoxic time
period, however, an increase in solids

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 67

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

retention time (SRT) improved COD and not only affects the metabolic activities of
Colour removal, although it reduced the the microbial population but also
nutrient (TKN and TP) removal efficiency. influences the gas-transfer rates and the
Abu-Ghunmi and Jamrah [28] examined settling characteristics of activated sludge.
the feasibility of initial substrate and cell An increase in temperature generates two
growth in the ration of 0.13-0.5. The reciprocal effects on biochemical
composition of the influent was 400-1520 reactions. Furthermore, sludge is difficult
mg/l COD, pH-9.5 and 1-3mg/l DO. A to settle as higher temperature maintained
pilot scale-SBR with simulated sludge, during the settling phase of SBR. Tsang et
removals efficiency was 80-95% COD and al. [34] have observed the SVI had
95% BOD. Table 1. Summarizes some of significant difference at various
characteristics and removal percentages of temperatures (35oC>30oC>25oC).
dye/textile wastewaters by laboratory and Although the COD removal efficiency and
pilot/full scale-SBR. Kapdan et al. [27] the effluent quality were satisfied among
studied the biological treatment of textile various temperatures, higher SVI value
wastewater with an AnSBR (Anaerobic was obtained at higher temperature
SBR). They found that 85% colour resulting in poor sludge settleability.
removal and 90% COD in a 12-72 h cycle. Furthermore, the SVI value at higher
2.3. Paper mill wastewater temperature was more unstable than that at
Pulp and paper making industry is lower temperature due to the fluctuation of
know to generate large quantities of highly microbial growth under the higher
polluted wastewater, especially the lignin- temperature. Tsang et al. [34] have
derived dissolved organic compounds used observed of activated sludge using
and/ or formed during the paper production microscopic, indicated the flocculation of
processes [34]. Thompson et al. [47] that bacteria was looser at higher temperature
reviews the treatment of pulp and paper (35oC) than that at lower one (25oC).
mill effluents and Mace and Mata-Alvakez Loose sludge leads to poor settling
[48] reviews the various industrial characteristic, resulting in higher
wastewaters by SBR technology. Primary concentration of suspended solid (SS) and
clarification is the main treatment applied COD in the effluent. Tsang et al. [34] was
to pulp and paper mill wastewater and it found to be unstable SVI and loose floc of
can sometimes be followed by secondary sludge under higher temperature indicated
treatment, generally of a biological nature that high temperature (>30oC) was not
[48]. However, problems encountered in appropriate for the treatment of pulp and
the treatment of kraft mill effluents by paper mill effluent. Therefore, they
conventional activated sludge process are concluded that temperature should be
the settlement characteristics of the sludge controlled if possible between 25 oC and
as well as the formation of filamentous 30 oC ensuring the stable operation of SBR
microorganism. Table 1. summarizes some process with effective treatment
of characteristics and removal percentages performance. Tripathi and Allen [49]
of paper mill effluent by laboratory and investigated the effect of temperature in
pilot/full scale-SBR. laboratory scale-SBR over 40 weeks for
Tsang et al. [34] studied various bleached kraft pulp mill effluent. They
parameter affects the SBR performances found that 63-75% COD and 60-70%
for treatment of paper mill effluent. In that AOX removal efficiency at the different
view, Fig. 6. shows the effect of temperature (35 oC and 60 oC). Tripathi
temperature on percentage of COD and Allen [49] concluded that long-chain
removal and sludge settling, in terms of fatty acid removal was better at
sludge volume index (SVI). Temperature thermophilic condition than the mesophilic

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 68

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

condition and at 35oC and 45oC, %COD 2.5. Brewery wastewater

was significantly higher and AOX removal Some of applications of SBR
decreased with temperature increases. technology to the biological treatment of
2.4. Piggery wastewater brewery wastewaters are shown in Table.1.
In the conventional system would be Ling and Lo [54] investigated some
the application of post-denitrification with experiments with laboratory scale aerobic
the addition of an external carbon source, SBR to study the treatment of brewery
which leads to more complex mixture, wastewater. The suspended and attached
high operational cost [48]. For the piggery growth-SBR with HRT 0.56-6.06 days was
wastewater, nutrient contents are very tested for removal efficiency of over 90%
higher and SBR system has most suitable of TOC, BOD5, COD and SS. Wang et al.
technology for above problem solving [35] have studied treatment of brewery
[50]. Jern et al. [15] investigated piggery wastewater in the laboratory scale-SBR
wastewater treatment carbon and solids with 239 mg/l influent COD. They found
removal in a laboratory scale-ASBR with a that removals of 88.7% COD and 88.9%
cycle length of 24h, 58% COD, 82% BOD NH4+-N efficiency. Rodrigues et al. [55]
and 79% SS removals were reached. A was used the SBR for the post treatment
study concerning the use of internal carbon process of brewery wastewater. They
sources for biological nutrient removal found that maximum rate of 0.175 kg
from piggery wastewaters by Bortone et al. NH4+-N/kg of VSS day. The removal of
[51]. The initial concentration are 844 mg/l 97% nitrification efficiency was achieved
NH4+-N, 10580mg/l total COD. The result in the SBR technology. Xiangwen et al.
was obtained with 24h total cycle, 93% [36] carried out experiments with pilot
COD, 88-93% total nitrogen and 95% scale-ASBR (Anaerobic SBR) with the
phosphorus removals. Su et al. [16] HRT of 1 day (with removals of COD
investigated an SBR for insitu studies of >90%). The production of biogas was 2.4
piggery wastewater. The pilot scale-SBR l/day with VFA < 200 mg/l and SVI 28.88
which was about 37.5 m3 and HRT was 3 mg/l. Xiangwen et al. [36] compared with
days. Removal efficiency of 94.5% COD, other reactors treating the same type of
36.3-52.9% total nitrogen, 88.7% BOD, wastewater, OLR in ASBR was relatively
61.1% phosphorus and 93.4% SS were low due to batch ASBR. Low effluent
reached. However, total nitrogen and COD was also expected to meet the local
phosphorus removal was poor while strict discharge permission. Xiangwen et
compared to COD, BOD and SS removal. al. [36] soluble COD in the effluent was
Masse et al. [52] used an ASBR, without normally less than 150 mg/l. They
agitation, for treating piggery wastewater concluded that highest treatment efficiency
at psychrophilic temperatures (20 oC), with compared to other conventional treatment
organic loads of 0.71.2 g COD/l day. The method. The process of brewery
reactor was efficient in retaining the wastewater treatment was to be controlled
biomass and attained 73% of total organic by effective feedback controller system
matter removal (as COD). Ndegwa et al. based on DO concentration [53]. The
[53] using a 12 l ASBR with sludge fixed-film SBR was used for post
circulation (500 ml/min) to treat dilute treatment of brewery wastewater with
swine slurries at temperatures of 20 oC and removal of 92% COD.
35 oC, on investigating COD reduction and 2.6. Tannery wastewater
biogas production interaction, obtained Generally, tannery wastewater
COD reduction of 90 and 84% for contains mainly high CODs and range of
hydraulic times of 7.2 and 9.1 days, chrome contents. Carucci et al. [56]
respectively. studied the laboratory scale-SBR was fed

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 69

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

in the tannery wastewater with anoxic- total operation phase of reactor; (b) during
aerobic conditions. Good nitrification was single cycle operation (OLR1:2.4 Kg
obtained and denitrification was effective COD/m3-day; OLR2: 3.5 Kg COD/m3-
when COD/TKN ratio in the influent was day; OLR3: 4.7 Kg COD/m3-day) [22].
higher than 8. Ganesh et al. [32] They concluded that increased the organic
investigated tannery wastewater in a loading with decrease percentage removal
laboratory scale-SBR with the influent of COD.
1908 mg/l COD. The removals of 80-82% Boopathy et al. [33] investigated
COD, 80% TKN with SVI of 110-50 mg/l. aquaculture wastewater which was influent
they concluded that cycle of period and 1201 mg/l COD in the laboratory scale-
HRT are 12 h and 2 days was optimum SBR. The removal efficiency was 97.3%
with maximum removal efficiency. COD and 99.99% total nitrogen. They
2.7. Others industrial wastewater suggested that maximum removal of
SBR technology has also been used nutrient was achieved by SBR compared to
for the treatment of other types of physicochemical method. Oliveira et al.
wastewater, such as petrochemical [24]; [37] studied the automobile wastewater
complex chemical [31]; hypersaline[9]; treatment in the laboratory scale-SBR with
aquaculture [33]; automobile [37]; Work the removal efficiency of 88% COD.
camp wastewater [8]; coke oven [38, 57]; Papadimitriou et al. [38] operated in 12 h
river sediments [39]. Table 1. shows that cycles including five sequential stages: fill,
some significant examples of SBR react, settle, draw and idle. Each cycle
technology applied to various types of consisted of 2 h mixed fill, 6 h react
industrial wastewater. aeration with 1 h anoxic stage, 2 h
Petrochemical wastewaters are sedimentation, 1.5 h draw of the
considered to be the complex and hard to supernatant and 0.5 h idle for treatment of
treat among the complex industrial wastes. coke oven wastewater. They found to be
The COD value of high level 92% COD removal efficiency in the
petrochemical wastewater is 17500 mg/l. laboratory scale-SBR. Rezaee et al. [8]
Hudson et al. [24] studied in the laboratory studied work camp wastewater in the
scale-SBR for the treatment petrochemical laboratory scale-SBR. 87% COD, >95%
wastewater in the HRT of 53 h. 93% COD NO3-N and 90% BOD removal efficiency.
was achieved in this treatment method. Aerobic biodegradation of low molecular
Mohan et al. [22] studied complex weight polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs)
chemical which was obtained in the by bacteria and microorganisms has been
common effluent treatment plant by documented in the various researchers and
laboratory scale-SBR. At cycle period 24h high-molecular weight PAHs has proven
and 1 day of HRT, the removals was to be more recalcitrant to biological
79.9%COD and 87.9% BOD. Mohan et al. degradation [50]. The bio-slurry process
[22] used an AnSBBR to treat hypersaline has been carried out using the continuous
and low biodegradable wastewater. The flow-completely stirred tank reactor
reactor presented improvement in substrate (CSTR) [58], the SBR [58] as well as
removal efficiency with a maximum of batch systems [59]. SBR technology was
51% and after introducing recirculation to selected among different alternatives due
the system a biogas yield of 0.023 m/h, to its widely proved ability in the
due to the improved mass transfer between depuration of streams containing toxic or
the substrate present in the bulk liquid and bio-recalcitrant compounds [56, 60] and
the attached biofilm. Fig. 7. shows hydrocarbon-contaminated sediments [61].
substrate degradation (COD reduction) With respect to the typical cycle of a SBR
profile during reactor operation. (a) during for wastewater treatment, in the soil or

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 70

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

sediment slurry-SBR (SS-SBR) [39] no effective than conventional SBR system

settle phase is foreseen, whereas, at the used for work camp effluents for removal
end of the react phase, a known volume of of nutrients [8]. Mohseni and Bazari [20]
slurry is withdrawn from the tank and suggested that influent COD (mg/l) affect
discharged or eventually delivered to a the performance of the SBR system in
further treatment process. The feasibility terms of COD removal for the milk
of this process was demonstrated on real industry wastewater. Sirianuntapiboon et
sediment, although lightly contaminated al. [21] concluded that, in milk industry
by PAHs (below 20 mg/kg) by Chiavola et wastewater, percent removal of BOD5,
al. [39]. Wastewater is the most important COD, TKN, and oil & grease increased
waste stream in the distillation industry with decreasing organic loading (g
contains very high chemical oxygen BOD/m3 day) in SBR and MSBR systems.
demand COD due to number of organics They suggested, when the attached growth
such as polysaccharides, carbohydrates, SBR has efficiency than conventional SBR
reduced sugars, dissolved lignins, proteins, because of more microbial activity in the
waxes, resin acids, etc. Farima et al. [4] biofilm. In complex chemical wastewater
studied in a pilot scale-SBR for treatment from common effluent treatment plant,
of distillery effluent. 70-80% COD substrate degradation (COD reduction)
reduction was achieved. The average increased, when the organic loading (kg
applied loading rate was 4 kg COD m-3 d-1 COD/m3 day) decreased [31]. In the paper
and after a shock load condition (15 g mill wastewater, optimum temperature was
CODT /l d). The results obtained show the 30oC for the maximum removal of COD
feasibility of this anaerobic discontinuous by Tsang et al. [34]. Finally, automation of
process for distillery effluent treatment. SBR operations has made their
3. CONCLUSIONS/SUMMARY implementation much easier and has
The SBR is a cost effective and definitely contributed to the development
reliable technique for the removal of of SBR technology.
pollutants from industrial wastewater. It
provides provision for flexibility in ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
variation of operating conditions to Authors would like to express their
achieve desired results for it is time thanks to the funding agencies, Ministry of
oriented rather than space oriented. Human Resource Development,
Compared to conventional continuous Government of India. One of the author,
processes its hardware is simple. A new Dr. S. Suresh, is thankful to MANIT
development has taken place in the Bhopal for providing financial R&D
treatment process for the dye or textile project [Grants in Aid Scheme] for
wastewater under microaerophilic aerobic carrying out this research work.
condition. Hybrid system was more

[1] Kleerbezem R.; Beckers, J.; Hulshoff Pol, L.W.; Lettinga, G., High rate treatment of
terephthalic acid production wastewater in a two stage anaerobic bioreactor.
Biotechnol. Bioeng, vol. 91 (2), 2005, p 169179.
[2] Subbaramaiah V.; Suresh, S.; Mall, I. D.; Srivastava, V. C., Application of sequential
batch reactor (SBR) for the wastewater treatment: A review. National Symposium on
Reaction Engineering (NSRE-2010), National Institute of Technology Raipur,
Chhattisgarh, India. Jan 22-23, 2010.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 71

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

[3] Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet, 1999. Sequencing Batch Reactors.United States
Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water Washington, D.C.EPA 932-F-99-
073 September 1999.
[4] Irvine, R.L. and . Davis W.B., Use of Sequencing Batch Reactor for Wastewater
Treatment-CPC International, Corpus Christi, TX. Presented at the 26th Annual
Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue, University, West Lafayette, IN. 1971.
[5] Liu Y., Liu Q-S., Causes and control of filamentous growth in aerobic granular
sludge sequencing batch reactors. Biotechnology Advances, Vol . 24, 2006, p 115
[6] Kolb, F. R.; Wildere. P. A., Activated carbon sequencing batch reactor to treat
industrial wastewater. Wat Sci Tech, vol. 35, 1997, p 169-176.
[7] Wilderer, P.A.; Irvine R.L.; Goronszy M., Sequencing Batch Reactor Technology.
Scientific and Technical Report No. 10, IWA Publishing, London, UK, 2001.
[8] Rezaee, A.; Khavanin, M. A., Treatment of Work Camp Wastewater Using a
Sequencing Batch Reactor Followed by a Sand Filter. American Journal of
Environmental Sciences, vol. 4 (40), 2008, p 342-346.
[9] Mohan, S. V.; Chandrashekara N. R.; Krishna K. P.; Madhavi, B.T.V.; Sharma, P.N.,
Low-biodegradable composite chemical wastewater treatment by biofilm configured
sequencing batch reactor (SBBR). Journal of Hazardous Materials, vol. 144, 2007,
p 108117.
[10] Irvine, R. L.; Ketchum, Jr.; L. H.; Arora, M. L.; Barth, E. F., An organic loading
study of full-scale sequencing batch reactors. Journal WPCF, Vol. 57, 1985, p 847-
[11] Singh M.; Srivastava, R. K., Sequencing batch reactor technology for biological
wastewater treatment: a review. Asia-Pacafic Journal of Chemical Engineering,
2010, p 1-11.
[12] Norcross, K. L., Sequencing batch reactors: An overview. Water Science &
Technology, vol. 26, 1992, p 2523.
[13] Ketchum, L. H., Jr. Design and physical features of sequencing batch reactors.
Water Science and Technology, Vol. 35 (1), 1997,p 11.
[14] Chin, K. K.; Ng, W. J.; Ma, A. N., Palm oil refinery treatment by sequencing batch
reactors. Biological Wastes, vol. 20, 1987, p 101-109.
[15] Jern, N. W., Aerobic Treatment of Piggery Wastewater with the Sequencing Batch
Reactor. Biological Wastes, vol. 22, 1987, p 285-294.
[16] Su, J-J; Kungb C.-M.; Lina J.; Liana W.-C.; Wu J.-F., Utilization of sequencing
batch reactor for in situ piggery wastewater treatment. Journal of Environmental
Science and Health, Part A, vol. 32 (2), 1997, p 391 405.
[17] Dugba P.N.; Zhang R., Treatment of dairy wastewater with two-stage anaerobic
sequencing batch reactor systems - thermophilic versus mesophilic operations.
Bioresource Technology, Vol. 68, 1999, p 225-233.
[18] Whichard, D.P.; Nancy, Dr.; Love, G., Nitrogen Removal From Dairy Manure
Wastewater Using Sequencing Batch Reactors. July 16, 2001.
[19] Omil F.; Juan M.; Arrojo, G. B.; M!endez, R., Anaerobic filter reactor performance
for the treatment of complex dairy wastewater at industrial scale. Water Research,
Vol. 37, 2003, p 40994108.
[20] Mohseni, B. A.; Bazari, H., Biological Treatment Of Dairy Wastewater By
Sequencing Batch Reactor. Iranian J Env Health Sci Eng, Vol. 1, (2), 2004, p 65-69.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 72

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

[21] Sirianuntapiboona S.; Jeeyachokb, N.; Larplai, R., Sequencing batch reactor biofilm
system for treatment of milk industry wastewater. Journal of Environmental
Management, Vol. 76, 2005, p 177183.
[22] Mohan, S.; Venkata, V.; Babu, L.; Sarma. P.N., Anaerobic biohydrogen production
from dairy wastewater treatment in sequencing batch reactor (AnSBR): Effect of
organic loading rate. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, vol. 41, 2007, p 506515.
[23] Neczaj, E.; Kacprzak, M.; Kamizela, T.; Lach, J.; Okoniewska. E., Sequencing batch
reactor system for the co-treatment of landfill leachate and dairy wastewater.
Desalination, Vol. 222, 2008, p 404409.
[24] Hudson, N.; Doyle, J.; Lant, P.; Roach, N.; Bruyn B. de; Staib.C., Sequencing batch
reactor technology: the key to a BP refinery [Bulwer Island] upgraded environmental
protection system a low cost lagoon based retro-fit. Water Science and Technology
Vol. 43 No 3, 2001, p 339346.
[25] Shaw, C.B.; Carliel, C.M.; Wheatley A.D., Anaerobic/Aerobic Treatment Of
Coloured Textile Effluents Using Sequencing Batch Reactors. Water Research, Vol.
36, 2002, p 19932001.
[26] Fongsatitkula P.; Elefsiniotisb, P.; Yamasmitc,A.; Yamasmitd N., Use of
sequencing batch reactors and Fentons reagent to treat a wastewater from a textile
industry. Biochemical Engineering Journal, vol. 21, 2004, p 213220.
[27] Kapdan, I. K.; Alparslan S., Application of AnaerobicAerobic Sequential Treatment
System To Real Textile Wastewater For Colour And COD Removal. Enzyme and
Microbial Technology, vol. 36, 2005, p 273279.
[28] Abu-Ghunmi, L.N.; Jamrah, A.I., Biological treatment of textile wastewater using
sequencing batch reactor technology. Environmental Modeling and Assessment, Vol
11, 2006, p 333 - 343.
[29] Isik, M.; Sponza, D.T., Biological treatment of acid dyeing wastewater using a
sequential anaerobic/aerobic reactor system Anaerobic/aerobic sequential treatment of
a cotton textile mill wastewater. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, vol. 38, 2006,
p 887892.
[30] El-Gohary, F.; Tawfik A., Decolorization and COD reduction of disperse and
reactive dyes wastewater using chemical-coagulation followed by sequential batch
reactor (SBR) process. Desalination, vol. 249, 2009, p 11591164.
[31] Mohan, S. V.; Chandrashekara N.R.; Krishna K. P.; Madhavi, B.T.V.; Sharma, P.N.,
Treatment of complex chemical wastewater in a sequencing batch reactor (SBR)
with an aerobic suspended growth configuration. Process Biochemistry, vol. 40,
2005 p 15011508.
[32] Ganesh, R.; G. Balaji, R.; Ramanujam,A., Biodegradation of tannery wastewater
using sequencing batch reactorRespirometric assessment. Bioresource
Technology, vol. 97, 2006, p 18151821.
[33] Boopathy, R.; Bonvillain, C.; Fonteno,t Q.; Kilgen,M., Biological treatment of low-
salinity shrimp aquaculture wastewater using sequencing batch reactor, International
Biodeterioration & Biodegradation . Vol. 59, 2007, p 1619.
[34] Tsang, Y.F.; Hua, F.L.; Chua, H.; Sin S.N.; Wang Y.J., Optimization Of Biological
Treatment Of Paper Mill Effluent In A Sequencing Batch Reactor. Biochemical
Engineering Journal, Vol. 34, 2007, p 193199.
[35] Wang, S-G.; Liu, X.-W.; Gong We.-X.; Gao B.-Y.; Yu H.-Q.; HuaZhan D., Aerobic
granulation with brewery wastewater in a sequencing batch reactor. Bioresource
Technology, Vol. 98, 2007, p 21422147.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 73

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

[36] Xiangwen, S.; Dangcong P.; Zhaohua T.; Xinghua J., Treatment of brewery
wastewater using anaerobic sequencing batch reactor (ASBR). Bioresource
Technology, Vol. 99, 2008, p 31823186.
[37] Oliveira, R. P.; Ghilardi J. A;. Ratusznei, S.M., Rodrigues J. A.D.; Zaiat, M.; Foresti,
E., Anaerobic sequencing batch biofilm reactor applied to automobile industry
wastewater treatment: Volumetric loading rate and feed strategy effects. Chemical
Engineering and Processing, Vol. 47, 2008, p 13741383.
[38] Papadimitriou, C.A.; Samaras, P.; Sakellaropoulos, G.P., Comparative study of
phenol and cyanide containing wastewater in CSTR and SBR activated sludge
reactors. Bioresource Technology, vol. 100, 2009, p 3137.
[39] Chiavola, A.; Baciocchib, R..; Gavascib R., Biological treatment of PAH-
contaminated sediments in a Sequencing Batch Reactor. Journal of Hazardous
Materials, Vol. 184, 2010, p 97104.
[40] Farina, R.; Cellamare, C. M.; Stante, L.; Giordano, A., Treatment of distillery
wastewater by a pilot scale anaerobic sequencing batch reactor. Simposio
Internazionale di Ingegneria Sanitaria Ambientale Taormina, Palazzo dei Congressi
23-26 giugno, ANDIS 067, 2004.
[41] Metcalf & Eddy Inc., Wastewater Engineering Treatment Disposal and Reuse, third
ed. McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 1991, p 532537.
[42] Kagi, F., Uygur, A., Nutrient removal performance of a sequencing batch reactor as
a function of the sludge age. Enzyme and Microbial Technology, vol. 31, 2002, p
[43] Mohamed, F.; Saed, M., Wastewater management in a dairy farm. Water Sci.ence
& Technology, Vol. 32 (11), 1995, p 1.
[44] Ghough, R. H.; Samkutty, P. J.; McGrew, P.; Arauz, J.; Adkinson, R. W., Prediction
of effluent biochemical oxygen demand in a dairy plant SBR wastewater system.
Journal of Environmental Science Health A scale, vol. 35 (2), 2000, p 169.
[45] Delee W.; ONeill F.R.; Hawkes H.M., Pinheiro., Anaerobic treatment of textile
effluents: a review. Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology vol. 73,
1998, p 323.
[46] Beydilli, M.I,; Pavlostathis, S.G.; Tincher, W.C., Decolorization and toxicity
screening of selected reactive azo dyes under methanogenic conditions. Water
Science Technology, Vol. 38, 1998, p 22532.
[47] Thompson, G.; Swain, J.; Kay, M.; Forster, C. F., The treatment of pulp and paper
mill effluent: A review. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 77, 2001, p 275.
[48] Mace, S.; Mata-Alvarez, J.R., Utilization of SBR technology for wastewater
treatment: an overview. Industrial Engineering Chemistry Research, Vol. 4, 2002, p
[49] Tripathi, S.; Allen, D., Comparison of mesophilic and thermophilic aerobic
biological treatment in sequencing batch reactors treating bleached kraft pulp mill
effluent. Water Research, Vol. 33 (3), 1999, p 836.
[50] Ferrarese E.; Andreottola, G., Opera, I.A., Remediation of PAH-contaminated
sediments by chemical oxidation. Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 152, 2008, p
[51] Bortone, G.; Gemelli, S.; Rambaldi, A.; Tilche, A., Nitrification, denitrification and
biological phosphate removal in sequencing batch reactors treating piggery
wastewater. Water Sci. Technol. Vol. 26,1992, (5-6), 977.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 74

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

[52] Masse, D.I.; Droste, R.L.; Kennedy, K.; Patni, N.K.; Munroe, J.A., Potential for the
psychrophilic anaerobic treatment of swine manure using a sequencing batch reactor.
Can. Agric. Eng, vol. 39, 1997, p 2533.
[53] Ndegwa, P.M.; Hanilton, D.W.; Lalman,J.A.; Cumba, H.J., Optimization of
anaerobic sequencing batch reactors treating dilute swine slurries. Transaction
ASAE, vol. 48, 2005, p 15751583.
[54] Ling, L.; Lo, K. V., Brewery wastewater treatment using suspended and attached
growth sequencing batch reactors. J. Environ. Sci. Health A, Vol. 34 (2), 1999, p
[55] Rodrigues, A.C.; Brito, A. G.; Melo, L. F., Post treatment of a brewery wastewater
using a sequencing batch reactor. Water Environment and Research, Vol. 73 (1),
2001, p 45.
[56] Carucci, A.; Chiavola, A., Majone, M.; Rolle E., Treatment of tannery wastewater in
a sequencing batch reactor. Water Science Technology, Vol .40, 1999,p 253259.
[57] Yu, H. Q.; Gu, G. W., Treatment of phenolic wastewaters by sequencing batch
reactors with aerated and unaerated fills. Waste Management, Vol. 16, 1996, p 561.
[58] Cassidy, D.P.; Efendiev, S.; White, D.M., Comparison of CSTR and SBR bioslurry
reactor performance . Water Research. Vol. 34, 2000, p 43334342.
[59] Abbondanzi, F.; Bruzzi, L.; Campisi,, T.; Frezzati,A.; Guerra R.; Iacondini, A.,
Biotreatability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in brackish sediments:
Preliminary studies of an integrated monitoring. International of Biodeterioration and
Biodegradation, Vol . 57, 2006, p 214221.\
[60] Ma, G; Love, N.G., Creating anoxic and microaerobic conditions in sequencing
batch reactors treating volatile BTEX compounds. Water Science & Technology,
vol. 43, 2001, p 275282.
[61] Giordano, S.; Stante,L.; Pirozzi, F.; Cesaro, R.; Bortone, G., Sequencing batch
reactor performance treating PAH contaminated lagoon sediments. Journal of
Hazardous Materials , Vol.119, 2005, p 159166.
[62] Nguyen, A. L.; Duff, S. J. B.; Sheppard, J. D., Application of feedback control
based on dissolved oxygen to a fixed-film sequencing batch reactor for treatment of
brewery wastewater. Water Environmental Research, Vol. 72, 2000, p 75.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 75

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

Table 1. Characteristics and removal percentages of various industrial wastewaters by laboratory and pilot/full scale-SBR.
Type of pH T (0C) COD Scale and Total HRT (%) Nutrient Removal Reduction in the References
industrial (mg/l) Reactor cycle (d) Removal (%) or production properties of
wastewater conditions time COD rate and others (%) sludge (mg/l) or
(h) others (%)
Piggery 7-8 - - Lab scale 24 3 58 BOD removal-82, Sludge from Jern et al. [15]
ASBR , SS removal-79% activated sludge
W.V-5 VSS removal-75% plant

Piggery - - 10580 Laboratory 24 10 93 Total N removal-88- - Bortone et al. [51]

scale, W.V- 93, TP removal-95
Piggery 7.11 25 3769 Pilot scale - 3 94.5 Nitrogen [NH4+-N, - Su et al. [16]
1214 SBR, W.V- NO3-N, and TKN]
0.08 37500 and phosphorus were
36.3-52.9 and 61.1,
BOD removal- 88.7
Dairy - 35-55 - Lab scale - 3-6 - Volatile solids Sludge municipal Dugba and Zhang
two-stage removal-29.3-30.2 plant [17]
Paper mill - 35-60 Lab. scale 8 0.5 63-75 AOX removal-60-70 - Tripathi and Allen
SBR, W.V- [49]
Brewery - - - Lab. Scale - 0.56- >90 TOC, BOD5, SS - Ling and Lo [54]
SBR 6.06 removal >90
Brewery - 25-35 - - - - BOD removal-92% Post treatment Nguyen et al. [62]
Petrochemical 6.5 - 1400 lab scale - 53 h 93 - - Hudson et al. [24]
9.5 SBR, W.V-

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 76

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

Dairy <7 20 - Lab scale - 3 98 Soluble inorganic Sludge from Whichard et

SBR, nitrogen removal-98, aeration basin, al.[18]
W.V-3.5 solid removal-79-84. specific growth rate
KL-0.01 [max]-1.84 d-1
Brewery - - - - - - - 97% nitrification Post treatment, Rodrigues et al.
efficiency maximum rate of [55]
0.175 kg NH4
N/kg of VSS day
Textile 9.4 371 3547 Lab scale - 2.6 60-70 TOC removal- - Shaw et al. [25]
0.05 SBR,W.V- 76.4%, SS removal-
10.5 78.1
Dairy 7.68 37 3000- Full scale - 1.6 > 90 NH4N removal- - Omil et al. [19]
18000 SBR, W.V- 25.5%, total N
14000 removal 61.34
Textile 8.7 2832 773 Lab scale 24 83.3 TKN ,TP and colour Sludge from Fongsatitkul et al.
10.8 1290 SBR,W.V- removal- 94.1, 77.4, domestic Plant [26]
10, 2b 35.5
Milk factory - - 400- Lab scale 7 - >90 - - Mohseni and
2500 ASBR,W.V- Bazari [20]
22.5 3-7.5b

Distillery 7.2 35 15- Pilot scale - - 70 80 - Methane removal - Farina et al. [40]
7.8 125 AnSBR, 300 up to 350 l
W.V-180 methane /kg COD
Complex 7.1 262 6000 Lab scale 24 1 79.9 BOD87.89 SVI-50 to 100ml/g Mohan et al.[31]
chemical 0.2 SBR,W.V- Sulphate8
Milk industry 4.0 3435 5000 MSBR and 24 - 97.9 BOD5, TKN and oil Sludge from Sirianuntapiboon
7.0 10,00 conventional & grease removal sewage plant, et al. [21]
0 SBR, W.V- efficiencies of, Max. organic
20 97.90.1, 79.31.0 loading
and 94.80.5%, of 680 g BOD5/m3

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 77

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

respectively, d
Textile 7 28 800- Pilot scale 12-72 2 90 - Colour removal: 85 Kapdan et al. [27]
1200 AnSBR,
Textile 9.5 40-60 400- Pilot scale 27 - 80-95 BOD95 S0/X0-0.13 to 0.5 Abu-Ghunmi and
1520 SBR, Jamrah [28]
W.V-5, 0.18-
0.56a, 13b
Tannery 7-7.7 1908 Bench scale 12 2 80-82 TKN-80 SVI-110 to 50ml/g Ganesh et al. [32]
SBR, W.V-8, NH3-N-83.4
KL- 191.7
Acid dyeing 6.5-8 - 2000 Lab scale - 3.3 97 Methane gas Colour removal-87 Isik and Sponza
UASB production=437 ml [29]
reactor W.V- CH4/d, VFA
2.5 l production=40mg
Aquaculture 7.8 22 120 Lab. scale - - 97.3 Total Ammonia Carbon level 1201 Boopathy et al.
SBR, W.V- 99.99 to 32 mg/l [33]
19, 0.15.5b NO399.87
Dairy 6.1 29 10400 Lab. scale 12 1 65 H2 production rate Dewatered sludge; Mohan et al. [22]
AnSBR,W.V 1.2 mmol/min volumetric H2
-2.3 Volatile Fatty Acids production
[VFA] production rate=1.105 mmol
3010 mg/l H2/m3-min OLR
3.5 Kg COD/m3-
Paper mill 6.2 251 1200 Lab scale - 1.6-3 93.10.3 OLR-1.9 kg Sludge from Tsang et al. [34]
6.6 1400 SBR, W.V-4, BOD/m3 day municipal plant,
2b SVI-52.71.3ml/g
Brewery - - 239 Lab scale 6 - 88.7 NH4+-N88.9 SVI-87.5 to 32ml/g Wang et al.
SBR, 91a [35]

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 78

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

Dairy and low 1820 - Lab scale 24 12 98.4 TKN removal-79.2, Sludge from Neczaj et al. [23]
Leachate ASBR, W.V- BOD removal-97.3 municipal plant
Automobile - 301 1400 Lab scale 8 - 88 - Volumetric loading Oliveira et al. [37]
AnSBBR, rate [VLR] of 3.09
W.V-5 mg COD/l day
Work Camp 7.5- 202 350- Pilot scale 24 - 87 NO3-N removal->95, - Rezaee et al. [8]
8.2 450 SBR ,W.V- BOD removal- 90
20, 2b
Brewery 67 331 - Pilot scale - 1 >90% - VFA < 200 mg/l, Xiangwen et al.
AnSBR, Biogas production [36]
W.V-45 2.4 L/Ld,
SVI 28.88 mg/l
Textile 8.8 22 - 29 5951 Lab scale - 5h 68.2 Colour removal: 97, Sludge from El-Gohary and
9.4 31 SBR, W.V-4, BOD removal- 76.3 sewage plant Tawfik [30]
< 4-6b
Coke oven - 4000 Bench scale 12 - 92 - Sludge from Papadimitriou et
6500 SBR,W.V-5 municipal al. [38]
River 7.85 202 200- bench-scale 7 70 - 80% for Fluorene, Total PAH Chiavola et al.
sediments 4000 SS- anthracene, pyrene concentration of 70 [39]
SBR,W.V-5 and crysene mg/kg as dry
a b
W.V-Working volume (l); Settling velocity (m/h); Dissolved oxygen (DO, mg/l); TKNTotal Kjeldahl Nitrogen; HRTHydraulic Retention
Time; SVISludge Volume Index; TSSTotal Suspended Solid; VFAVolatile Fatty Acids; KL-Oxygen mass transfer coefficient (h-1);OLR-
Organic loading rate; PAH-polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; TP-total phosphate; AOX-Adsordable halogenated compounds; ASBR-aerobic
sequencing batch reactor; AnSBR-anaerobic sequencing batch reactor; UASB upflow anaerobic sludge blanket; AnSBBR- anaerobic
sequencing batch biofilm reactor; SS-SBR sediment slurry sequencing batch reactor.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 79

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

Fig. 1. Experimental Setup for laboratory scale sequential batch reactor [25].

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 80

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011

Influent FILL


Mixing Mixing
Aeration Aeration

Aeration DECANT
- Mixing
Waste - Aeration

- Mixing
- Aeration

Fig. 2. Sequential batch reactor operating for each tank for one cycle for the five discrete time
periods of Fill, React, Settle, Draw, and Idle.

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 81

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011


Percent removal (COD) 80

50 COD:1000 mg/l
COD:1500 mg/l
40 COD:2000 mg/l
30 COD:2500 mg/l

3 4 5 61 2 7
Time of aeration (h)
Fig. 3. Milk industry wastewater-ASBR: Performance of the reactor under different COD
concentrations [20].

COD BOD TKN Oil & grease

COD BOD TKN Oil & grease
Percent removal

500 1000 1500
Organic loading (g BOD/m3 d)
Fig. 4. Milk industry wastewater: Percent removal of BOD5, COD, TKN, and oil & grease
with various organic loading in SBR and MSBR systems. Initial conditions: COD-5000-
10000 mg/l, BOD5-3000-5000 mg/l, TKN-50-150mg/l and Oil & grease-3000-7000 mg/l

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 82

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011


TKN TKN Oil & grease Oil & grease
Percent removal

0 10 20 30
Time (days)
Fig. 5. Milk industry wastewater: Percent removal of BOD5, COD, TKN, and oil & grease
with various retention times in SBR and MSBR systems. Initial conditions: COD-5000-
10000 mg/l, BOD5-3000-5000 mg/l, TKN-50-150mg/l and Oil & grease-3000-7000 mg/l
100 120

Percent removal (COD)

SVI (ml/g)



0 0
20 25 30 35 40
Temp. (0 C)
Fig. 6. Paper mill wastewater: Percent removal of COD and sludge volume index under
various temperatures. An experimental error was calculated by standard deviation. Average
initial COD: 1213.9107.7 mg/l [34].

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 83

ISSN: 2229-6646 (online) IJSTM Vol. 2, Issue 1, February 2011


Percent removal (COD)

20 OLR 2

1 2 4 6 8 10 12 16 24
Cycle period (h)

Fig. 7. Composite chemical wastewater-SBBR: Substrate degradation (COD reduction)

profile during reactor operation (a) during total operation phase of reactor; (b) during single
cycle operation) (OLR1:2.4 Kg COD/m3-day; OLR2: 3.5 Kg COD/m3-day; OLR3: 4.7 Kg
COD/m3-day) [9].

International Journal of Science Technology & Management Page 84