【作者】 尹华升；

【导师】 陈治安；

【作者基本信息】 湖南大学 ， 市政工程， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 随着水资源短缺和水源污染问题的日益严重及国家生活饮用水水质标准的进一步提高,传统的常规水处理工艺已难以满足生活饮用水的安全要求,探索新的经济实用的水处理方法是摆在我国水处理科技工作者面前的重大课题。本课题主要目的在于探索研究微絮凝-超滤工艺取代常规工艺处理南方微污染水库水的处理效果,为将来超滤工艺应用于我国南方饮用水生产提供依据。本课题采用国产中空纤维超滤膜进行了微絮凝-超滤工艺处理深圳微污染水库水的试验研究。系统地研究了微絮凝-超滤工艺的影响因素,并对其各运行参数进行了优化。在此基础上做了常规工艺、直接超滤工艺、微絮凝-超滤工艺处理微污染水库水的平行对比试验,并考察了微絮凝-超滤工艺处理微污染水库水的经济成本。主要成果和结论如下:1.微絮凝-超滤工艺中,铁盐混凝剂比铝盐要好;随着混凝剂投加量的增加,有机物的去除率也随着增加,但当混凝剂投加量增加到一定量(以Al 2 O3计为6mg/L)时,反而会加剧膜污染;投加PAM(聚丙烯酰胺)对提高有机物去除率没有帮助,但可以缓解膜污染。在酸性条件下,有机物去除率比中性和碱性条件下高,但膜污染则在酸性条件下最严重。微絮凝-超滤工艺的最佳混凝时间为2min左右。2.在超滤工艺中,操作压力控制在0.12MPa以下比较合理;最佳水力冲洗方式为顺冲-反冲-顺冲;最佳的反冲洗时间为60-80s,最佳的反冲洗流量为产水流量的2-2.5倍。错流过滤对缓解膜污染作用不大,反而会增加制水成本。3.微絮凝-超滤、直接超滤、常规工艺的平行对比试验证明:微絮凝-超滤工艺的出水水质最好,直接超滤工艺最差。超滤工艺对浊度、病原微生物等有很好的去除效果。微絮凝-超滤工艺的投资成本比常规工艺节省,其运行成本约为0.23元/m3水。更多还原

【Abstract】 The water resource contamination is serious day by day, and water resource is become shortage. At the same time the national drinking water quality standard is enhanced more. the traditional regular water treatment being difficult to meet the security requirement of drinking water. Explore new economical and practical water treatment method is a great subject in front of our country’s water treatment academician. The main purpose of this subject is exploring and studying microflocilation/UF replace the conventional treatment treat the South micro-polluted reservoir water, for using UF to the south water production provides basis in future.The topic used a hollow fiber UF membrane which made in China to the experimental study of microflocilation/UF. The water we treatment is micro-polluted reservoir water in Shenzhen. We investigate the influence factor of microflocilation/UF Systematically, and optimize its major parameter. Then the parallel experiment was made with the conventional treatment progress and direct UF progress and microflocilation/UF progress. The economic cost of microflocilation/UF progress was inspected. The main conclusion are as bwlow:1. For microflocilation/UF progress, ferric salts were better than aluminum salts; the more dose of coagulant, the high removal rate of organic matter. However when dose increased to a certain level (6mg/L AlO2), fouling was higher instead. Adding PAM was helpless to remove organic matter, but can delay fouling. Removal rate of organic matter was better when pH<7, but fouling would be worse. the best time for coagulation was about 2 minutes.2. For the UF progress, the service pressure control below 0.12Mpa is quite reasonable. The best water flushing method is direction flushes - the recoil flushes- suitable flushes. The best flush time is 60-80s; the best recoil washes current is about 2-2.5 times of the produce water current. Cross-flow filtration hardly help to delay the fouling, on the other hand, it would increase energy and cost.3. The parallel experiment proved that the water quality of microflocculation-UF progress is the best, and water quality of direct UF progress is the worst. Turbidity and pathogens are removed efficiently by UF. The investment cost of microflocculation-UF progress is cheaper than the conventional treatment progress, its running cost is about $0.23 yuan /m3.更多还原