Você está na página 1de 23

Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production


journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro

Review

Applications of uidized bed reactors in wastewater treatment e A


review of the major design and operational parameters
Mustapha Mohammed Bello a, Abdul Aziz Abdul Raman a, *, Monash Purushothaman b
a
Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, 50603, Malaysia
b
Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Civil and Chemical Engineering (SCALE), VIT University, Vellore, 632014, Tamilnadu, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: One of the current challenges of wastewater treatment is the presence of recalcitrant pollutants which
Received 8 May 2016 are difcult to remove using conventional treatment technologies. This poses a threat to environmental
Received in revised form sustainability and hinders the efforts of many industries to adopt cleaner production through zero-
11 August 2016
discharge and subsequent wastewater reuse. Effective wastewater treatment technologies are there-
Accepted 18 September 2016
Available online 20 September 2016
fore needed to address this challenge. Accordingly, the last few years have seen intensied effort to
develop more effective wastewater treatment technologies. The use of uidized bed reactor in waste-
water treatment, particularly Advanced Oxidation Processes and biological treatment, represents a
Keywords:
Fluidized bed reactor
unique opportunity for cost-effective treatment of wastewater containing recalcitrant pollutants.
Fluidized bed Fenton Although the application of uidized bed reactor in biological wastewater treatment is well established
Fluidized bed bioreactor with many large-scale plants in existence, its application in advanced oxidation processes is mostly at
Advanced oxidation processes laboratory-scale. For proper design, upscaling and process improvement, information on the major pa-
Adsorption rameters affecting the processes is important. This paper offers an overview on the applications of u-
Operational parameters idized bed reactor in wastewater treatment, with emphasis on the important design and operational
parameters affecting its performance. The discussion covers liquid-solid and gas-liquid-solid uidized
bed reactors and their applications in advanced oxidation processes, biological as well as adsorption
processes which are effective wastewater treatment technologies. Fluidized bed reactors are excellent
contacting devices and have the potential to enhance the effectiveness and energy efciency of these
treatment processes if properly design and utilized. An energy efcient and cost-effective wastewater
treatment technology is crucial to industries adopting cleaner production. Important parameters such as
reactor geometry, aspect ratio, support materials, reactor internal, supercial uid velocity and other
operational parameters are reviewed. The review concluded with some perspectives on future research
interests.
2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1493
1.1. Fluidization and fluidized bed reactor (FBR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1494
1.2. Classifications of FBR for wastewater treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1495
1.2.1. Two-phase versus three-phase FBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1495
1.2.2. Upward-fluidization versus downward/inverse-fluidization in FBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1495
2. Applications of FBR in wastewater treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1495

Abbreviations: AOPs, Advanced oxidation processes; BPA, Bisphenol A; COD, Chemical oxygen demand; DMSO, Dimethyl sulfoxide; DTFBR, Draft tube uidized bed
reactor; FBR, Fluidized bed reactor; FB-Fenton, Fluidized bed Fenton; FB-Photocatalysis, Fluidized bed photocatalysis; FB-Adsorption, Fluidized bed adsorption; FBBR, Flu-
idized-bed bioreactor; HLR, Hydraulic retention time; IFBBR, Inverse uidized bed bioreactor; IFBR, Inverse uidized bed reactor; IFAFB, Integrated occulation-adsorption
uidized bed; LDPE, Low density polyethylene; MO, Methyl orange; OH, Hydroxyl radicals; OLR, Organic loading rate; OM, Organic matter; PC, Phthalocyanine; PP, Poly-
propylene; PZC, Point of zero charge; RB, Rhodamine B; RB13, Reactive blue 13; TOC, Total organic carbon; UV, Ultraviolet; VSS, Volatile suspended solids.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: mmbello.cda@buk.edu.ng (M.M. Bello), aziz@um.edu.my (A.A. Abdul Raman), monash.purushothaman@vit.ac.in (M. Purushothaman).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.09.148
0959-6526/ 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1493

2.1. FBR-AOPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1495


2.1.1. Fluidized bed-Fenton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1496
2.1.2. Fluidized bed-photocatalysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1497
2.2. Fluidized bed bioreactor (FBBR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1499
2.3. Fluidized bed-adsorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1501
3. Effects of design parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1501
3.1. Reactor geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503
3.1.1. Shape and cross-sectional area of the reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503
3.1.2. Aspect ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1503
3.1.3. Reactor internals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1505
3.2. Support material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1505
3.2.1. Particle size and surface property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1505
3.2.2. Particle loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1506
3.2.3. Particle density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1506
3.3. Superficial fluid velocity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1507
4. Effect of operational parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1507
4.1. pH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1507
4.2. Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1508
4.3. H2O2 concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1508
4.4. Fe2 concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1508
4.5. Photocatalyst concentration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1508
4.6. UV intensity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1509
4.7. Hydraulic retention time (HRT) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1509
4.8. Organic loading rate (OLR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1509
5. Conclusions and future perspectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1509
Acknowledgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1510
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1510

1. Introduction Fluidized bed reactor (FBR) has proven to be an effective reactor


in the applications of both AOPs (Tisa et al., 2014) and biological
There is consensus that more effective wastewater treatment processes (Zou et al., 2016). Some of the excellent features of FBR
technologies are needed for the removal of recalcitrant pollutants include low operating cost (Ahmadi et al., 2015), high resistance to
that are increasingly encountered in both domestic and industrial system upsets (Brackin et al., 1996), high mass transfer rates and
efuents. This is largely due to the need for environmental pro- uniform mixing (Andalib et al., 2014). Many researchers have
tection on one hand, and the need to have cost-effective waste- investigated the applications of FBR in wastewater treatment,
water treatment technologies on the other. Driven by these particularly AOPs and biological processes. Although the applica-
reasons, industries have intensied efforts to adopt cleaner pro- tion of FBR in AOPs is relatively new, FBR has been extensively used
duction using strategies such as zero-discharge (Tabassum et al., in biological wastewater treatment, with many large-scale uidized
2015), process modications (Zhang and Wang, 2015) and other bed bioreactors (FBBRs) in existence.
appropriate methods. Adopting zero-discharge through waste- To derive an apposite support for the review, some relevant
water reuse is attractive (Othaman et al., 2014) as it can lower studies are highlighted here. It is pertinent to note that most of the
production cost and ensure environmental sustainability. Unfor- studies on FBR have been on its applications in areas such as
tunately, conventional wastewater treatment technologies are not combustion, gasication, catalytic processes and other more
effective in degrading recalcitrant pollutants which are hydro- established processes. For example Corella et al. (2007) reviewed
phobic and generally of high molecular weight (Pouran et al., 2014). the application of FBR in biomass gasication, the so called dual
Thus, the last few years have seen increased research towards uidized bed biomass gasier. Abdelmotalib et al. (2015) reviewed
developing treatment technologies that can degrade recalcitrant the heat transfer in gas-solid uidized bed combustors, discussing
pollutants while meeting the cost-effectiveness needed by the effect of operating parameters on the heat transfer. Similarly,
industries. Singh and Kumar (2016) reviewed the current status of oxygen-
Among the possible technologies for treating recalcitrant red uidized bed combustion. Such literature emphasized gas-
wastewater, Advanced oxidation processes (AOPs) have received solid FBR, which is not applicable to wastewater treatment. The
wide attention. These technologies are based on the generation of earliest studies on FBR applications in wastewater treatment were
powerful oxidants through various processes as put forward by mainly on aerobic oxidation and denitrication. With increased
Glaze and coworkers (Glaze et al., 1987). The most common oxidant interest in anaerobic process, studies on the use of FBR in anaerobic
is the hydroxyl radical (OH), a powerful and non-selective oxidant wastewater treatment with concomitant methane generation were
with a redox potential of 2.8 eV that can effectively degrade organic reported in the early 80s. Heijnen et al. (1989) presented a state of
pollutants. Another attractive technology is biological treatment the art review on the application of anaerobic FBBRs in wastewater
which is widely used to treat both domestic and industrial waste- treatment. The review discussed the basic concept of anaerobic
waters. While interest on AOPs is due to their effectiveness in FBBR, process development and the challenges facing the tech-
degrading recalcitrant pollutants, biological processes are consid- nology. Studies reported around that time were mainly on process
ered inexpensive and eco-friendly. In either case, an effective performance. Converti et al. (1990) studied the performance of
contacting device is essential for proper application of the FBBR in anaerobic treatment of wine wastewater containing high
technology. COD and proposed a kinetic model for the process. Similarly, Borja
1494 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

et al. (1995) evaluated the kinetic reaction of an FBBR treating et al. (2014) attempted to capture the recent applications of FBR in
slaughterhouse waste with concomitant methane generation. AOPs. However, the review mainly discussed the basic concept of
Recently, Haribabu and Sivasubramanian (2016) studied the FBR-AOPs and their specic applications to different wastewater
biodegradation of domestic wastewater using FBBR and achieved a streams. Thus, a review that covers the common applications of FBR
COD removal of 96.7% under optimum condition. Wang et al. (2016) in wastewater treatment with focus on the major inuential pa-
conducted anaerobic digestion of primary sludge (PS) and thick- rameters is yet to be presented.
ened waste activated (TWAS) using FBBR and reported that the Despite the wide applications of FBR in wastewater treatment,
system performed better than conventional anaerobic processes. A its designing and operation still pose signicant challenges. The
high-rate autotrophic denitrication using FBBR was reported lack of proper understanding of the inuential parameters can lead
where complete nitrate removal was achieved at a hydraulic to improper design and poor reactor performance. Therefore, a
retention time (HRT) of 10 min (Zou et al., 2016). However, the prerequisite knowledge of FBR design and operational parameters
earliest studies on the application of FBR in AOPs were reported in is necessary for successful application of the technology. This paper
the late 90s (Chou and Huang, 1999). reviews, for the rst time, the common applications of FBR in
Currently, there is growing interest in the applications of FBR in wastewater treatment and the major parameters affecting its per-
wastewater treatment, particularly in AOPs where it has shown formance. The goal is to offer an overview of the recent applications
potential in addressing some of the drawbacks of Fenton oxidation of FBR in wastewater treatment and provide insights on the major
(Chen et al., 2016) and improving the performance of photo- design and operational parameters which are prerequisites for
catalysis (Shet and Shetty, 2016). Anand et al. (2015) investigated successful design and application of the technology.
the performance of a uidized bed solar photo Fenton for the Since uidization technology has wide applications, large vol-
treatment of hospital wastewater and achieved 98% COD removal at ume of literature on various aspects of the technology exists. Thus,
HRT of 90 min. The process achieved 92% COD removal at 60 min to keep the review within reasonable proportions, the discussion
HRT compared with 67% obtained using conventional solar photo covers only liquid-solid and gas-liquid-solid FBRs and their appli-
Fenton oxidation. Chen et al. (2015) evaluated the effect of different cations in wastewater treatment. Thus, throughout the paper, FBR
carriers and operating parameters on the degradation of ax refers to either liquid-solid or gas-liquid-solid system used for
wastewater by uidized bed Fenton process. SiO2 was reported to wastewater treatment. The review is presented as follows:
be the most appropriate carrier while Fe2, H2O2 and bed expan-
sion were signicant operating parameters. Matira et al. (2015) 1. The basic concepts of FBR and its applications in wastewater
studied the degradation of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) using a treatment are rst discussed
uidized bed Fenton process and achieved 95% DMSO degradation 2. Important parameters related to reactor design and process
and 34% TOC removal after 2 h. The process also showed better hydrodynamics are then reviewed
performance than conventional Fenton process. Dong et al. (2014) 3. The operational parameters are discussed with emphasis on FB-
conducted a visible-light photocatalytic degradation of methyl or- Fenton, FB-Photocatalysis and FBBR
ange over spherical activated carbon-supported and Er3:YAlO3- 4. Lastly, the review offered some perspectives on future research
doped TiO2 in a uidized bed reactor. The process achieved an interest
optimum color removal of 65% after 8 h, with a reaction rate con-
stant of 22.17 mgL1 h1. Mailler et al. (2016) studied the removal of
emerging pollutants from wastewater treatment plant discharges 1.1. Fluidization and uidized bed reactor (FBR)
by micro-grain activated carbon in a uidized bed as tertiary
treatment. The obvious advantages of the process was the contin- The basic concept of uidization involves passing a uid through
uous injection of fresh dose of adsorbent and non-requirement of a static bed of solid particles with a supercial velocity enough to
additional separation steps. suspend the particles and caused them to behave as though they
Recent studies have also been directed towards process inten- were uid. When the uid is introduced into the static bed at a low
sication and energy efciency through process integration. For velocity, it simply passes through the voids of the solid particles
example, Apollo and Aoyi (2016) investigated the combined and the bed remains xed. As the velocity increases, the bed ex-
anaerobic digestion and photocatalytic treatment of distillery pands until the particles become suspended when the buoyancy
efuent using FBR. Besides the improved performance of the force balances the drag and gravitational forces. At a particular
combined process, the methane generation could provide the velocity, the minimum uidization velocity (Umf), the pressure drop
necessary power to drive the ultraviolet (UV) lamp. Studies have across the bed equals the weight of the particles and the bed be-
also been reported on the application of an integrated anaerobic comes completely suspended (Khan et al., 2014). Fluidization im-
uidized bed membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment (Kim pacts excellent features onto the system such as excellent particle
et al., 2016). The integrated process results in low energy con- mixing, uniform temperature distribution and high mass transfer
sumption and reduces membrane fouling. Li et al. (2014) utilized a rate (Tisa et al., 2014). Depending on the uidization velocity,
uidized bed membrane bioelectrochemical reactor as an energy- various ow regimes such as particulate/smooth uidization,
efcient wastewater treatment process. Besides achieving more bubbling uidization, slugging uidization, turbulent uidization,
than 90% COD and 80% suspended solids removals, the overall en- and pneumatic conveying regimes can be obtained (Yang, 2003).
ergy balance of the process was theoretically neutral. The principle of uidization has been extensively utilized, partic-
Some reviews have also been presented on FBR applications in ularly in chemical processes where efcient mixing and mass/heat
wastewater treatment. Burghate and Ingole (2013) presented an transfer are essential.
overview of FBBR, discussing the basic concepts, advantages and FBR is a contacting device that uses the principle of uidization
applications in both aerobic and anaerobic treatments. Although in its operation. It is similar to the commonly used packed bed
the review had highlighted the need for standardizing the design reactors in many aspects, except that the packing material is
procedure of FBBR, the discussion on the design parameters was expanded by the upward or downward movement of the uid
limited. In their review for anaerobic biolm reactors for the (Burghate and Ingole, 2013). The degree of the bed expansion de-
treatment of dairy industry wastewater, Karadag et al. (2015) dis- pends on the particle size and density, the up-ow velocity of the
cussed the application of FBBR and highlighted its advantages. Tisa uid and its viscosity. FBR involves multiphase ow system (solid-
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1495

gas, solid-liquid, or solid-liquid-gas) which may include mo- The solid phase could be a variety of support materials or catalysts
mentum exchange, heat exchange and mass transfer. Because of its while the liquid phase is always the wastewater. The three-phase
excellent features, FBR is one of the most important reactor systems system involves gas-liquid-solid process where aeration or
used in chemical and biotechnology applications (Si et al., 2011). oxygenation is added to a typical liquid-solid FBR. In a two-phase
Initially, applications of FBR had been limited to catalytic cracking, FBR, uidization is provided by the ow of wastewater through
combustion, coating, granulation, drying and other chemical ap- the catalyst or biomass bed. In a three-phase system, uidization is
plications. However, FBR was later deployed for wastewater provided by the concurrent or countercurrent ow of the liquid and
treatments. gas through the solid bed. The three-phase system was developed
Fig. 1 shows the basic concept of FBR in wastewater treatment. to improve, inter alia, the oxygen limitation encountered in two-
The wastewater is introduced into the bed of the reactor at a phase FBRs (Choi et al., 2000). However, the three-phase system
particular supercial velocity enough to suspend the support me- has some challenges such as particle elutriation with high gas ow
dia. The purpose of the distributor (spager, if air) is to uniformly rate and increased agitation which may cause reactor failure.
distribute the efuent across the reactor bed. Depending on the Although two phase systems are simpler in design and easier to
system design, recycling of the efuent is usually employed. The control, the three-phase systems have seen wider applications (Han
uidized media can be an immobilized catalyst in AOPs or micro- et al., 2003).
organisms in biological treatment.
1.2.2. Upward-uidization versus downward/inverse-uidization in
1.2. Classications of FBR for wastewater treatment FBR
FBR can also be classied based on the direction of the uid ow.
In chemical industries, various types of FBRs such as bubbling Conventional FBR uses solid particles that are denser than the uid
uidized bed, circulating uidized bed, turbulent uidized bed, phase and uidization is achieved by the upward uid ow from
oating uidized bed, twin uidized bed and many other classi- the bottom of the reactor. However, inverse uidized bed reactor
cations based on ow regime and reactor design are used (IFBR) was later introduced to overcome some challenges intrinsic
(Jordening and Buchholz, 1999). However, most of these have been to the conventional FBR, such as uncontrolled growth of biomass
developed for specic chemical applications, often involving very which can affect the bioparticles hydrodynamics (Lakshmi et al.,
high supercial uid velocities typically not needed in wastewater 2000). In IFBR, the density of the solid particles is lower than the
treatment. Thus, this review departs from these conventional uid phase and uidization is achieved by the downward uid ow
classications and discusses FBR in a way that is more applicable to opposite to the net buoyancy of the particles (Nikolov et al., 2000).
wastewater treatment (Fig. 2). The IFBR is argued to possess superior hydrodynamic characteris-
tics than conventional FBR. However, the downside of IFBR is that it
usually requires higher supercial uid velocity (Bufere et al.,
1.2.1. Two-phase versus three-phase FBR
1998).
Two-phase FBR involves a liquid-solid or gas-solid process
where uidization is brought about by the liquid or gas. In waste-
2. Applications of FBR in wastewater treatment
water treatment, however, only liquid-solid system is applicable.

Initially developed for gas generation by Fritz Winkler in 1920s,


FBR has found various applications in chemical and biochemical
industries such as coal gasication, metal rening, catalytic
cracking, powder technology, food processing and other numerous
applications (Tavoulareas, 1991). However, it was only in the early
70s that FBR was investigated as a possible reactor for biological
wastewater treatment. Subsequent years saw a lot of progress, and
by 1984, full-scale FBBRs were developed and installed (Heijnen
et al., 1989). The application of FBR in AOPs is relatively new,
with the earliest literature appearing in the late 90s. The works of
Diz and Novak (1998) and Chou and Huang (1999) may have been
the earliest reported studies on the application of FBR in AOPs.
FBR has attracted interest as it has shown more effectiveness in
wastewater treatment compared to other contacting devices such
as xed-bed column and activated sludge (Burghate and Ingole,
2013). Excellent mixing, high mass transfer rates, and low sludge
production are some of the features that make FBR an attractive
technology (Andalib et al., 2014). Since the solid particles are
vigorously agitated by the uid passing through the bed, an
excellent mixing and little or no temperature gradient is obtained
(Dora et al., 2013). Since FBR is commonly used in AOPs, biological
treatment and adsorption, its applications are discussed under
these three areas (Fig. 3).

2.1. FBR-AOPs

The concept of AOPs was put forward by Glaze and coworkers as


processes of generating reactive OH radicals with a redox potential
of 2.8 eV that are capable of degrading organic pollutants (Glaze
Fig. 1. Basic concept of FBR in wastewater treatment application. et al., 1987). The OH radicals are generated in situ through either
1496 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Classificaon of
FBR for
wastewater
treatment

Based on
Based on reactant
direcon of
phase
fluidizaon

Upflow
Downflow
2-Phase FBR 3-Phase FBR (convenonal)
(inverse) FBR
FBR

Fig. 2. Classication of FBR applicable to wastewater treatment.

one or a combination of chemical oxidations by using H2O2, ozone, are uidized bed Fenton (FB-Fenton) and uidized bed photo-
and radiation assisted sources such as ultraviolet (Soon and catalysis (FB-Photocatalysis).
Hameed, 2011). Typical AOPs include Fenton and Fenton-like pro-
cesses, photocatalysis, electrochemical oxidation, Ozonation, and
ultrasound cavitation. AOPs are very effective in degrading recal-
citrant pollutants and have many advantages over conventional 2.1.1. Fluidized bed-Fenton
wastewater treatment methods. Unlike conventional treatments Fenton oxidation is considered one of the most effective AOPs
which either separate the pollutants from the wastewater stream because of its rapid formation of OH in acidic medium (Asghar
or convert them to some intermediate compounds, AOPs are et al., 2015). The process consists of a homogeneous catalytic re-
capable of mineralizing organic pollutants to H2O and CO2 (Ahmadi action between ferrous iron (Fe2) and hydrogen peroxide (H2O2)
et al., 2015). This made AOPs very attractive, especially in the to produce OH that can oxidized organic pollutants as shown in
treatment of recalcitrant and persistent organic pollutants that Equations (1)e(3) (Alalm et al., 2015). The decomposition of the
have deed the conventional treatment technologies. pollutants using Fenton process occurs in two stages (Lu et al.,
Since a number of chemical reactions are necessary for the 1999). The rst stage is the rapid reaction of Fe2 and H2O2
generation of OH, then the choice of a reactor is very important. which produces large amount of OH that can rapidly oxidized the
Because of the excellent features of FBR, many researchers have pollutants. The second stage involves a reaction between Fe3 and
investigated its potential application in AOPs. Combining FBR H2O2 which produces less OH and decomposes the pollutant rather
technology with AOPs can reduce sludge production (Briones et al., less rapidly. This stage produces hydroperoxyl radicals, which have
2012), increase catalyst reusability (Tisa et al., 2014) and improve lower oxidative power.
process performance. The most commonly investigated FBR-AOPs
H2O2 Fe2 / Fe3 OH OH (1)

Application of FBR in
Wastewater Treatment

Advanced
Biological Adsorption
Oxidation
Processes
Processes

FB- FB-
FB-Fenton FBBR Adsorption
Photocatalysis

Fig. 3. Applications of FBR in wastewater treatment.


M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1497

OH Organic / Products (2) degradation.


However, Liu et al. (2014) investigated the treatment of real
OH Fe2 / Fe3 OH (3) wastewater using FB-Fenton. Recalcitrant silicone wastewater was
treated using a 3.92 L reactor with different carrier materials. The
When Fe2 and/or Fe3 are used as the active sites, the process is process achieved 95% COD and 85% TOC removals at HRT of 60 min.
referred to as homogenous Fenton and depends on the chemical Compared to the traditional Fenton process, the COD and TOC
interactions between the catalysts. Although the homogeneous removal rates were found to increase by 20% and 15% respectively.
Fenton process is widely employed because of its effectiveness and Other reported studies are quite similar to the discussed literature.
ease of operation (Bellotindos et al., 2014), it has inherent disad- Although most of the studies have been on lab-scale, it can be seen
vantages of excessive sludge production (Anotai et al., 2012a) and that combining FBR with Fenton process enhances process perfor-
limited range of operational pH (Rodrguez et al., 2016). Thus, mance, with the potential to overcome some of the drawbacks of
heterogeneous Fenton oxidation was developed to overcome some conventional Fenton oxidation.
of these limitations (Buthiyappan et al., 2016). In heterogeneous
Fenton oxidation, the reaction occurs between H2O2 and iron ions 2.1.2. Fluidized bed-photocatalysis
existing in multiple forms such as [Fe(OH)2] [Fe(H2O)]2, Fe2O3, a- Photocatalytic oxidation is another AOP where the application
FeOOH (Soon and Hameed, 2011) or other transition metal- of FBR has attracted recent interests. In Photocatalysis, a semi-
substituted oxides (Pouran et al., 2014). In addition to the chemi- conductor metal oxide is used as a photocatalyst to oxide organic
cal changes, physical adsorption occurs at the surface of the solid pollutants to carbon dioxide and water (Rosa et al., 2015). The
catalyst which reduces sludge generation. However, the heteroge- process involves illuminating metal oxide in aqueous suspension
neous process is reportedly less effective than homogeneous Fen- with irradiation having a photon energy (hv) equal to or greater
ton oxidation due to mass-transfer limitation. than the band gap energy of the metal. This generates valence band
To overcome some of the limitations of Fenton oxidation, re- holes and conduction band electrons which can react with water
searchers have recently explored the advantages of FBR as a and the hydroxyl ion to generate OH (Pelaez et al., 2010). Two
possible solution. FBR can combine the effectiveness of homoge- broad light spectrum, UV (200e400 nm) and visible light
neous Fenton and the sludge reduction of heterogeneous Fenton. (400e700 nm), are commonly used to generate the light photon
The solid materials in the reactor provide surfaces for iron crys- (Cheng et al., 2016). Although metal oxides such ZnO, NiO, ZnS,
tallization which reduces the sludge generation and increases Fe2O3 can be used, TiO2 is the most widely used photocatalyst due
catalyst reusability (Anotai et al., 2009). A possible reaction to its strong photo-activity, high stability, non-toxicity and com-
mechanism that is thought to occur in FB-Fenton has been pro- mercial availability (Ananpattarachai and Kajitvichyanukul, 2016).
posed by Chou and Huang (1999). Furthermore, because of the Once the surface of the TiO2 is photo-activated, OH will be
excellent features of FBR, the performance of FB-Fenton has been generated and subsequently oxidized organic pollutants (Chong
shown to be superior to that of conventional Fenton process (Liu et al., 2015). Details of the fundamentals of photocatalysis have
et al., 2014). Lu and coworkers have conducted several works on been well documented (Meng et al., 2010).
the application of FB-Fenton in degrading various recalcitrant Although powder photocatalyst has large specic surface area
pollutants such as textile wastewater (Su et al., 2011a, 2011b), which enhances mass transfer during wastewater treatment, it is
dimethyl sulfoxide (Bellotindos et al., 2014), acetaminophen (Luna necessary to have a downstream separation stage which increases
et al., 2013), monoethanolamine (Su et al., 2013) and phenol the cost of treatment (Pozzo et al., 2000). To overcome this, the
(Muangthai et al., 2010). powder is usually impregnated onto the surface of other com-
Table 1 summarizes experimental conditions and results from pounds such as Al2O3, SiO2 or perlite which have larger surface
previous studies on FB-Fenton. The reported studies have largely areas. This solves some of the challenges of using powder catalyst,
considered synthetic wastewaters under laboratory-scale in- including the need for downstream separation and possible parti-
vestigations. The FBRs usually consist of a cylindrical glass column cles elutriation. Because of the excellent features of FBR, re-
with working volumes ranging between 1 and 2 L. The support searchers have investigated its application in photocatalytic
materials commonly used include SiO2, Al2O3, and waste Iron oxide oxidation. It is believed that besides its excellent mixing and high
(BT4). Anand et al. (2015) studied the performance of a uidized mass transfer, FBR can also enhance light penetration and exposure
bed solar Fenton reactor in the removal of COD from hospital of the interior of the reaction matrix (Nam et al., 2002).
wastewater. The reactor was a cylindrical vessel of 1.5 L with silica Table 2 gives a summary of reported studies on FB-Photo-
granules as carriers. Maximum COD removal of 98% was obtained at catalysis which have largely been on laboratory-scale using syn-
90 min HRT. The uidized bed solar Fenton oxidation performed thetic wastewaters. The FBRs used are mostly three-phase systems
better than conventional solar Fenton oxidation. where air is supplied to increase the rate of the photocatalytic
Li et al. (2015) studied the oxidation of bisphenol A by Photo- degradation. Most of the studies have reported an improvement in
Fenton-like process using a waste iron oxide in a three-phase process performance with the application of FBR. This is largely due
FBR. The system consists of a Pyrex tube with an integrated 15 W to the improved light penetration and possible adsorption of pol-
UV lamp which removed 90% TOC after 180 min. The use of waste lutants onto the support materials.
iron oxide, a by-product of tannery wastewater treatment, is Dong et al. (2014) studied the visible-light photocatalytic
attractive as it could increase the cost-effectiveness of the process. degradation of Methyl Orange (MO) over AC-supported and
The study of Bellotindos et al. (2014) considered the degradation of Er3:YAlO3-doped TiO2 using FBR. Maximum decolorisation of
a synthetic pollutant, Dimethyl Sulfoxide (DMSO), using FBR- 65.3% was achieved after 8 h. The performance of the system was
Fenton process with SiO2 as carriers. Up to 98% DMSO degrada- found to be higher under the UV irradiation. Similarly, Shet and
tion was achieved under optimum conditions, with the FB-Fenton Shetty (2016) compared the performance of a photocatalytic u-
process showing superior performance than conventional Fenton idized bed degradation of phenol using Ag@TiO2 under UV and
process. Similarly, Cheng et al. (2014) studied the degradation of solar irradiations. Around 76% degradation was achieved using UV
Phthalocyanine (PC) dyes by photo-assisted Fenton process in an while only 40% was achieved under solar irradiation. The high band
up-ow FBR. The system consists of a 1.45 L ber glass plastic of TiO2 is known to prevent it from utilizing visible irradiation and
surrounded by 6 UV germicidal lamp and achieved 95% PC hence its lower performance compared to UV irradiation.
1498 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Table 1
Applications of FB-Fenton in wastewater treatment.

Target pollutant Reactor and support material Operational conditions Performance Reference
properties

DMSO H: 140 cm pH: 3 DMSO: 95.22 % (Chen et al., 2016)


D: 5.2 cm Fe2: 5 mM COD: 34.38 %
Solid: SiO2 H2O2: 32.5 mM
Dp: 0.42-0.5 mm HRT: 240 min
PL: 68.97 g/L
Hospital wastewater: COD V: 1.5 L pH: 3 COD: 98 % (Anand et al., 2015)
D: 0.053 mm Fe2: 5 mM
H: 1330 mm H2O2: 50 mM
Solid: SiO2 HRT: 90 min
Dp: 0.42-0.59 mm Q: :12 L/min
PL: 40 g/L
Orange G Coaxial cylinder pH: 3 TOC: 78.9 % (Wang et al., 2015)
V: 1.5 L T: 25  C Color: 92 %
D: 35 mm H2O2: 25 mg/L
H: 300 mm UV: 15 W, 365 nm
Solid: iron oxide (BT4)
Dp: 0.42-0.59 mm
PL: 6 g/L
BPA Cylindrical pH: 3 TOC: 90 % (Li et al., 2015)
V: 1.5 L H2O2: 0.7 mmol/L
Solid: Iron oxide (BT4) HRT: 180 min
UV: 15 W, 365 nm
DMSO Cylindrical glass pH: 3 DMSO: 98 % (Bellotindos et al., 2014)
V: 1.3 L Fe2: 5 mM
D: 5.23 cm H2O2: 60 mM
H: 133 cm HRT: 2 h
Solid: SiO2
Phthalocyanine (PC) Cylindrical Fiber glass pH: 2 e 4 PC: 95 % (Cheng et al., 2014)
H: 400 mm UV light: 254 nm
D: 25 mm
Solid: Fe (II)/g-Al2O2
PL: 60 g/L
Organic silicone wastewater Cylindrical Plexiglass pH: 3.5 COD: 95 % (Liu et al., 2014)
V: 3.92 L HRT: 60 min TOC: 85 %
D: 8 cm H2O2/ Fe2 13.6:1
H: 78 cm Q: 3 mL/h
Solid: quartz / brick/GAC
Dp: 0.5 e 0.8 mm
Carrier lling rate: 35 %
Acetaminophen (ACT) Cylindrical glass reactor pH: 3 ACT: 99.6 % (Luna et al., 2013)
V: 1.45 L Fe2: 0.05e0.1 mM
Solid: SiO2 H2O2: 5e25 mM
Dp: 0.5 mm, 2 & 4 mm
2,2,3,3-tetrauoro-1-propanol (TFP) Cylindrical glass H2O2: 10 mM TFP: 99.65 % (Shih et al., 2013)
V: 1.5 L UV: 254 nm lamp Fluoride: 99 %
D: 7.5 cm
H: 50 cm
Solid: BT5 iron oxide
DP: 0.25e0.5 mm
MEA and phosphate Cylindrical vessel pH: 3 MEA: 76 % (Su et al., 2013)
V: 1.45 L H2O2: 50 mM Phosphate: 45 %
Solid: SiO2 MEA/Fe2: 3 mM
Dp: 0.24e0.5 mm
PL: 100 g/L
50 % bed expansion
TFT-LCD wastewater: MEA Cylindrical glass pH: 3 MEA 98.9 % (Anotai et al., 2012a)
V: 1.45 L Fe2: 3 mM COD: 64.7 %
Solid: SiO2 H2O2: 50 mM Iron: 67.4 %
DP: 0.42 e 0.5 mm
PL:: 100 g
O-toluidine Cylindrical glass pH: 2e4 O-toluidine: 64.2 % (Anotai et al., 2012b)
V: 1.35 L Fe2: 0.1e1.0 mM COD: 36.7 %
D:5.23 cm H2O2: 1e17 mM Iron: 100 %
H:133 cm
Solid: SiO2
DP: 0.42e0.59 mm
PL: 50e300 g
Pharmaceutical wastewater: acetaminophen Cylindrical glass pH: 3.22 ACT 97.8 % (Briones et al., 2012)
(ACT) V: 1.45 L Fe2: 1e5 mM
Solid: SiO2 H2O2: 100 mM
Dp: 0.5 mm
PL: 100 g/L
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1499

Table 1 (continued )

Target pollutant Reactor and support material Operational conditions Performance Reference
properties

Dyes: RB5, RO16, RB2 Cylindrical glass pH: 3.22 RB 5 and RO16: 99 (Su et al., 2011a)
V: 1.35 L Fe2: 0.06 mM %
D: 5.23 cm H2O2: 19.87 mM RB2: 96 %
H: 133 cm COD: 34e 49 %
Solid: SiO2 and Al2O3
PL: 74.07 g/L
50 % bed expansion
Textile wastewater Cylindrical glass pH: 2e5 COD: 86.7 % (Su et al., 2011b)
V: 1.35 L [COD]: [Fe2]: [H2O2] Color: 97.9 %
D: 5.23 cm 1:0.95:7.94
H: 133 cm
Solid: SiO2
PL: 74.07 g/L
50 % bed expansion
Aniline Cylindrical glass pH: 3 Aniline: 96 % (Anotai et al., 2010)
V: 1.35 L Fe2: 0.00107 mM
D: 5.2 cm H2O2: 58 mM
H: 133 cm HRT: 60 min
Solid: SiO2
DP: 0.42 e 0.84 mm
Solids: glass beads 2 & 4 mm
2, 6, Dimethylaniline Cylindrical glass pH: 3 100% (Ratanatamskul et al.,
V: 1.35L H2O2: 2.5 mM 2010)
Solid: Al2O3 Fe2:10 mM
DP: 2.5 mm
2,4-dichlorophenol Cylindrical glass pH: 3 2,4-DCP: 99 % (Muangthai et al., 2010)
V: 1.35 L H2O2: 10 mM COD: 55 %
Solid: SiO2 Fe2:0.25 mM Iron: 14 %
DP: 0.84-2.00 mm
PL: 100 g/L
Nitrobenzene and Iron removal Cylindrical glass pH: 2.8 0.2 Nitrobenzene: 90 % (Anotai et al., 2009)
V: 1.35 L H2O2: 50 mM Iron: 30 e 65 %
Solid: Al2O3 Fe2: 5 mM
DP: 0.8 -2.0 mm
Phenol Cylindrical Pyrex tube pH: 2.8 0.2 TOC: 98 % (Huang and Huang, 2009)
V: 150 m L H2O2: 500 mg/L
D: 2.0 cm T: 30  C
Solid: SiO2-immobilized iron oxide Q: 1.5 L/min
DP: 0.89 mm
Benzoic Acid (BA) D: 2 cm pH: 2.85e3.74 BA: 95 % (Chou and Huang, 1999)
H: 100 cm UL: 0.011 m/s Iron: 90 %
Solid: g-FeOOH TOC: 59 %
DP: 0.564 mm
Density: 1.11 g/cm3
PL: 80 g
50 % bed expansion

V: Reactor volume; D: reactor diameter; H: reactor height; DP: diameter of support media: BH: Initial static bed height; Q: liquid ow rate; Qa: air ow rate: HRT: Hydraulic
Retention Time; T: Temperature; Umf: Minimum supercial velocity; UL: supercial Liquid velocity; Ug: supercial gas velocity; PL: Solid particle loading; BPA: Bisphenol A;
DMSO: Dimethyl Sulfoxide; TFT-LCD: Thin lm transistor liquid crystal display; MEA: Monoethanolamine.

Mungmart et al. (2011) investigated the degradation of phenol 2.2. Fluidized bed bioreactor (FBBR)
in a three-phase FBR using three different metal oxides. The per-
formances of reactors utilizing O3, TiO2 deposited on silica beads, FBBR has been widely used for aerobic and anaerobic waste-
metal catalyst (Ni or Co) impregnated on mesoporous carbon water treatments. The system consists of microorganisms-coated
beads, or O3 in combination with each catalyst were compared. The particles in wastewater which are sufciently uidized to keep
reactor with Co impregnated on mesoporous carbon beads gave the the phases thoroughly mixed (Vinod and Reddy, 2005). The support
highest phenol removal while the reactor with only Ozone gave the materials of FBBR normally have extremely large specic surfaces
lowest phenol removal. The carbon beads provided adsorption sites and achieve treatment levels in shorter time than conventional
for the phenol, thereby increasing the removal rate. Kanki et al. biological treatment processes (Alfredo et al., 2013). This is because
(2005) studied the degradation of phenol and bisphenol A in a the uidization maximizes surface contact between microorgan-
uidized bed photocatalytic reactor using TiO2-coated ceramic isms and the pollutants. It has been argued that FBBR offers the
particles. Two FBRs, one with an internal UV lamp (254 nm, 9 W) stability and ease of operation of a trickling lter and the high ef-
and the other with an outside black lamp (365 nm, 15 W) were ciency of activated sludge process (Burghate and Ingole, 2013). For
compared. The reactor with the internal UV lamp degraded the example, it was reported that FBBR operated at lower HRT and gave
pollutant 4 times faster than the other reactor. Clearly, the intensity better performance than a stirred tank reactor in the degradation of
and location of the lamp have an effect on the reactor performance. phenol (Gonzalez et al., 2001). Fluidization provides a favorable
gas-liquid mass transfer, which promotes good pollutant-biomass
contact and suitable oxygen transfer rate (Pen and Jose, 2008).
1500 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Table 2
Applications of FB-Photocatalysis in wastewater treatment.

Target pollutant Rector and support material properties Operational conditions Performance Reference

Phenol Cylindrical column pH: 3 Phenol: 84 % (Shet and shetty, 2016)


H: 52 cm HRT 420 min
D: 1.6 cm Q: 140 mL/min
Catalyst: Ag/TiO2 Qa: 1.5 L/min
Loading: 0.25 e 0.75 g UV lamps:18 W
Solid: Glass beads
MO Annulus reactor LED: 36 W, 455 e 533 nm MO: 65.3% (Dong et al., 2014)
D: 60 mm T: 20  C
H: 1 mm
Support: Glass beads
BH: 33 mm
Phenol Cylindrical quartz tube Qa: 1 L/min Phenol: 100 % (Mungmart et al., 2011)
V: 235 ml HRT: 10 min
D:31.6 mm UV: 15-W, 254 nm
H: 300 mm
Catalyst: TiO2/Co/Ni
Loading: 2.5 e 20 g
Phenol Quartz glass column pH: 7 Phenol: 99 % (Zulfakar et al., 2011)
H: 600 mm T: 30  C
D: 60 mm loading: 0.33 g/L
Catalyst: TiO2 UV: 20 W, 254 nm
Support: quartz sand
Sodium lauryl sulfate(SLS) Stainless steel reactor with draft tube Qa: 0.2 cm/s SLS: 100 % (Nam et al., 2009)
V: 7 L 30 W UV-A (365 nm) Black Light Blue Lamp
D: 0.1 m 65 W UV-C (254 nm) Germicidal Lamp
H: 1.0 m
Catalyst: immobilized TiO2
Particle size: 130 mm
loading: 2.448 g/L
Support: SiO2
Congo Red (CR) Stainless steel column with conical bottom pH: 7 COD: 80 % (Chong et al., 2009)
catalyst: Titania/Kaolinite loading: 6 g/dm3 Qa: 0.5 dm3/min Decolorisation: 95.5 %
11 W UV light (256 nm)
Acid dye Acrylic cylindrical column Q: 3 L/min Acid dye: 60 % (Wang et al., 2009)
H: 210 mm HRT: 4 h
D: 90 mm visible light lamp (150 W)
Catalyst: ZnFe2/TiO2-GAC
Loading: 20 e 40 g
Phenol and Bisphenol A Rectangular column Air-ow rate: 0.5 dm3 Phenol/BPA: 100 % (Kanki et al., 2005)
V: 4 dm3 HRT: 200 min
H: 20 cm
UV lamps (9 W, 254 nm)
Catalyst: Immobilized TiO2
Dp: 0.7 mm
Rhodamine B Rectangular acrylic vessel Qa: 7.0 L/min RB: 100 % (Na et al., 2005)
V: 2.8 8-W Germicidal lamps
H: 250 mm
Catalyst: TiO2
Loading: 33.8 g/
Microcystin-LR (MLR) Cylindrical column Q: 150 e 200 cm3/s MLR: 95 % (Lee et al., 2004)
D: 68 cm UV: 4 W, 370 nm
H: 65 cm Catalyst T: 20  C
: TiO2-coated GAC
BH: 2.5 cm
Rhodamine B V: 24 L Catalyst Qa: 1 L/min 87 % degradation (Na et al., 2004)
: TiO2-coated ceramic UV: 20 W
DP: 1.5 mm HRT: 180 min
Loading: 25 g/L
Dyes: Crystal violet & Azure B Cylindrical glass vessel Qa: 2 L/min Decolorisation: 77-100 % (Couto et al., 2002)
D: 45 mm UV: 125 W, 650 nm TOC: 52-90 %
H: 250 mm Catalyst T: 25  C
: ZnO immobilized in alginate gel beads
DP: 2.5 e 3.0 mm
Loading: 20 g
TCE Annular quartz glass tube reactor HRT: 10 min TCE: 80 % (Lim and Kim, 2002)
D: 55 mm Ug: 5.1 cm/s
H: 600 mm 6 white lamps (8 W, 365 nm)
Catalyst: immobilized TiO2 6 Germicidal lamps (8 W 254 nm)
Support: Silica gel
DP: 220-417 mm
MO Acrylic pipe with draft tube pH: 3 MO: 100 % (Nam et al., 2002)
V: 2.5 L 15 W UV-lamp
D: 10 cm Qa: 1.5 L/min
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1501

Table 2 (continued )

Target pollutant Rector and support material properties Operational conditions Performance Reference

H: 45 cm
Catalyst: Degussa P-25
Particle size: 21 nm
Loading: 0.2 g/L

V: Reactor volume; D: reactor diameter; H: reactor height; DP: diameter of support media: BH: Initial static bed height; Q: liquid ow rate; Qa: air ow rate: HRT: Hydraulic
Retention Time; T: Temperature; Umf: Minimum supercial velocity; UL: Liquid supercial velocity; Ug: Gas supercial velocity; MO: Methyl Orange; TCE: Trichloroethylene.

Obviously uidization will do away with preferential ow paths, problems encountered in xed-bed column adsorption such as
bed clogging and other problems encountered in xed-bed reactors clogging, temperature gradient, channeling and dead zones are
(Jaafari et al., 2014). eliminated. Table 4 shows reported studies on adsorption using
Although FBBR is a well-established technology with full-scale FBR.
plants in existence, lab-scale studies are still being conducted to- Dora et al. (2013) investigated the adsorption of Arsenic (III)
wards process improvement, application of new materials and using cashew nut shell in a three-phase FBR and reported a removal
integration with other technologies. For example, Logan and co- efciency of 92.55% under optimum condition. The adsorption was
workers have recently combined FBBR with membrane bioreactor found to be affected by the gas and liquid velocities, particle size
as a possible solution to membrane fouling (Kim et al., 2011, 2016). and initial static bed height. Kulkarni et al. (2013) studied the
Improved treatment efciency, stable mixed liquor suspended solid adsorption of phenol from wastewater in an FBR using coconut
and reduced transmembrane pressure are obtained when FBBR is shell activated carbon. The adsorption was found to depend on the
combined with membrane bioreactor (Shin et al., 2014). initial phenol concentration, owrate and bed particle size.
Table 3 gives a summary of some reported studies on waste- Jovanovic et al. (2014) studied the hydrodynamics and sorption
water treatment using FBBR. Both two- phase and three-phase studies for the removal of Cu (II) from aqueous solution using FBR
processes have been used, with some researchers exploring the packed with Zeolite A beads. The process was optimized, with a
advantages of an inverse uidized bed bioreactor (IFBBR). Haribabu maximum sorption capacity of 23.3 mg/g.
and Sivasubramanian (2016) studied the biodegradation of organic Zhou et al. (2015) developed an integrated occulation-
matter in domestic wastewater using IFBBR and achieved a adsorption uidized bed (IFAFB) system for the removal of Kaolin
maximum COD removal of 96.7%. A three-phase FBR with a working clay and phenol from synthetic wastewater. The adsorption ca-
volume of 0.0125 m3 and employing low density biocarries was pacities of the uidized regime were found to be 8.77 and
used. The low density media had a positive effect on the minimum 24.70 mg/g greater than those of the xed bed regime. At shorter
uidization velocity and increased the efciency of the process. HRT (below 50 min), however, the adsorption was higher in the
Lin et al. (2010) investigated the biodegradation of RB13 in a xed bed regime. At longer HRT and higher supercial velocities,
two-stage anaerobic/aerobic FBBR and achieved color and COD the adsorption performance of the FBR was superior. Under uid-
removal efciencies of 86.9% and 90.4% respectively. Rajasimman ization, the solution forms micro-vortices and create a uniform
and Karthikeyan (2007) investigated the effect of HRT on the aer- condition around the adsorbent, resulting in effective utilization of
obic digestion of starch wastewater using FBBR with low density the adsorbent. Under xed bed mode, however, there are discrep-
biomass support. The COD removal increased with increase in HRT ancies between the two sides of the particles. In a similar study,
for all initial substrate concentration, with maximum removal Wang et al. (2011) reported that the adsorption capacity of xed
(95.6%) at 40 h HRT. bed was higher than that of an inverse uidized bed in their study
Cuenca et al. (2006) studied the anaerobic biodegradation of for aqueous phase adsorption of toluene using hydrophobic aero-
diesel fuel-contaminated wastewater using FBBR and reported that gels. The breakthrough time was found to be shorter in the inverse
both diesel and COD removal efciencies increased with increased FBR than packed bed. This is perhaps because of the short HRT
in HRT for all the conditions investigated. Mustafa et al. (2014) (50 min) where the packed bed normally exhibits a better perfor-
studied the treatment of municipal wastewater sludge using mance. The use of the inverse FBR might have equally contributed
anaerobic FBBR and reported that the treatment performance to the lower performance of the process.
decreased with increased in organic loading rate (OLR). A volatile
suspended solids (VSS) removal efciencies of 88%, 79% and 70% 3. Effects of design parameters
were achieved at OLRs of 4.2, 9.5 and 19 kg COD/m3-d respectively.
A COD removal efciency of 68% was obtained at OLR of 19 kg COD/ Successful application of FBR requires knowledge of the
m3-d. Borja et al. (2004) carried out mesophilic anaerobic digestion important design parameters. However, despite the extensive ap-
of wastewater from the production of protein isolates from plications of FBR, uidization is still an empirical science (Yang,
chickpea our using FBBR and reported that the percentage COD 2003) and a single systematic design approach is yet to emerge.
removal decreased with increase in OLR. Instead, the design is largely application-specic and relies on
empirical correlations (Onysko et al., 2002) and experience of the
2.3. Fluidized bed-adsorption designer (Zhang et al., 2012). For example, Deng et al. (2016)
developed an integrated methodology for designing FBBR for the
Adsorption is an effective and economical method for the treatment of dyeing efuents. The method was based on theories,
removal of recalcitrant pollutants from wastewater, especially experiments and knowledge base. The absence of a robust meth-
when low-cost adsorbent such as grape bagasse (Demiral and odology and the reliance on heuristics may lead to various prob-
Gngo r, 2016) and cow bone (Cechinel et al., 2014) are utilized. lems such as insufcient or over-uidization, poor treatment
Although treatability studies on adsorption are usually conducted performance and reactor failure. Although attempts have been
in batch (Abidi et al., 2015) or xed-bed column rectors (Bello et al., made to understand the design parameters, large-scale applica-
2013), studies have also been reported on the use of FBR for tions of FBR still pose signicant challenge (Reinhold et al., 1996).
adsorption process. When FBR is used in adsorption, operational Despite the wide applications of FBR in wastewater treatment,
1502 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Table 3
Applications of FBBR in wastewater treatment.

Target pollutant Reactor and support material Operational conditions Performance Reference
properties

PS & TWAS Plexiglass rectangular column T: 37  C PS, COD: 62%, VSS: 63% (Wang et al., 2016)
V: 16 L HRT: 2.2 e 4 d TWAS, COD: 56%, VSS: 50%
H: 3.6 m OLR: 12 -18kg COD/m3 d
Support: HDPE
DP: 600e850 mm
Density: 1554 kg/m3
Domestic wastewater V: 0.0125 m3 HRT: 6.25 e 24 h COD: 96.7 % (Haribabu and Sivasubramanian,
D: 0.1 m Q: 10 e 80 mL/min 2016)
H: 1.8 m Ug:0.0016 - 0.00318 m/s
Support: LDPE
Density: 870 kg/m3
BH: 0.6 e 1.0 m
Autotrophic denitrication Glass column pH: 5.8 N: 100 % (Zou et al., 2016)
V: 580 ml T: 20 e 30  C
Support: GAC Q: 800 mL/min,
DP: 0.5 -1 mm HRT: 10 min
OLR: 500 mg/L h
Bed expansion: 25 %
Aquaculture Efuent: Nitrate removal V: 2.85 L Phase I: HRT: 3.2- N: 49 % (Christianson et al., 2015)
D: 0.31 m 3.3 min,
H: 3.9 m Flowrate: 63-65 L/min
BH: 0.9 m Phase II: HRT: 3.2-
Support: Sulfur biolters 4.8 min
DP: 0.3 mm Flowrate: 67-43 L/min
13 e 42% bed expansion
Aquaculture efuent: denitrication V: 285 L HLR: 188 L/min m2 N: 26.9 % (Tsukuda et al., 2015)
D: 0.31 m HRT: 15 min
H: 3.9 m Q: 13.7 L/min
Support: sand biolters 50 % bed expansion
DP: 0.11 mm
BH: 0.9 m
Denitrication of mining water V: 1 L T: 7 e 22  C Denitrication: 100 % (Zou et al., 2015)
Support: GAC HRT: 12 h
Dp: 0.5 e 1 mm Q: 800 mL/min
25 % bed expansion
Cu, Ni & Zn removal V: 2.5 L HRT: 24 h Cu: 97.5 % (Janyasuthiwong et al., 2015)
D: 0.08 m pH: 7 & 5 Ni: 65.9 %
H: 1.0 m OLR: 1 g COD/L. d Zn: 97.0 %
30 % bed expansion COD: 61.9 %
Synthetic municipal wastewater: Plexiglass column T: 20 3  C N2O: 0.53 % (Eldyasti et al., 2014)
denitrication V: 608 ml HRT: 0.6 h
D: 2.54 cm OLR: 5.9 e 7 kg COD/m3
H: 100 cm d
Support: zeolite Q: 20 2 L/day
DP: 600 e 850 mm
Currant wastewater: COD Plexiglass column T: 35 2  C COD: 96. 9 % (Jaafari et al., 2014)
V: 3.95 L OLR: 9.4 to 24.2 kg COD/
3
D: 60 mm m
H: 140 cm Umf: 0.75 m/min
BH: 0.6 m 30 % bed expansion
Support: PVC
DP: 2 mm
Domestic wastewater Plexiglass plate T: 15 - 35  C COD: 74.0 3.7% (Gao et al., 2014)
V:7.6 L, HRT: 6 h
Support : GAC
Loading: 200 e 300 g
Formaldehyde Pillar glass reactor HRT: 24 h Degradation: 98. 37 % at (Qiu et al., 2014)
V: 486 mL T: 30 & 37  C 30  C
D: 3.6 cm Degradation: 96.83 % at
H: 46 cm 37  C
Support: Gel beads
Metal precipitation (Cu, Pb, Cd, Zn) PVC pipe with conical bottom T: 25  C Removal: 99 % (Villa-Gomez et al., 2014)
V:2.5 L HRT: 24 h
D: 0.05 m 30 % bed expansion
H: 1.0 m
Support: LDPE beads
DP: 3 mm
PS & TWAS V: 16 L OLR: 8 e 19 kg/m3-d COD: 68 % for PS (Mustafa et al., 2014)
H: 3.6 m Q: 3.4 L/d COD: 55 % for TWAS
Support: zeolite
DP: 425 e 610 mm
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1503

Table 3 (continued )

Target pollutant Reactor and support material Operational conditions Performance Reference
properties

Petrochemical wastewater: COD and TPH Glass column with draft tube T: 20 e 25  C COD: 87 % (Qin et al., 2014)
V: 4.36 L HRT: 6 h TPH: 95 %
Qa: 2-5 L/h,
OLR:1.61-2.56 kg COD/
m3.d
Thin stillage H: 3.6 m T: 37  C, COD: 88 % (Andalib et al., 2012)
Support: Zeolite UL: 1.4 cm/s TSS: 78 %
DP: 425 e 610 mm OLR: 29 1.2 kg COD/
m3d
Dyeing Efuent: color and COD V: 0.02 m2 Qa: 0.025 m/s COD: 83.3 % (Balaji and Poongothai, 2012)
D: 0.15 m HRT: 26 h Color: 89.5 %
H: 1.17 m 50 % bed expansion
BH: 0.25 m
Support: PVC
Sulde oxidation Glass column T: 30 2  C Degradation: 92 % (Midha et al., 2012)
V: 0.6 L HRT: 25 e 70 min
D: 0.045 m Uup: 14 e 20 m/h
H: 0.38 m
Support: nylon
DP: 2-3 mm
Density: 1140 kg/m3
BH: 16 cm
Real acid drainage mine water V: 300 mL T: 35  C Sulfate: 90 % (Sahinkaya et al., 2011)
Support: AC HRT: 12 e 24 h COD: 80 %
DP: 0.5 e 1 mm pH: 2.7 e 7 Metal: 99.9 %
15 e 20 % bed expansion

V: Reactor volume; D: reactor diameter; H: reactor height; DP: diameter of support media: BH: Initial static bed height; Q: liquid ow rate; Qa: air ow rate: HRT: Hydraulic
Retention Time; T: Temperature; Umf: Minimum supercial velocity; UL: Liquid supercial velocity; Ug: Gas supercial velocity; OLR: Organic Loading Rate; IFBBR: Inverse
Fluidized Bed Bioreactor; IAFMBR: Inverse Anaerobic Fluidized Bed Bioreactor; GAC: Granular Activated Carbon; HDPE: High Density Polypropylene; LDPE: Low Density
Polypropylene; TPH: Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon; PS: Primary Sludge: TWAS: Thickened Waste Activated Sludge.

the effects of design parameters are not fully established. Also in- (Fig. 4). Conventional FBRs are atbed reactors with uniform cross-
formation on the effects of reactor conguration on the mass sectional areas. However, wash-out of particles occurs sometimes
transfer and the reactor performance are somewhat sparse. Some due to high supercial velocity. To overcome this challenge, Scott C.
of the design parameters that may affect the performance of FBR D and Hancher C. W. introduced the concept of tapered-bed FBR in
include reactor geometry, aspect ratio, reactor internals, particle 1976 (Parthiban et al., 2007). In Tapered FBR, the cross-sectional
size and density, particle loading and uid supercial velocity. area of the reactor is made narrower at the bottom (tapered-in)
or both bottom and top (tapered-in tapered-out) (Askaripour and
Dehkordi, 2015). This results in a stable feed introduction as well
3.1. Reactor geometry as minimizes eddies and back mixing that could arise in atbed
FBR. However, it is necessary to ensure appropriate taper angle so
3.1.1. Shape and cross-sectional area of the reactor that turbulent ow due to sudden expansion can be avoided.
Reactor conguration is an important parameter that affects A comparative study on the performance of a atbed FBR and a
mixing and particle distribution in FBR (Choi and Shin, 1999). Par- tapered FBR showed that the latter has superior treatment perfor-
ticle mixing plays an important role in the performance of FBR since mance and better hydrodynamic characteristics (Huang et al.,
it affects both heat and mass transfer (Yan et al., 2009). For 2000). Three FBRs having 0 , 2.5 and 5 taper angles were
wastewater treatment, it is necessary to obtain high mass transfer compared in the study. The hydrodynamics characteristics and
rate and uniform temperature in the reactor through uid-particle performance of the three FBRs were in the following decreasing
interactions. order 5 / 2.5 / 0 . The 5 tapered FBR showed the highest
Although FBRs are conventionally cylindrical, other shapes such performance while the 0 tapered FBR exhibited the lowest per-
as square columns have been used. Dead-zones are encountered formance. A previous study by Wu and Huang (1996) reported that
more frequently in square columns where the sharp corners of the COD removal efciency of a tapered FBR was higher than a atbed
reactor promote their occurrences. The presence of dead-zones FBR when the taper angle does not exceed 5 . Above 5 taper angle,
inhibits proper particle mixing in the reactor. In their compara- the performance of the atbed FBR was either higher or lower than
tive study on the effect of bed geometry on mixing rate, Gorji-kandi the tapered FBR.
et al. (2015) concluded that mixing rate is greater in a cylindrical
bed than a square bed FBR. This was attributed to the presence of
dead-zones at the corners of the square reactor which caused slow 3.1.2. Aspect ratio
motion of particles. The presence of slow uidization on the wall of Aspect ratio, dened as the ratio of the static bed height to the
the reactor had been conrmed earlier (Efstathios and Michaelides, reactor diameter, is an important design parameter of FBR. The
2013). Therefore, it is necessary to choose appropriate shape of the aspect ratio has an inuence on uid circulation velocity and
reactor for effective wastewater treatment. consequently on the phase mixing in the reactor (Weipeng et al.,
The cross-sectional area of the reactor is another parameter that 2014). Large aspect ratio promotes bubble coalescence and higher
can affect the hydrodynamics and treatment performance of FBR. solid holdup. This reduces both gas/liquid holdup and the inter-
Generally, FBR can be divided into a atbed or a tapered-bed FBR phase mixing. Conversely, a low aspect ratio promotes higher
1504 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

Table 4
Applications of FB-Adsorption in wastewater treatment.

Target pollutant Reactor and support material properties Operational conditions Performance Reference

Emerging micro-pollutants V: 20 m3 HRT: 10 e 20 min PPHs: 80 % (Mailler et al., 2016)


H: 5 m Q: 1400 m3/d COD: 40 e 45 %
Adsorbent: GAC OM: 30 e 35 %
DP: 100 e 800 mm
BH: 1.5 e 2.5 m
Kaolin clay and Phenol Cylindrical Plexiglas UL: 4 e 8 mm/s Kaolin: 95 % (Zhou et al., 2015)
D: 30 mm HRT: 7 s Phenol: 80 %
H: 570 mm
Adsorbent: SiO2/CAC
DP: 0.6 e 1.5 mm
BH: 35 mm
Cu Polycarbonate column HRT: 1.4 - 4.0 s adsorptive capacity 23.3 mg/g (Jovanovic et al., 2014)
D: 2.4 cm Q: 11.6 - 13.5 cm3/s
H:16.7 cm UL: 2.6 - 3.0 cm/s
Adsorbent: Zeolite A
DP: 0.71 e 2.2 mm
Loading: 10.5 - 12.5 g
BH: 4.3 - 10.2 cm
Arsenic Perplex column Ug: 5 e 20 m/s Arsenic: 93 % (Dora et al., 2013)
D: 5 cm UL: 0.01 e 0.07 m/s
H: 150 cm
Adsorbent: Cashew nut shell
DP: 1.1005 e 1.5405 mm
BH: 0.06 e 0.14 m
Toluene PVC column HRT: 6.25 e 24 h Removed up to 4 % of the adsorbent weight (Wang et al., 2011)
D: 0.076 m Ug: 0.0016 - 0.00318 m/s
H: 1.47 m Q: 0.86 e 5.99 L/min
Adsorbent: SiO2
DP: 0.7 e 1.2 mm
Loading: 50 e 200 g
Congo red phosphate and nitrate Conical bottom polyplastic Qa: 1 L/min Congo red: 99 % Phosphate: 99 % (Vimonses et al., 2010)
Adsorbent: formulated clay-lime Nitrate: 45 %
Loading: 0.4 e 1.0 g/L
Phenol Cylindrical perplex column pH: 3.5 Phenol 95 % (Mohanty et al., 2008)
V: 70 L Ug: 0.0219 m/s
D: 0.2199 m
H: 1.82 m
Adsorbent: PAC
Loading: 2 g/L
Copper D: 3 cm pH: 4 Copper: 90 % (Lee et al., 2006)
H: 120 cm HRT: 60 min
Adsorbent: clarier sludge T: 25  C
DP: 0.5 mm UL: 0.0028 m/s
Copper D: 3 cm pH: 2 e 8 Copper: 99 % (Lee et al., 2004)
H: 120 cm HRT: 60 min
Adsorbent: Manganese-coated sand T: 25  C
DP: 1.0 0.1 mm UL: 0.0028 m/s
Phenol Jacket glass column T: 21 e 24  C Phenol: 62 % (Wang and Chang, 1999)
D: 20 mm Q: 0.15e0.35 dm3/min
Adsorbent: GAC Umf: 0.0085 m/s
DP: 0.937, 1.524 mm
Density: 2100 kg/m3
Loading: 12-24 g

V: Reactor volume; D: reactor diameter; H: reactor height; DP: diameter of support media: BH: Initial static bed height; Q: liquid ow rate; Qa: air ow rate; HRT: Hydraulic
Retention Time; T: Temperature; Umf: Minimum uidization velocity; UL: Liquid supercial velocity; Ug: Gas supercial velocity; CAC: Coconut activated carbon; IFAFBR:
Integrated Flocculation-Adsorption Fluidized Bed Reactor; IFBR: Inverse Fluidized Bed Reactor; GAC: Granular Activated Carbon; OM: Organic matter: PAC: Powder Activated
Carbon.

liquid/gas holdup and encourages interphase mixing. Therefore, result in slugging effect (Kunii and Levenspiel, 1991) and hence the
low aspect ratio can reduce the uid ow rate requirement and diameter is usually made relatively bigger to achieve the necessary
hence lower the process cost (Ochieng et al., 2003). It is therefore degree of uidization. However, a very large diameter may pose
necessary to select the appropriate aspect ratio for proper design challenges to uniform uidization. Therefore, a compromise is
and successful application. usually necessary (Jordening and Buchholz, 1999). For example,
Typical ranges of aspect ratio for both laboratory/pilot FBRs and Ochieng et al., (2002) found an aspect ratio of 10 to be the optimum
technical plants are shown in Table 5 (Jordening and Buchholz, in their treatment of brewery wastewater using laboratory-scale
1999). Laboratory scale FBRs usually have small diameters in rela- FBBR.
tion to the reactor column height and the corresponding static bed In FBBR, large aspect ratio results in more surfaces for biomass
height. Since the reactor volume is small, a small diameter and a growth. However, higher aspect ratio above the optimum value will
relatively high static bed height can give the necessary solid increase solid holdup and thereby inhibit proper mixing of the
loading. In the case of full scale FBR, a long and narrow column may bioparticles and wastewater. The increased amount of solid
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1505

removal efciency. Interestingly, Wei et al. (2000) compared the


hydrodynamics of two FBRs, one having a conventional internal
draft tube and the other with a convergence-divergence draft tube.
Results showed that gas holdup is higher in the FBR with
convergence-divergence draft tube than the conventional draft
tube FBR. Conversely, liquid circulation velocity was found to be
lower in the convergence-divergence draft tube reactor, perhaps
due to the decrease in the velocity caused by the divergence/
convergence tube.
However, Nam et al. (2002) reported that internal draft tube has
a negligible effect on the performance of FBR in the photocatalytic
oxidation of methyl orange. The photocatalytic degradation was
found to depend largely on the amount of catalyst and lamp power
rather than the reactor internals. However, the range of gas ow
Fig. 4. Flatbed versus tapered-in FBR (Adapted from: Heat and Mass Transfer in Par-
rates tested in the study may have been too low to make a signif-
ticulate Suspensions In: Springer Briefs in Applied Sciences and Technology, Efstathios
and Michaelides, 2013, pp 89e199, with permission from Springer).
icant difference in the hydrodynamics of the two different reactors.
To buttress that, the authors reported the superiority of the DTFBR
over the conventional FBR in a later study (Nam et al., 2009). Thus,
Table 5 it is obvious that internals can affect the reactor hydrodynamics and
Typical range of aspect ratio for FBR. therefore inuences the treatment performance of the FBR.
FBR type Aspect ratio
3.2. Support material
Laboratory scale 5e25
Technical plant 2e5
The properties of support materials such as particle size, density
and surface characteristics can affect the process performance of
FBR (Wirsum et al., 2001). The choice of support material would
particles due to the high aspect ratio will equally increase the uid
therefore determine, to a great extent, the process engineering
pumping requirement of the system (Sabarunisha and Radha,
(Jordening and Buchholz, 1999). The effects of particle loading,
2014).
density, size and surface properties on the reactor performance are
discussed in this section.
3.1.3. Reactor internals
Another parameter that affects FBR performance is the presence 3.2.1. Particle size and surface property
of an internal structure in the reactor. Internals, such as tubes and Particle size is an important parameter that affects uidization
bafes, are sometimes introduced into the reactor to modify the as well as heat and mass transfer in the reactor. In fact, it has been
ow structures and improve particles uidization. Reactor internals argued that particle size could be the most important factor that
promotes uniform mixing which result in effective uidization (Qin govern mass transfer in a three-phase FBR (Kim and Kang, 1997).
et al., 2014). Although the main purpose of internals is to ensure Although developed for gas-solid uidization, Geldart classication
uniform uidization, additional benets such as enhanced phase of particles can be useful in classifying solids for wastewater ap-
contact, controlled solid holdup and improved radial mixing are plications. Geldart (1973) classied solid particles into four groups
obtained (Jin et al., 2003). The downside of the internals is that they (A, B, C and D) based on their mean size and density differences
can increase the complexity of system design and operation (Dutta between the particles and the uidizing medium. Group A are
and Suciu, 1992). particles with small mean size between 30 and 100 mm, group B
Internals can be broadly classied into bafes, tubes, packings, ranges between 100 and 800 mm, group C has mean size less than
inserted bodies, and other congurations developed for various 20 mm while group D has a mean size above 1 mm. For each clas-
specic applications. Bafes and tubes are the most commonly sication, different ow regimes and bed behavior are observed.
used internals in wastewater treatments. Examples of bafes Although all these types of solids are used in traditional uidization
include wire mesh, ring, perforated plate etc. While tubes can be applications, only Geldart B and D particles are applicable to
draft tubes, horizontal and vertical banks. Many studies have been wastewater treatment.
reported on reactor internals such as vertical internals Both heat and mass transfer in FBR increase with increase in
(Ramamoorthy and Subramanian, 1981), horizontal tubes particle size. This is because large particles have the capability to
(Olowson, 1994), perforated bafes (Zhao et al., 1992), ring-type break up and disintegrate large bubbles (Nguyen-tien et al., 1984).
internals (Zhu et al., 1997) and other variations. In general, in- For a given liquid velocity, larger particles would result in a better
ternals have effects on the bubble behavior, ow distribution and mass transfer and reactor performance than smaller ones (Begum
phase mixing. and Radha, 2015). In a study to investigate the effect of zeolite
Studies have shown that introducing a draft tube into FBR can diameter used as a support material in FBBR, it was reported that
enhance the process performance. Wang et al. (2015) reported that larger diameter (0.5e0.8 mm) gave slightly higher COD removal
an FBR with internal draft tube gave a higher decolorisation and than smaller ones (0.2e0.5 mm) (Ferna ndez et al., 2008). Therefore,
TOC removal compared with conventional FBR in their study for it is generally believed that mass transfer coefcient in FBR in-
orange G degradation. Similarly, Nam et al. (2009) reported similar creases with increase in bed particle diameter.
ndings when they compared the performance of conventional FBR However, large particles can increase bed pressure drop (Dora
and FBR with an internal draft tube (DTFBR). The DTFBR showed et al., 2012) which will consequently increase the uidization
superior performance under all the conditions investigated which requirement (Midha et al., 2012). Lakshmi et al. (2000) investigated
was attributed to the more uniform distribution of the catalyst. the effect of particle diameter on the minimum uidization velocity
In another study, Vinod & Reddy (2005) used a draft tube FBBR in a two-phase IFBR using LDPE and propylene particles. They re-
for the treatment of phenolic wastewater, achieving up to 96% ported that the minimum uidization velocity increased with
1506 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

increase in particle diameter for the two types of particles inves- (Han et al., 2003).
tigated. This was attributed to the increase in the Archimedes For a given reactor diameter, particle loading can affect the ox-
number which increases with increase in particle diameter. ygen mass transfer rate in a three-phase FBR. However, the inu-
Surface characteristic of the solid particle is another important ence of particle loading on oxygen transfer rate is rather complex.
parameter that can affect the performance of FBR. Solid particles High particle loading promotes bubble coalescence, which in turns
can be hydrophobic or hydrophilic. Unlike hydrophobic particles, reduces the interfacial area of gas-liquid and hence the oxygen
hydrophilic particles mix excellently with water. This improves the mass transfer (Abdel-aziz et al., 2016). Large bubbles will move
mass transfer coefcient for up-ow uidization (Kim and Kang, faster, resulting in shorter residence time and consequent low gas
1997). However, for inverse uidization, the reverse is the case. hold up. It was reported that an increased particle loading of 15%
Han et al. (2003) compared hydrophobic and hydrophilic particles caused a 30% drop in oxygen mass transfer in a three-phase FBR for
having the same density and concluded that hydrophobic are better aerobic wastewater treatment (Yu et al., 1999).
than hydrophilic particles for inverse uidization. This was attrib- The initial static bed also affects the pressure drop across the
uted to the retardation of rising bubbles near the hydrophobic reactor bed. At Umf, the pressure drop is equal to the weight of the
particles which subsequently increased the gas holdup. A similar particles divided by the cross-sectional area of the bed. The pres-
concept of hydrophobic/hydrophilic was discussed by Choi & Shin sure drop in FBR is the sum of the frictional pressure drop and the
(1999) and observed by Bufere et al. (1998) during their study of static pressure drop. However, the static pressure drop is usually
an IFBBR. Kim and Kang (1997) had equally discussed this in terms negligible and the total pressure drop is then due to the frictional
of the wettability of the particles. This shows the importance of pressure drop only (Askaripour and Dehkordi, 2016). Therefore, the
surface properties of FBR support materials in wastewater frictional pressure drop required to counterbalance the weight of
treatment. the bed increases with increase in initial static bed height (Dora
Particles with high specic surface areas, good physicochemical et al., 2012). Thus, it is necessary to use appropriate aspect ratio
and uidodynamic properties should therefore be used as support to ensure optimum performance of the system.
materials (Pen and Jose, 2008). Particles with irregular surfaces,
sharp angles and crevices are suitable for biomass attachment and 3.2.3. Particle density
development which are important in FBBR (Bufere et al., 1998). For a given bed height, the density and surface property of the
Silica, quartz sand, granular activated carbon, vitreous coke, glass particles would determine the required supercial uid velocity
beads, PVC, are some of the common support materials used in FBR (Han et al., 2003). Dense particles would require high up-ow ve-
(Alfredo et al., 2013). The particle diameter of the support materials locity to achieve uidization (Escudero, 2010). Also porous mate-
is usually less than 1 mm, though larger particles have also been rials result in lower supercial velocity requirement than non-
used (Vinod and Reddy, 2005). The specic area of bed materials porous materials (Jordening and Buchholz, 1999). Where FBBR is
after uidization can be calculated using the following formula: used, polymeric support particles could be the materials of choice
because they offer large surface areas for microbial growth (Midha
61  et al., 2012). The use of light particles will result in low uid
as (4)
dj pumping requirement and thereby low operational cost. In such
case, however, the aspect ratio should be as low as possible in order
Where. to achieve bed homogeneity at the low gas/liquid ow rates
(Ochieng et al., 2002).
as specic surface area (m1) Conversely, minimum uidization velocity decreases with in-
expanded bed porosity (dimensionless) crease in particle density in the case of an IFBR. A study on the
d support particle diameter (mm) minimum uidization velocity requirement between a low density
j form factor (dimensionless, equals 1 if considered a pseudo- polyethylene (LDPE) (940 kg/m3) and polypropylene (PP) (840 kg/
spherical particle) m3) revealed that the LDPE particles required lower velocity than
the PP particles (Lakshmi et al., 2000). This is because the upward
buoyance force increases as the particle density decreases and thus
3.2.2. Particle loading higher liquid velocity is required to achieve uidization.
For successful application, it is necessary to understand the ef- For a given initial static bed height, particle density affects bed
fect of particle loading/initial bed height on the hydrodynamics of pressure drop. Dense particles increase the weight of the initial
FBR (Delebarre et al., 2004). The initial static bed height is the static bed height and this increases the pressure drop necessary to
height of the solid particles in the reactor prior to uidization. counterbalance the weight (Dora et al., 2012). A correlation of gas
Theoretically, the initial static bed height does not affect the min- velocity, phase holdups and pressure drop can give further insights
imum uidization velocity (Umf) in a conventional FBR (Jena et al., on the inuence of the hydrodynamic characteristics on the process
2009). This is because uidization is achieved when the upward performance (Equation (5)).
inertial and drag forces exerted on the particles equal the buoyant
weight of the bed. Lakshmi et al. (2000) studied the effect of bed dp  
 s rs L rL g rg g (5)
height on Umf in a two-phase FBR and reported that constant ve- dz
locity is obtained for all bed heights investigated.
However, Delebarre et al. (2004) studied the inuence of bed s L g 1 (6)
inventory on uidization characteristics of FBR and concluded that
the initial static bed height has effect on Umf. An increase in bed Where dp is the pressure drop, dz is the bed height; s, L and g are
inventory led to an increase in Umf. However, there were some the solid, liquid and gas phase holdups respectively; rs, rL and rg are
inaccuracies in the bed height measurements which might have similarly the densities; g is the acceleration due to gravity.
affected the authors conclusion. Previous study by Garcia et al. Clearly from Equation (5), the use of dense particles could lead
(1999) had reported a small inuence of particle loading on the to an increase in pressure drop, which consequently increases po-
liquid velocity of the system. In the case of IFBR, however, the wer consumption. On the other hand, very low densities could lead
uidization velocity decreases with increase in particle loading to particle wash-out. However, a careful design and reactor internal
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1507

can minimize this problem (Ochieng et al., 2002). supercial gas velocity. This was attributed to the higher gas
holdup, volumetric mass transfer coefcient and oxygen transfer
3.3. Supercial uid velocity rate due to the increased gas velocity. The highest COD and phenol
degradation rates were obtained at a gas velocity of 0.220 m/s.
Supercial uid velocity (Uf) refers to the volumetric ow rate of Above this optimum value, however, the degradation efciencies
the uid divided by the cross-sectional area of the reactor. Uf is became lower. At gas velocities above the optimum value, larger
responsible for the particles uidization and therefore inuences bubbles are formed which dominate over the interfacial area,
the particles mixing, heat and mass transfer rate in the reactor resulting in lower mass transfer. Uf is affected by the properties of
(Mostou and Chaouki, 2001). Therefore, it is necessary to under- bed materials as well as the aspect ratio of the reactor (Zhong et al.,
stand how Uf affect FBR performance. Uf is required to be within 2008).
two extremes, the minimum uidization velocity (Umf) and the
terminal uidization velocity (Ut). Umf is the lowest uid velocity 4. Effect of operational parameters
necessary to initiate particles uidization while Ut is the uid ve-
locity at which particles are carried out with the uid ow Since FBR is most commonly used in Fenton oxidation, photo-
(Jovanovic et al., 2014). catalytic oxidation and aerobic/anaerobic treatments, the discus-
Umf is an important parameter which is closely related to the sion on the operational parameters has given emphasis to them.
power requirement of the system (Ochieng et al., 2003). A high Umf Some of the operational parameters that affect FBR performance
will result in a high uidization power requirement. Therefore, it is include pH, catalyst concentration, amount of H2O2, temperature,
necessary to control Uf slightly above Umf with as much accuracy UV intensity, HRT and OLR.
and precision as possible (Delebarre et al., 2004). Umf can be
calculated using Equation (7) (Alfredo et al., 2013). 4.1. pH

d2 rs  rg pH has a remarkable effect on FB-Fenton as efcient degradation


Umf 16:50 (7)
m of pollutants is attributed to acidic pH (Li et al., 2015). This is
because the production of OH is enhanced at lower pH, usually in
Where. the range of 2.5e4.5 (Malik and Saha, 2003). Higher pH favors the
formation of ferric and ferric hydroxide complexes which have
Umf minimum uidization velocity (m/h) much lower catalytic capability than ferrous ions. On the other
d solid particle diameter (mm) hand, very low pH promotes hydrogen formation which may
rs, r specic weight of the solid and the water, respectively (g/ reduce the number of active sites for generating ferrous ions
m3 ) (Ratanatamskul et al., 2010). In other words, a low pH leads to the
m dynamic viscosity of water (g/m/h) formation of Fe2:H2O2 complex, which react more slowly with
g acceleration of gravity (m/h2) H2O2 and thereby produces OH at a slower rate. A high pH leads to
the formation of Fe2:OH complexes which reduces the amount of
Increasing Uf leads to increase in liquid circulation and mixing Fe2 that are responsible for the decomposition of H2O2.
rate, thus a shorter reaction time. However, this is only true up to Su et al. (2011b) investigated the effect of operational parame-
the optimum Uf. On the other hand, very high Uf is associated with ters on the decolorisation of textile wastewater by FB-Fenton and
particle wash-out from the reactor, especially where FBBRs are reported that the process performance increased as the pH was
employed (Jaafari et al., 2014). Therefore, selection of optimum Uf is increased from 2 to 3. However, increasing the pH above 3 led to a
necessary to ensure successful operation of FBR. decrease in the removal efciency. The degradation was highest at
Although liquid velocity dominates in a three-phase FBR, the pH 3. Low pH was associated with production of FeOOH2 which
ow regime depends on the ratio of the supercial liquid velocity to compete with Fe2 in reacting with H2O2. At pH above 4, Fe2 is
the supercial gas velocity. Both velocities have to be properly unstable and easily forms Fe3. However, in their investigation of
designed and controlled. It is necessary to have a small liquid ve- parameters affecting FB-Fenton process for the treatment of
locity to gas velocity ratio in order to have high mass transfer co- recalcitrant organic silicon wastewater, Liu et al. (2014) reported
efcients for counter-current ow FBR (Forster, 1980). However, for that the pH has an insignicant effect on the COD and TOC removal.
a concurrent ow process, a high ratio will give a well dispersed Other parameters such H2O2/Fe2 and particle loading were found
bubbles and hence high oxygen transfer rate whereas a low ratio to have more impact on the process. Therefore, the effect pH may
would result in bubble coalescence and low oxygen transfer rate also depend upon other process parameters such as Fe2/H2O2
(Yu et al., 1999). Both supercial liquid and gas velocities will affect concentration. From the reviewed literature, the optimum pH in
solid and liquid holdups. Increasing supercial liquid velocity will FB-Fenton process ranges between 2 and 4 which is quite similar to
cause solid particles to expand faster and hence reduces the solid the range used in conventional Fenton oxidation (Table 1).
holdup (Akilamudhan et al., 2014). This will in turn increase the In FB-Photocatalysis, pH affects the charge on the catalyst par-
liquid holdup. On the other hand, gas holdup increases with in- ticles, size of catalyst aggregates and the positions of conductance
crease in supercial gas velocity (Wei et al., 2000). and valence bands (Meng et al., 2010). At low pH, the environment
Nikolov et al. (2000) reported that liquid velocity has a weak around the photocatalyst would become positively charged and
effect on the oxygen transfer and gas velocity has a strong effect in a negatively charged at high pH. In order to fully study the impact of
three phase IFBR. In general, the smaller the amount of air supplied, pH on photocatalytic oxidation, the concept of point of zero charge
the more economical the process would be which is desirous for (PZC) of TiO2 is important. The PZC is a condition where the surface
industrial applications (Vimonses et al., 2010). However, the ca- charge of TiO2 is zero or neutral and lies in the pH range of 4.5e7.0.
pacity of FBBR in aerobic wastewater treatment depends on the The implication is that the interaction between the photocatalyst
oxygen transfer rate of the aeration system (Forster, 1980). and the contaminants is minimal. Details on the PCZ have been
Sabarunisha & Radha (2014) studied the hydrodynamic explained elsewhere (Meng et al., 2010). Under acidic conditions,
behavior of an inverse FBBR for phenol biodegradation and re- the surface of is TiO2 protonated and deprotonated under alkaline
ported that COD removal increased with an increase in the condition (Gaya and Halim, 2008). Thus, TiO2 has higher oxidizing
1508 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

power at low pH. H2O2 OH / HO2 H2O (8)


Nam et al. (2002) investigated the effect of pH on the photo-
catalytic degradation of methyl orange in a three-phase FBR and HO2 OH / H2O O2 (9)
obtained higher performance at lower pH values. At lower pH,
reduction by electrons in the conduction band plays an important However, the effect of H2O2 on the process is closely linked to
role in the degradation while at neutral or high pH levels, hydroxyl the amount of Fe2. Therefore, the ratio of H2O2 to Fe2 is equally
radicals may be the predominant oxidation species. However, a important. Indeed, some researchers have reported the effect of
very low pH may result in excess H which can lower the reaction H2O2 vis- a-vis the concentration of Fe2 (Su et al., 2011a; 2011b). In
rate. a study to establish the optimum condition for degrading 2,4-
In FBBR, pH is an important parameter that affects process Dichlorophenol using FBR-Fenton process, H2O2 was found to be
performance because of its effect on microorganisms. A very high or the major parameter affecting the process (Muangthai et al., 2010).
low pH can affect FBBR performance due to the inhibitory effect of Increasing H2O2 from 1 to 10 mM led to an increased degradation
superacidity and superalkalinity on the activity of the intracellular from 70% to 98% at a constant Fe2 concentration (0.1 mM). Wang
enzyme of bacteria (Jianping et al., 2003). Lin et al. (2010) studied et al. (2015) investigated the degradation of Orange G in FB-Fenton
the biodegradation of Reactive blue 13 in a two-stage anaerobic/ and reported that the decolorisation of the dye increases with in-
aerobic FBBR with a Pseudomonas sp. At pHs between 5 and 9, the crease in H2O2 up to 25 mg/L.
color removal efciency uctuated between 75.6% and 86.9%, while There is variation in the optimum amount of H2O2 in the FB-
the total COD removal efciency varied between 67.7% and 90.4%. Fenton process reported in the literature (Table 1). Though most of
The optimum pH for the degradation was between 6 and 7. the studies have reported between 50 and 60 mM, others have used
Zeroual et al. (2007) investigated the effect of pH (3e9) on the concentrations outside this range. Since there are differences in the
decolorisation of different dyes by calcium alginate-immobilized reported studies either from the pollutant being degraded or other
Geotrichum sp. in FBBR. Maximum decolorisation was achieved process parameters, these variations were to be expected. However,
at pH 5. Above pH 5, the decolorisation rate decreased signicantly. all the studies have shown that the reaction rate increases with an
Jianping et al. (2003) studied the effect of pH on the denitrication increase in H2O2 concentration until the optimum amount is
treatment of low C/N ratio nitrate-nitrogen wastewater in a three- reached. High concentration may inhibit the degradation due to the
phase FBR. The optimum pH was found to be between 6.5 and 7.5. scavenging effect of the H2O2. Also the ratio of H2O2 to Fe2 was
Similarly, District et al. (1996) reported an improvement in FBBR shown to be signicant when discussing the effect of H2O2 on the
performance when pH was increased from 7 to 7.5. process. Therefore, the optimum dosage of H2O2 is application-
specic and depends on other parameters such as the Fe2
4.2. Temperature concentration.

Temperature is an important operational parameter, especially 4.4. Fe2 concentration


in FBBR. Unlike other technologies such as a xed-bed reactor,
temperature uctuation is uncommon in FBBR because of the Fe2 acts as a catalyst in decomposing H2O2 to produce OH in
excellent phase mixing. Therefore, uidization will improve the FB-Fenton. Therefore, increasing its concentration leads to an in-
process performance in terms of temperature uniformity. Never- crease in the production of OH. However, increasing the concen-
theless, it is necessary to establish the optimum temperature for a tration above the optimum amount can inhibit the process
given process. High temperature may cause protein denaturation (Muangthai et al., 2010). This is because excess Fe2 acts as a
while low temperature may inhibit the activity of intracellular scavenger, reacting with OH and decreasing their availability to
enzymes, resulting in low metabolism (Jianping et al., 2003). oxidize the pollutant. Excess Fe2 may also cause turbidity in the
For example, an efcient denitrication was achieved at an reactor, decreasing light penetration when UV is used (Wang et al.,
optimum temperature of 30  C during autotrophic denitrication 2015). This underscores the importance of establishing the opti-
using FBBR (Zou et al., 2016) while Jianping et al. (2003) reported an mum dosage of Fe2 vis-a -vis the amount of H2O2.
optimum temperature between 20 and 35  C for the removal of Previous studies have shown that the concentration of Fe2 has
nitrate-nitrogen from wastewater using a three-phase FBBR. On the a positive effect on pollutant degradation in FB-Fenton, with the
other hand, Zeroual et al. (2007) reported that the decolorisation optimum dosage around 5 mM in most of the reported literature
rate of four different dyes using calcium alginate-immobilized (Table 1). Ratanatamskul et al., 2010 found that the degradation of
Geotrichum sp. increased when the temperature was increased 2,6-dimethylaniline by FB-Fenton process increased from 83% to
from 25 to 35  C. However, when the temperature was increased to 100% when Fe2 was increased from 1 to 5 mM. The optimum
45  C, the decolorisation rate decreased drastically. The reduction concentration was found to be 2.5 mM. In another study, Briones
of decolorisation efciency at 45  C was attributed to the dena- et al. (2012) studied the degradation of acetaminophen using FB-
turation of the enzymes involved in the degradation of the azo dyes Fenton process and found that increasing the iron concentration
and the loss of fungal cell viability at high temperature. from 0.01 to 0.1 mmol1 led to increase in ACT degradation.
However, the increase was more evident at acidic pH.
4.3. H2O2 concentration
4.5. Photocatalyst concentration
In FB-Fenton, the concentration of H2O2 determines the poten-
tial OH that can be generated in the reaction. Thus, pollutant FB-Photocatalysis uses metal oxide, usually TiO2, as the photo-
degradation increases with increase in H2O2 concentration, until catalyst. The concentration of TiO2 has a strong effect on the rate of
the optimum concentration is reached. Beyond the optimum con- photocatalytic process and hence, the performance of the reactor.
centration, process performance usually decreases due to scav- When the amount of TiO2 is increased, the photocatalytic activity
enging effect of the OH (Ahmadi et al., 2015). Scavenging effect increases and therefore higher degradation rate is obtained. This is
occurs when the excessive H2O2 acts as radical scavenger and because the surface area available for photocatalytic reaction in-
change the more reactive OH to a less reactive hydroperoxyl rad- creases with an increased in the catalyst concentration. However,
icals as shown in Equations (8) and (9) (Li et al., 2015). increasing the concentration above the saturation level may lead to
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1509

turbidity (Meng et al., 2010) which reduces light penetration into leads to a decrease in OLR, other conditions being equal. For a
the reaction matrix and hinders the photocatalytic performance of constant OLR, increase in HRT will lead to higher performance of
the reactor (Zulfakar et al., 2011). Also from an economic viewpoint, the process as microorganisms will have more time to degrade the
excess catalysts should be avoided so as to keep the operating cost pollutant. However, above the optimum HRT, the process becomes
as low as possible. Therefore, it is imperative to establish the op- independent of the HRT (Borja et al., 2001). Although HRT can be
timum dosage of the TiO2. Where immobilized TiO2 is used, addi- controlled through ow rate manipulation, it may pose uidization
tional removal is obtained via adsorption of pollutants on the challenges for the bioparticles (Christianson et al., 2015). Thus,
surface of the solid. there is need for a trade-off between HRT and ow rates to obtain
Youngsoo Na et al. (2005) studied the photocatalytic decolor- the optimum condition for specic applications.
isation of rhodamine B by immobilized TiO2/UV in an FBR and re- For aerobic FBBR, the optimum degradation is usually achieved
ported that the decolorisation rate increased with increase in TiO2 within a short HRT, depending on the microorganisms, pollutants
dosage. The immobilized TiO2 was responsible for both degradation and other operational parameters (Table 3). Rajasimman and
and adsorption of the dye. However, since UV light was used, Karthikeyan (2007) investigated the effect of HRT on the treat-
excessive amount of the catalyst could hinder light penetration. A ment of starch wastewater in an aerobic FBBR and reported that the
dosage of 33.8 g/L was found to be the optimum concentration. COD reduction increased with increased in HRT for all initial sub-
Details of typical photocatalyst concentrations reported in the strate concentrations. The optimum removal efciency of 93.8 5%
literature can be found in Table 2. was achieved after 24 h.
The effect of HRT on anaerobic FBBR follows the same trend as
4.6. UV intensity that of aerobic FBBR. Cuenca et al. (2006) investigated the anaerobic
biodegradation of diesel fuel-contaminated wastewater in an FBBR
A source of photons, mostly UV lamp, is usually introduced into and reported that both the diesel and COD removal efciencies
FB-photocatalysis and FB-Photo-Fenton processes. The rate of increased with increased in HRT for all the conditions investigated.
photon increases as the number and intensity of UV lamps increase. Lin et al. (2010) studied the effect of HRT on dye degradation using a
The degradation efciency of FB-photocatalysis increases with UV two-stage anaerobic/aerobic FBR and reported that the overall
light intensity, and shorter wavelength gives higher degradation degradation was enhanced when HRT was increased from 20 h to
(Lim and Kim, 2002). Shorter wavelength light is adsorbed more 70 h.
strongly by TiO2 particles than longer one. Therefore, the pene-
tration distance of photons into TiO2 particles is shorter and elec- 4.8. Organic loading rate (OLR)
trons and holes are formed closer to the surface of the particles.
In their study for the Photooxidation of sodium lauryl sulfate in OLR is the measure of organic pollutants which is expressed as
a three-phase FBR using TiO2/SiO2, Nam et al. (2009) found that the kilogram (kg) of COD per cubic-meter (m3) per day (d). In FBBR, OLR
degradation rate increased with an increase in the UV light in- is normally manipulated through variation of owrate. When OLR
tensity. The intensity of light determines the potential number of is increased, the performance of the system reduces due to shock
photons that can be generated and hence the number of photons and disturbance on the biomass. However, the microorganisms
that may eventually reach the catalyst surface. Thus a 65 W lamp adjust to the new OLR and the process performance usually re-
gave a better performance than a 30 W lamp. sumes. Excellent FBBR performance is usually associated with low
Also the position of the UV lamp in relation to the reaction OLR (Balaji and Poongothai, 2012). On the other hand, when the
matrix is also important. The closer the lamp is to the reaction substrate is limiting in the process, increasing OLR can improve the
matrix the higher the amount of photons reaching the reactants. process performance (Ferna ndez et al., 2008). In that case,
Kanki et al. (2005) investigated the inuence of UV irradiation on increasing OLR provides more food to microorganisms and hence
FB-photocatalytic process using TiO2-coated ceramic particles. Two more biomass production.
FBRs, one with an internal UV lamp (254 nm, 9 W) and the other Carbajo et al. (2010) reported a slight decreased in phenol and
with an outside black lamp (365 nm, 15 W) were used. The reactor TOC degradation as the OLR was increased in their treatment of
with the internal UV lamp degraded the pollutant 4 times faster phenol in an anaerobic FBBR. However, the degradation efciency
than the other reactor. This signies the importance of the prox- resumed once the microorganisms acclimatized to the new OLR.
imity of the light source to the reaction matrix. Mustafa et al. (2014) studied the anaerobic digestion of municipal
wastewater sludge using FBBR and reported that the treatment
4.7. Hydraulic retention time (HRT) performance decreased with increased in OLR. A volatile suspended
solids (VSS) removal efciency of 88%, 79% and 70% were achieved
HRT is the average length of time the wastewater stays in the at OLRs of 4.2, 9.5 and 19 kg COD/m3-d respectively. A COD removal
reactor. Generally, long HRT leads to a better performance of FBR- efciency of 68% was equally obtained at OLR of 19 kg COD/m3-d.
AOPs, until the optimum time is reached. Above the optimum Borja et al. (2004) carried out mesophilic anaerobic digestion of
HRT, there is usually little or no further degradation of the wastewater from the production of protein isolates from chickpea
pollutant. During a treatment of recalcitrant organic silicone our in an FBBR and reported that the percentage COD removal
wastewater using FB-Fenton, Li et al. (2014) found out that the decreased with increased in OLR.
degradation of COD and TOC increased as the HRT was increased
from 15 to 60 min, with no further degradation thereafter. Thus, the 5. Conclusions and future perspectives
optimum HRT was 60 min corresponding to COD and TOC removal
efciency of 90% and 78% respectively. In another study for COD FBRs have been widely used in wastewater treatment, particu-
removal from hospital wastewater, 98% removal efciency was larly biological processes and AOPs, due to their excellent features
achieved at an HRT of 90 min (Anand et al., 2015). such as high mass transfer rate, excellent mixing and low sludge
In FBBR, any change in HRT is likely to affect the OLR and hence generation. Few studies have also appeared on the use of FBR for
the performance of the reactor (Haroun and Idris, 2009). The ef- adsorptive removal of recalcitrant pollutants. Since the design and
ciency of pollutant removal in FBBR is a function of the HRT which operation of FBR depends largely on experience and empirical
is concomitant with OLR (Perez et al., 2007). Increasing the HRT approach, an understanding of the important design and
1510 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

operational parameters is necessary for successful application of Combining FBBR with other wastewater treatment technologies
the technology. This review discusses the applications of FBR in such as membrane bioreactor is an attractive research area. Some
wastewater treatment, with emphasis on design and operational recent studies have shown that combining FBR with membrane
parameters affecting process performances. Although the review is bioreactor can improve process performance (Gao et al., 2014) and
non-exhaustive, especially with the technology still unfolding, alleviate membrane fouling (Kim et al., 2016). This has the potential
major parameters affecting the process such as reactor geometry, to reduce energy consumption and increase cost-effectiveness of
particle size, particle density and loading, supercial uid velocity, the process. Another approach that is considered attractive is the
catalyst concentration, pH, HRT, and OLR have been discussed. integration of biological processes and AOPs using FBR. Since AOPs
Reviewed literature shows that using FBR in wastewater treat- are more cost-effective when applied as tertiary treatment tech-
ment increases process performance and could help in addressing nologies, FBBR can be used as initial treatment to reduce the
some of the drawbacks of the conventional treatment technologies. organic loading, followed by FBR-AOPs to mineralize the recalci-
In the last two years, more than 80% of the reported studies on FBR trant pollutants. For example, integrating anaerobic digestion and
applications in wastewater treatment have been on FB-Fenton and photocatalytic oxidation using FBR can improve cost-effectiveness
FBBR. Therefore, these two represent the most important applica- as the methane generated from the anaerobic digestion could
tions of FBR in wastewater treatment. In particular, FBR has shown provide the necessary energy for driving AOPs.
potential to overcome the problem of excessive sludge generation It is obvious that the excellent features of FBR can be exploited in
in conventional Fenton oxidation. Reported studies show that the wastewater treatment as indicated by the recent growing interest
support materials in FB-Fenton can crystallize about 30e65% iron in the topic. Overall, FBR has the potential to improve process
from the solution and can achieve 15e20% better performance than performance and increase the cost-effectiveness of various waste-
conventional Fenton oxidation. This indicates that FBR can increase water treatments, particularly AOPs and biological processes. A
the cost-effectiveness of Fenton oxidation. In biological wastewater cost-effective wastewater treatment technology is particularly
treatment, most of the recent studies have been on improving important to industries as they strive to adopt zero-discharge as a
process performance, energy efciency and fouling prevention in means of cost reduction and environmental sustainability. The
membrane bioreactor. Fluidized bed membrane bioreactor using outcomes of this study provide a prerequisite knowledge for un-
GAC as support material reduces membrane fouling and conse- derstanding the important parameters affecting the performance of
quently lowers energy requirements of the process. In some FBR in wastewater treatment while at the same time highlighting
studies, anaerobic FBBR has been integrated with AOPs such as some existing gaps for future studies.
photocatalysis, where energy generated from methane can provide
the power required by the UV. Acknowledgment
Although previous studies have shown encouraging results on
the application of FBR in wastewater, more studies will be needed This work was nancially supported by the University of Malaya
to address some of the existing gaps in the literature. One of the High Impact Research Grant (UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/37) from the
major challenges is that uidization is still an empirical science, Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia and University of Malaya,
relying largely on empirical correlations and heuristic approach. As Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
FBR operation is known to be inherently complex, modeling and
optimization of wastewater treatment using FBR are challenging
due to the additional parameters involved. Fortunately, many References
models have been put forward for the gas-solid FBR, which can be
Abdel-aziz, M.H., El-abd, M.Z., Bassyouni, M., 2016. Heat and mass transfer in three
modied to suit the liquid-solid system. Studies on the inuence of phase uidized bed containing high density particles at high gas velocities. Int.
the major parameters on treatment performance of FBR are J. Therm. Sci. 102, 145e153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijthermalsci.2015.11.020.
somewhat limited. The existing studies have largely reported on Abdelmotalib, H.M., Youssef, M.A.M., Hassan, A.A., Youn, S.B., Im, I.T., 2015. Heat
transfer process in gas-solid uidized bed combustors: a review. Int. J. Heat.
the treatment performance and the effect of some operational Mass Transf. 89, 567e575. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
parameters. Future studies are therefore needed on process opti- j.ijheatmasstransfer.2015.05.085.
mization and modeling of FBR in wastewater treatment, taking the Abidi, N., Errais, E., Duplay, J., Berez, A., Jrad, A., Schafer, G., Ghazi, M., Semhi, K.,
Trabelsi-Ayadi, M., 2015. Treatment of dye-containing efuent by natural clay.
process hydrodynamics into consideration. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 432e440. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.08.043.
Application of FB-Fenton has shown potential under laboratory- Ahmadi, M., Ramavandi, B., Sahebi, S., 2015. Efcient degradation of a bio-
scale investigations. However, more studies are needed towards recalcitrant pollutant from wastewater using a uidized catalyst-bed reactor.
Chem. Eng. Commun. 202, 1118e1129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
process improvement and large-scale applications. In this context, 00986445.2014.907567.
optimization of solid carriers used in FB-Fenton is particularly Akilamudhan, P., Sivakumar, P., Mohanraj, R., Senthilkumar, K., 2014. Prediction of
imperative since iron crystallization and removal depend on the solid holdup in an internal loop airlift uidized bed reactor. Interntional J.
ChemTech Res. 6, 4460e4467.
solid types, particle size and loading. This is yet to be put forward. It
Alalm, M.G., Tawk, A., Ookawara, S., 2015. Comparison of solar TiO2 photocatalysis
is not clear yet, from the literature, how the supercial velocity and solar photo-Fenton for treatment of pesticides industry wastewater:
affects the treatment performance of FB-Fenton. Since the effect of operational conditions, kinetics, and costs. J. Water Process Eng. 8, 55e63.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jwpe.2015.09.007.
process parameters depends on the pollutant being degraded, pez, J.S., Rodrguez, P.U., 2013. Fluidized Bed Series: Secondary
Alfredo, J.B., Lo
future studies should investigate the efcacy of FB-Fenton in Treatments [WWW Document]. Technol. Fact Sheets Ef. Treat. Plants Text. Ind.
treating a wide range of recalcitrant pollutants. It is also important URL. http://www.thermopedia.com/content/46/?tid104&sn1297.
to consider the effectiveness of FB-Fenton in treating real waste- Anand, A.A., Adish Kumar, S., Rajesh Banu, J., Ginni, G., 2015. The performance of
uidized bed solar photo Fenton oxidation in the removal of COD from hospital
water as only about 15% of the reported studies have been on real wastewaters. Desalin. Water Treat. 3994, 1e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
wastewaters. Despite the reported excellent performance of FB- 19443994.2015.1021843.
Fenton under treatability studies, large-scale applications will Ananpattarachai, J., Kajitvichyanukul, P., 2016. Enhancement of chromium removal
efciency on adsorption and photocatalytic reduction using a bio-catalyst,
depend largely on their cost-effectiveness. Although combining titania-impregnated chitosan/xylan hybrid lm. J. Clean. Prod. 130, 126e136.
FBR with Fenton can increase the cost-effectiveness due to the low http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.10.098.
sludge production and improved process performance, the cost of Andalib, M., Elbeshbishy, E., Mustafa, N., Hafez, H., Nakhla, G., Zhu, J., 2014. Per-
formance of an anaerobic uidized bed bioreactor (AnFBR) for digestion of
the combined technology still needs to be evaluated. primary municipal wastewater treatment biosolids and bioethanol thin stillage.
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1511

Renew. Energy 71, 276e285. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.05.039. j.jclepro.2015.06.104.


Andalib, M., Hafez, H., Elbeshbishy, E., Nakhla, G., Zhu, J., 2012. Treatment of thin Cheng, H., Chou, S., Chen, S., Yu, C., 2014. Photoassisted Fenton degradation of
stillage in a high-rate anaerobic uidized bed bioreactor (AFBR). Bioresour. phthalocyanine dyes from wastewater of printing industry using Fe (II)/g-Al2O3
Technol. 121, 411e418. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2012.07.008. catalyst in up-ow uidized-bed. J. Environ. Sci. 26, 1307e1312. http://
Anotai, J., Chen, C., Bellotindos, L.M., Lu, M., 2012a. Treatment of TFT-LCD waste- dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1001-0742(13)60604-X.
water containing ethanolamine by uidized-bed Fenton technology. Bioresour. Choi, H.S., Shin, M., 1999. Hydrodynamics study of two different inverse uidized
Technol. 113, 272e275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.11.100. reactors for the application of wastewater treatment. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 16,
Anotai, J., Sakulkittimasak, P., Boonrattanakij, N., Lu, M., 2009. Kinetics of nitro- 670e676.
benzene oxidation and iron crystallization in uidized-bed Fenton process. Choi, J., Min, J., Lee, W., Lee, S.B., 2000. Approximated solution of model for three-
J. Hazard. Mater 165, 874e880. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2008.10.062. phase uidized bed bio- lm reactor in wastewater treatment. Biotechnol.
Anotai, J., Su, C., Tsai, Y., Lu, M., 2010. Effect of hydrogen peroxide on aniline Bioprocess 5, 65e70.
oxidation by electro-Fenton and uidized-bed Fenton processes. J. Hazard. Chong, M.N., Cho, Y.J., Poh, P.E., Jin, B., 2015. Evaluation of Titanium dioxide pho-
Mater 183, 888e893. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.07.112. tocatalytic technology for the treatment of reactive Black 5 dye in synthetic and
Anotai, J., Thuptimdang, P., Su, C., Lu, M., 2012b. Degradation of o -toluidine by real greywater efuents. J. Clean. Prod. 89, 196e202. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
uidized-bed Fenton process : statistical and kinetic study. Env. Sci. Pollut. Res. j.jclepro.2014.11.014.
19, 169e176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-011-0553-x. Chong, M.N., Lei, S., Jin, B., Saint, C., Chow, C.W.K., 2009. Optimisation of an annular
Apollo, S., Aoyi, O., 2016. Combined anaerobic digestion and photocatalytic treat- photoreactor process for degradation of Congo Red using a newly synthesized
ment of distillery efuent in uidized bed reactors focusing on energy con- titania impregnated kaolinite nano-photocatalyst. Sep. Purif. Technol. 67,
servation. Environ. Technol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593330.2016.1146342. 355e363. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2009.04.001.
In press. Chou, S., Huang, C., 1999. Effect of Fe (II) on catalytic oxidation in a uidized bed
Asghar, A., Raman, A.A.A., Daud, W.M.A.W., 2015. Advanced oxidation processes for reactor. Chemosphere 39, 1997e2006.
in-situ production of hydrogen peroxide/hydroxyl radical for textile wastewater Christianson, L., Lepine, C., Tsukuda, S., Saito, K., Summerfelt, S., 2015. Nitrate
treatment: a review. J. Clean. Prod. 87, 826e838. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ removal effectiveness of uidized sulfur-based autotrophic denitrication bio-
j.jclepro.2014.09.010. lters for recirculating aquaculture systems. Aquac. Eng. 68, 10e18. http://
Askaripour, H., Dehkordi, A.M., 2016. Effects of initial static bed height on fractional dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2015.07.002.
conversion and bed pressure drop in tapered-in and tapered-out uidized bed Converti, A., Borghi, M. Del, Ferraiolo, G., 1990. The uidized bed reactor in the
reactors. Int. J. Multiph. Flow. 79, 50e61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ anaerobic treatment of wine wastewater. Bioprocess Eng. 5.
j.ijmultiphaseow.2015.08.006. Corella, J., Toledo, J.M., Molina, G., 2007. A review on dual uidized-bed biomass
Askaripour, H., Dehkordi, A.M., 2015. Effects of initial static bed height on fractional gasiers. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 46, 6831e6839. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/
conversion and bed pressure drop in tapered-in and tapered-out uidized bed ie0705507.
reactors. Int. J. Multiph. Flow. 08 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Couto, S.R., Dominguez, A., Sanrom, A., 2002. Photocatalytic degradation of dyes in
j.ijmultiphaseow.2015.08.006. aqueous solution operating in a uidised bed reactor. Chemosphere 46, 83e86.
Balaji, K., Poongothai, S., 2012. Evaluation of uidized bed reactor in treating dyeing Cuenca, M.A., Veluzi, J., Lohi, A., Upreti, S.R., 2006. Anaerobic biodegradation of
efuent. Int. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 4, 3134e3139. diesel fuel-contaminated wastewater in a uidized bed reactor. Bioprocess
Begum, S.S., Radha, K.V., 2015. Gas e liquid mass transfer studies in inverse uid- Biosyst. Eng. 29e37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00449-006-0053-4.
ized bed biolm reactor for the biodegradation of industrial efuent rich in Delebarre, A., Morales, J., Ramos, L., 2004. Inuence of the bed mass on its uid-
phenolic compounds. Environ. Prog. Sustain. Energy 00, 1e6. http://dx.doi.org/ ization characteristics. Chem. Eng. J. 98, 81e88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
10.1002/ep. S1385-8947(03)00206-7.
Bello, M.M., Nourouzi, M.M., Abdullah, L.C., Choong, T.S.Y., Koay, Y.S., Keshani, S., Demiral, H., Gngo r, C., 2016. Adsorption of copper(II) from aqueous solutions on
2013. POME is treated for removal of color from biologically treated POME in activated carbon prepared from grape bagasse. J. Clean. Prod. 124, 103e113.
xed bed column: applying wavelet neural network ( WNN ). J. Hazard. Mater http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.084.
262, 106e113. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2013.06.053. Deng, Z., Fung, K.Y., Ng, K.M., Wei, C., 2016. Design of anaerobic uidized bed
Bellotindos, L.M., Lu, M., Methatham, T., Lu, M., 2014. Factors affecting degradation bioreactor e dyeing efuents. Chem. Eng. Sci. 139, 273e284. http://dx.doi.org/
of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) by uidized-bed Fenton process. Env. Sci. Pollut. 10.1016/j.ces.2015.09.029.
Res. 21, 14158e14165. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3320-y. District, S., Angeles, L., Creek, W., 1996. Anaerobic dechlorination using a uidized-
Borja, R., Banks, C.J., Wang, Z., 1995. Kinetic evaluation of an anaerobic uidized-bed bed GAC reactor. Water Res. 30, 160e170.
reaction treating slaughterhouse wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 52, 163e167. Diz, H., Novak, J., 1998. Fluidized bed for removing iron and acidity from acid mine
Borja, R., Gonz, E., Raposo, F., Mill, F., Mart, A., 2001. Performance evaluation of a drainage. J. Environ. Eng. 124, 701.
mesophilic anaerobic uidized-bed reactor treating wastewater derived from Dong, S., Zhang, X., He, F., Dong, S., Wang, B., 2014. Visible-light photocatalytic
the production of proteins from extracted sunower four. Bioresour. Technol. degradation of methyl orange over spherical activated carbon-supported and Er
76, 45e52. 3 : YAlO3-doped TiO2 in a uidized bed. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 90,
Borja, R., Rinco n, B., Raposo, F., Dom, J.R., Milla n, F., Mart, A., 2004. Mesophilic 880e887. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.4391.
anaerobic digestion in a uidised-bed reactor of wastewater from the produc- Dora, D.T.K., Mohanty, Y.K., Roy, G.K., 2012. Hydrodynamics of three-phase uid-
tion of protein isolates from chickpea our. Process Biochem. 39, 1913e1921. ization of a homogeneous ternary mixture of irregular particles. Chem. Eng. Sci.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2003.09.022. 79, 210e218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2012.04.035.
Brackin, M.J., Mckenzie, D.E., Hughes, B.M., Heitkamp, M.A., 1996. Laboratory-scale Dora, T.K., Mohanty, Y.K., Roy, G.K., Sarangi, B., 2013. Adsorption studies of as ( III )
evaluation of uidized bed reactor technology for biotreatment of maleic an- from wastewater with a novel adsorbent in a three-phase uidized bed by using
hydride process wastewater. J. Ind. Microbiol. 216e223. response surface method. J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 1, 150e158. http://dx.doi.org/
Briones, R.M., de Luna, M.D.G., Lu, M.-C., 2012. Optimization of acetaminophen 10.1016/j.jece.2013.04.011.
degradation by uidized-bed Fenton process. Desalin. Water Treat. 45, 100e111. Dutta, S., Suciu, G.D., 1992. An experimental study of the effectiveness of bafes and
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2012.692015. internals in breaking bubbles in uid beds. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 25, 345e348.
Bufere, P., Moletta, R., Elmaleh, S., 1998. Anaerobic digestion of wine distillery Efstathios, E., Michaelides, S., 2013. Fluidized Bed Reactors, in: Heat and Mass
wastewater in down-ow uidized bed. Water Res. 32, 3593e3600. Transfer in Particulate Suspensions. Springer, Newyork, pp. 89e119. http://
Burghate, S.P., Ingole, N.W., 2013. Fluidized bed biolm reactor e a novel waste- dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-5854-8.
water treatment reactor. Int. J. Res. Environ. Sci. Technol. 3, 145e155. Eldyasti, A., Nakhla, G., Zhu, J., 2014. Inuence of biolm thickness on nitrous oxide
Buthiyappan, A., Abdul Aziz, A.R., Wan Daud, W.M.A., 2016. Recent advances and (N2O) emissions from denitrifying uidized bed bioreactors (DFBBRs).
prospects of catalytic advanced oxidation process in treating textile efuents. J. Biotechnol. 192, 281e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2014.10.008.
Rev. Chem. Eng. 32, 1e47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/revce-2015-0034. Escudero, D.R., 2010. Bed Height and Material Density Effects on Fluidized Bed
Carbajo, J.B., Boltes, K., Leton, P., 2010. Treatment of phenol in an anaerobic uidized Hydrodynamics. Iowa State University.
bed reactor (AFBR): continuous and batch regime. Biodegradation 21, 603e613. Fernandez, N., Montalvo, S., Borja, R., Guerrero, L., Sa nchez, E., Corte s, I.,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10532-010-9328-1. Colmenarejo, M.F., Travieso, L., Raposo, F., 2008. Performance evaluation of an
Cechinel, M.A.P., Ulson De Souza, S.M.A.G., Ulson De Souza, A.A., 2014. Study of lead anaerobic uidized bed reactor with natural zeolite as support material when
(II) adsorption onto activated carbon originating from cow bone. J. Clean. Prod. treating high-strength distillery wastewater. Renew. Energy 33, 2458e2466.
65, 342e349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.08.020. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2008.02.002.
Chen, M., Ren, H., Ding, L., Gao, B., 2015. Effect of different carriers and operating Forster, C.F., 1980. Aeration of uidised bed reactors. Environ. Technol. Lett. 1,
parameters on degradation of ax wastewater by uidized-bed Fenton process. 253e258. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09593338009383974.
Water Sci. Technol. 71, 1760e1767. http://dx.doi.org/10.2166/wst.2015.147. Gao, D., Hu, Q., Yao, C., Ren, N., 2014. Treatment of domestic wastewater by an
Chen, T.-C., Matira, E.M., Lu, M.-C., Dalida, M.L.P., 2016. Degradation of dimethyl integrated anaerobic uidized-bed membrane bioreactor under moderate to
sulfoxide through uidized-bed Fenton process. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 300, low temperature conditions. Bioresour. Technol. 159, 193e198. http://
1e12. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.06.069. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.02.086.
Cheng, C.K., Deraman, M.R., Ng, K.H., Khan, M.R., 2016. Preparation of titania doped Garcia, E.H., Rodriguez, A., Prados, A., Klein, J., 1999. A uid dynamic model for
argentum photocatalyst and its photoactivity towards palm oil mill efuent three-phase airlift reactors. Chem. Eng. Sci. 54, 2359e2370.
degradation. J. Clean. Prod. 112, 1128e1135. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Gaya, I.U., Halim, A., 2008. Heterogeneous photocatalytic degradation of organic
1512 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

contaminants over titanium dioxide: a review of fundamentals, progress and uidized bed reactor. Bioprocess Eng. 22, 461e466.
problems. J. Photochem. Photobiol. C Photochem. Rev. 9, 1e12. http://dx.doi.org/ Lee, C., Yang, W., Chiou, C., 2006. Utilization of water clarier sludge for copper
10.1016/j.jphotochemrev.2007.12.003. removal in a liquid uidized-bed reactor. J. Hazard. Mater 129, 58e63. http://
Geldart, D., 1973. Types of uidization. Powder Technol. 7, 285e292. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2005.06.045.
Glaze, W.H., Kang, J.-W., Chapin, D.H., 1987. The chemistry of water treatment Lee, D.K., Kim, S.C., Cho, I.C., Kim, S.J., Kim, S.W., 2004. Photocatalytic oxidation of
processes involving ozone, hydrogen peroxide and ultraviolet radiation. Ozone microcystin-LR in a uidized bed reactor having TiO2-coated activated carbon.
Sci. Eng. 9, 335e352. Sep. Purif. Technol. 34, 59e66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1383-5866(03)00175-
Gonzalez, G., Herrera, M.G., Garcia, M.T., Pena, M.M., 2001. Biodegradation of phenol 8.
in a continuous process: comparative study of stirred tank and uidized-bed Li, H., Priambodo, R., Wang, Y., Zhang, H., Huang, Y., 2015. Mineralization of
bioreactors. Bioresour. Technol. 76, 245e251. bisphenol A by photo-Fenton-like process using a waste iron oxide catalyst in a
Gorji-kandi, S., Alavi-amleshi, S.M., Mostou, N., 2015. Experimental investigating three-phase uidized bed reactor. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 53, 68e73. http://
the effect of bed geometry on solids mixing in uidized beds. Part. Sci. Technol. dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2015.02.024.
6351, 1e7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02726351.2015.1054532. Li, J., Ge, Z., He, Z., 2014. A uidized bed membrane bioelectrochemical reactor for
Han, H., Lee, W., Kim, Y., Kwon, J., Choi, H., Kang, Y., Kim, S., 2003. Phase hold-up and energy-efcient wastewater treatment. Bioresour. Technol. 167, 310e315.
Critical uidization velocity in a three-phase inverse uidized bed. Korean J. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.06.034.
Chem. Eng. 20, 163e168. Lim, T., Kim, S., 2002. Photocatalytic degradation of Trichloroethylene over TiO2/
Haribabu, K., Sivasubramanian, V., 2016. Biodegradation of organic content in SiO2 in an annulus uidized bed reactor. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 19, 1072e1077.
wastewater in uidized bed bioreactor using low-density biosupport. Desalin. Lin, J., Zhang, X., Li, Z., Lei, L., 2010. Biodegradation of Reactive blue 13 in a two-stage
Water Treat. 3994 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19443994.2014.992978. anaerobic/aerobic uidized beds system with a Pseudomonas sp. isolate. Bio-
Haroun, M., Idris, A., 2009. Treatment of textile wastewater with an anaerobic resour. Technol. 101, 34e40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2009.07.037.
uidized bed reactor. Desalination 237, 357e366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Liu, J., Li, J., Mei, R., Wang, F., Sellamuthu, B., 2014. Treatment of recalcitrant organic
j.desal.2008.01.027. silicone wastewater by uidized-bed Fenton process. Sep. Purif. Technol. 132,
Heijnen, J.J., Mulder, A., Enger, W., Hoeks, F., 1989. Review on the application of 16e22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2014.04.050.
anaerobic uidized bed reactors in waste-water treatment. Chem. Eng. J. 41 Lu, M., Chen, J., Chang, C., 1999. Oxidation of Dichlorvos with Hydrogen Peroxide
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0300-9467(89)80029-2. Using Ferrous Ion as Catalyst.
Huang, C.P., Huang, Y.H., 2009. Application of an active immobilized iron oxide with Luna, M.D.G., de Briones, R.M., Su, C., Lu, M., 2013. Kinetics of acetaminophen
catalytic H2O2 for the mineralization of phenol in a batch photo-uidized bed degradation by Fenton oxidation in a uidized-bed reactor. Chemosphere 90,
reactor. Appl. Catal. A Gen. 357, 135e141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ 1444e1448. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2012.09.003.
j.apcata.2008.12.043. Mailler, R., Gasperi, J., Coquet, Y., Bulet, A., Vulliet, E., Deshayes, S., Zedek, S., Mir-
Huang, J., Yan, J., Wu, C., 2000. Comparative bioparticle and hydrodynamic char- ande-Bret, C., Eudes, V., Bressy, A., Caupos, E., Moilleron, R., Chebbo, G.,
acteristics of conventional and tapered anaerobic uidized-bed bioreactors. Rocher, V., 2016. Removal of a wide range of emerging pollutants from waste-
J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 75, 269e278. water treatment plant discharges by micro-grain activated carbon in uidized
Jaafari, J., Mesdaghinia, A., Nabizadeh, R., Hoseini, M., 2014. Inuence of upow bed as tertiary treatment at large pilot scale. Sci. Total Environ. 542, 983e996.
velocity on performance and biolm characteristics of Anaerobic Fluidized Bed http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.10.153.
Reactor ( AFBR ) in treating high-strength wastewater. J. Environ. Heal. Sci. Eng. Malik, P.K., Saha, S.K., 2003. Oxidation of direct dyes with hydrogen peroxide using
12, 1e10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40201-014-0139-x. ferrous ion as catalyst. Sep. Purif. Technol 31, 241e250. http://dx.doi.org/
Janyasuthiwong, S., Rene, E.R., Esposito, G., Lens, P.N.L., 2015. Effect of pH on Cu, Ni 10.1016/S1383-5866(02)00200-9.
and Zn removal by biogenic sulde precipitation in an inversed uidized bed Matira, E.M., Chen, T.-C., Lu, M.-C., Dalida, M.L.P., 2015. Degradation of dimethyl
bioreactor. Hydrometallurgy 158, 94e100. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ sulfoxide through uidized-bed Fenton process. J. Hazard. Mater 300, 218e226.
j.hydromet.2015.10.009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2015.06.069.
Jena, H.M., Roy, G.K., Meikap, B.C., 2009. Hydrodynamics of a gas e liquid e solid Meng, C.N., Jin, B., Chow, C.W.K., Saint, C., 2010. Recent developments in photo-
uidized bed with hollow cylindrical particles. Chem. Eng. Process. Process catalytic water treatment technology: a review. Water Res. 44, 2997e3027.
Intensif. 48, 279e287. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cep.2008.04.003. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.02.039.
Jianping, W., Lei, P., Liping, D., Guozhu, M., 2003. The denitrication treatment of Midha, V., Jha, M.K., Dey, A., 2012. Sulde oxidation in uidized bed bioreactor using
low C/N ratio nitrate-nitrogen wastewater in a gas e liquid e solid uidized bed nylon support material. J. Environ. Sci. 24, 512e519. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
bioreactor. Chem. Eng. J. 94, 155e159. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1385-8947(03) S1001-0742(11)60799-7.
00049-4. Mohanty, K., Das, D., Biswas, M.N., 2008. Treatment of phenolic wastewater in a
Jin, Y., Wei, F., Wang, Y., 2003. Effect of internal tubes and bafes. In: Yang, W.-C. novel multi-stage external loop airlift reactor using activated carbon. Sep. Purif.
(Ed.), Handbook of Fluidization and Fluid-Particle Systems. Marcel Dekker, Inc, Technol. 58, 311e319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2007.05.005.
New York, pp. 171e200. Mostou, N., Chaouki, J., 2001. Local solid mixing in gasesolid uidized beds.
Jordening, H.-J., Buchholz, K., 1999. Fixed lm Stationary bed and uidized bed Powder Technol. 114, 23e31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0032-5910(00)00258-
reactors. In: Rehm, H.-J., Reed, G. (Eds.), Biotechnology: Environmental Pro- 8.
cesses I. Wiley-VCH Verlag, GmBH, Weinheim, Germany, pp. 493e512. http:// Muangthai, I., Ratanatamsakul, C., Lu, M., 2010. Removal of 2, 4-Dichlorophenol by
dx.doi.org/10.1002/9783527620999.ch24l. uidized-bed Fenton process. Sustain. Environ. Res. 20, 325e331.
Jovanovic, M., Grbavcic, Z., Rajic, N., Obradovic, B., 2014. Removal of Cu (II) from Mungmart, M., Kijsirichareonchai, U., Tonanon, N., Prechanont, S., Panpranot, J.,
aqueous solutions by using uidized zeolite A beads: hydrodynamic and Yamamoto, T., 2011. Metal catalysts impregnated on porous media for aqueous
sorption studies. Chem. Eng. Sci. 117, 85e92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ phenol decomposition within three-phase uidized-bed reactor. J. Hazard.
j.ces.2014.06.017. Mater 185, 606e612. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2010.09.061.
Kanki, T., Hamasaki, S., Sano, N., Toyoda, A., 2005. Water purication in a uidized Mustafa, N., Elbeshbishy, E., Nakhla, G., Zhu, J., 2014. Anaerobic digestion of
bed photocatalytic reactor using TiO2 -coated ceramic particles. Chem. Eng. J. municipal wastewater sludges using anaerobic uidized bed bioreactor. Bio-
108, 155e160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2005.01.014. resour. Technol. 172, 461e466. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.09.081.
Karadag, D., Koroglu, O.E., Ozkaya, B., Cakmakci, M., 2015. A review on anaerobic Na, Y., Kim, D., Lee, C., Lee, S., Park, Y., Oh, Y., Park, S., Song, S., 2004. Photocatalytic
biolm reactors for the treatment of dairy industry wastewater. Process Bio- decolorization of rhodamine B by uidized bed reactor with hollow ceramic ball
chem. 50, 262e271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procbio.2014.11.005. photocatalyst. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 21, 430e435.
Khan, M.J.H., Hussain, M.A., Mansourpour, Z., Mostou, N., Ghasem, N.M., Na, Y., Song, S., Park, Y., 2005. Photocatalytic decolorization of rhodamine B by
Abdullah, E.C., 2014. CFD simulation of uidized bed reactors for polyolen immobilized TiO2/UV in a uidized-bed reactor. Korean J. Chem. Eng. 22,
production e a review. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 20, 3919e3946. http://dx.doi.org/ 196e200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02701484.
10.1016/j.jiec.2014.01.044. Nam, W., Kim, J., Han, G., 2002. Photocatalytic oxidation of methyl orange in a
Kim, J., Kim, K., Ye, H., Lee, E., Shin, C., McCarty, P.L., Bae, J., 2011. Anaerobic uidized three-phase uidized bed reactor. Chemosphere 47, 1019e1024.
bed membrane bioreactor for wastewater treatment. Environ. Sci. Technol. 45, Nam, W., Woo, K., Han, G., 2009. Photooxidation of anionic surfactant (sodium
576e581. http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/es1027103. lauryl sulfate) in a three-phase uidized bed reactor using TiO2/SiO2 photo-
Kim, K., Yang, W., Ye, Y., Labarge, N., Logan, B.E., 2016. Performance of anaerobic catalyst. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 15, 348e353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
uidized membrane bioreactors using efuents of microbial fuel cells treating j.jiec.2008.11.006.
domestic wastewater. Bioresour. Technol. 208, 58e63. http://dx.doi.org/ Nguyen-tien, K., Patwari, A.N., Schume, A., Deckwer, W.-D., 1984. Liquid dispersion
10.1016/j.biortech.2016.02.067. in three-phase uidized beds. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 1249, 3e4.
Kim, S.D., Kang, Y., 1997. Heat and mass transfer in three-phase uidized-bed Nikolov, V., Farag, I., Nikov, I., 2000. Gas-liquid mass transfer in bioreactor with
reactorsean overview. Chem. Eng. Sci. 52, 3639e3660. three-phase inverse uidized bed. Bioprocess Eng. 23, 427e429.
Kulkarni, S.J., Tapre, R.W., Patil, S.V., Sawarkar, M.B., 2013. Adsorption of phenol Ochieng, A., Odiyo, J.O., Mutsago, M., 2003. Biological treatment of mixed industrial
from wastewater in uidized bed using coconut shell activated carbon. Procedia wastewaters in a uidised bed reactor. J. Hazard. Mater 96, 79e90.
Eng. 51, 300e307. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2013.01.040. Ochieng, A., Ogada, T., Sisenda, W., Wambua, P., 2002. Brewery wastewater treat-
Kunii, D., Levenspiel, O., 1991. Fluidization engineering. In: Second edi (Ed.), But- ment in a uidised bed bioreactor. J. Hazard. Mater 90, 311e321.
terworth-heinemann, Boston. Olowson, P.A., 1994. Inuence of pressure and uidization velocity on the hydro-
Lakshmi, A.C.V., Balamurugan, M., Sivakumar, M., Samuel, T.N., Velan, M., 2000. dynamics of a uidized bed containing horizontal tubes. Chem. Eng. Sci. 49,
Minimum uidization velocity and friction factor in a liquid-solid inverse 2437e2446.
M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514 1513

Onysko, K.A., Robinson, C.W., Budman, H.M., 2002. Improved modelling of the 10.1016/j.cej.2012.08.063.
unsteady-state behaviour of an immobilized-cell, uidized-bed bioreactor for Su, C., Pukdee-asa, M., Ratanatamskul, C., Lu, M., 2011a. Effect of operating pa-
phenol degradation. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 80, 239e252. rameters on decolorization and COD removal of three reactive dyes by Fenton s
Othaman, R.M., Hassan, A.M., Shirai, Y., Baharuddin, S.A., Ali, M.A.A., Idris, J., 2014. reagent using uidized-bed reactor. Desalination 278, 211e218. http://
Treatment of efuents from palm oil mill process to achieve river water quality dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2011.05.022.
for reuse as recycled water in a zero emission system. J. Clean. Prod. 67, 58e61. Su, C., Pukdee-Asa, M., Ratanatamskul, C., Lu, M.-C., 2011b. Effect of operating pa-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.12.004. rameters on the decolorization and oxidation of textile wastewater by the
Parthiban, R., Iyer, P.V.R., Sekaran, G., 2007. Anaerobic tapered uidized bed reactor uidized-bed Fenton process. Sep. Purif. Technol. 83, 100e105. http://
for starch wastewater treatment and modeling using multilayer perceptron dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.seppur.2011.09.021.
neural network. J. Environ. Sci. 19, 1416e1423. Tabassum, S., Zhang, Y., Zhang, Z., 2015. An integrated method for palm oil mill
Pelaez, M., Antoniou, M.G., He, X., Dionysiou, D.D., Cruz, A. A De, Tsimeli, K., efuent (POME) treatment for achieving zero liquid discharge - a pilot study.
Triantis, T., Kaloudis, T., Williams, C., Aubel, M., Foss, A., Khan, U., Shea, K.E.O., J. Clean. Prod. 95, 148e155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.02.056.
Westrick, J., 2010. Xenobiotics in the urban water Cycle. Environ. Pollut. 16, Tavoulareas, E.S., 1991. Fluidized-bed combustion. Annu. Rev. Energy Environ. 16,
101e127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3509-7. 25e57.
Pen, R.I..F.J., Jose, X.S.., 2008. Feasibility study of degradation of phenol in a Tisa, F., Aziz, A.R.A., Mohd, W.W.A., 2014. Applicability of uidized bed reactor in
uidized bed bioreactor with a cyclodextrin polymer as biolm carrier. recalcitrant compound degradation through advanced oxidation processes: a
Biodegradation 19, 589e597. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10532-007-9164-0. review. J. Environ. Manage 146, 260e275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
Perez, M., Rodriguez-Cano, R., Romero, L.I., Sales, D., 2007. Performance of anaerobic j.jenvman.2014.07.032.
thermophilic uidized bed in the treatment of cutting-oil wastewater. Bio- Tsukuda, S., Christianson, L., Kolb, A., Saito, K., Summerfelt, S., 2015. Heterotrophic
resour. Technol. 98, 3456e3463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ denitrication of aquaculture efuent using uidized sand biolters. Aquac.
j.biortech.2006.11.005. Eng. 64, 49e59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaeng.2014.10.010.
Pouran, S.R., Abdul Raman, A.A., Wan Daud, W.M.A., 2014. Review on the applica- Villa-Gomez, K.D., Enright, M.A., Rini, L.E., Buttice, A., Kramer, H., Lens, P., 2014.
tion of modied iron oxides as heterogeneous catalysts in Fenton reactions. Effect of hydraulic retention time on metal precipitation in sulfate reducing
J. Clean. Prod. 64, 24e35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.09.013. inverse uidized bed reactors. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 90, 120e129. http://
Pozzo, R.L., Giombi, J.L., Baltana s, M.A., Cassano, A.E., 2000. The performance in a dx.doi.org/10.1002/jctb.4296.
uidized bed reactor of photocatalysts immobilized onto inert supports. Catal. Vimonses, V., Jin, B., Chow, C.W.K., Saint, C., 2010. Development of a pilot uidised
Today 62, 175e187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0920-5861(00)00419-3. bed reactor system with a formulated clay e lime mixture for continuous
Qin, T.F., Shen, B.X., Zhou, Q.X., Liu, J.C., 2014. Biodegradation performance of an removal of chemical pollutants from wastewater. Chem. Eng. J. 158, 535e541.
inner-loop three-phase uidized-bed bioreactor to treat petrochemical waste- http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2010.01.044.
water. Pet. Sci. Technol. 32, 848e855. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ Vinod, A.V., Reddy, G.V., 2005. Simulation of biodegradation process of phenolic
10916460903514931. wastewater at higher concentrations in a uidized-bed bioreactor. Biochem.
Qiu, L., Chen, W., Zhong, L., Wu, W., Wu, S., Chen, J., Zhang, F., Zhong, W., 2014. Eng. J. 24, 1e10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bej.2005.01.005.
Formaldehyde biodegradation by immobilized Methylobacterium sp. XJLW cells Wang, D., Mclaughlin, E., Pfeffer, R., Lin, Y.S., 2011. Aqueous phase adsorption of
in a three-phase uidized bed reactor. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 37, 1377e1384. toluene in a packed and uidized bed of hydrophobic aerogels. Chem. Eng. J.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00449-013-1110-4. 168, 1201e1208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2011.02.014.
Rajasimman, M., Karthikeyan, C., 2007. Aerobic digestion of starch wastewater in a Wang, R., Chang, S., 1999. Adsorption/desorption of phenols onto granular activated
uidized bed bioreactor with low density biomass support. J. Hazard. Mater carbon in a liquid e solid uidized bed. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 654,
143, 82e86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2006.08.071. 647e654.
Ramamoorthy, S., Subramanian, N., 1981. Axial solid mixing and bubble character- Wang, R.C., Fan, K.S., Chang, J.S., 2009. Removal of acid dye by ZnFe2O4/TiO2-
istics in gas-uidized beds with vertical internals. Chem. Eng. J. 22, 237e242. immobilized granular activated carbon under visible light irradiation in a
Ratanatamskul, C., Narkwittaya, S., Masomboon, N., Lu, M.-C., 2010. Oxidation of recycle liquid-solid uidized bed. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 40, 533e540.
2,6-dimethylaniline by the uidized-bed Fenton process. Reac Kinet. Mech. Cat. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2009.02.001.
101, 301e311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11144-010-0236-5. Wang, Y., Priambodo, R., Zhang, H., Huang, Y., 2015. Degradation of the azo dye
Reinhold, G., Merrath, S., Lennemann, F., Markl, H., 1996. Modelling the hydrody- Orange G in a uidized bed reactor using iron oxide as a heterogenous photo-
namics and the liquid-mixing behaviour of a biogass tower reactor. Chem. Eng. Fenton catalyst. RSC Adv. 5, 45276e45283. http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/
Sci. 51, 4065e4073. C5RA04238K.
Rodrguez, R., Espada, J.J., Pariente, M.I., Melero, J.A., Martnez, F., Molina, R., 2016. Wang, Z., Kim, M., Nakhla, G., Zhu, J., 2016. Anaerobic uidized bed digestion of
Comparative LCA study of heterogeneous and homogenous Fenton processes primary and thickened waste activated sludges. Chem. Eng. J. 284, 620e629.
for the treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater. J. Clean. Prod. 124, 21e29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.08.155.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.02.064. Wei, B.C., Xie, B., Xiao, H., 2000. Hydrodynamics in an internal loop airlift reactor
Rosa, J.M., Fileti, A.M.F., Tambourgi, E.B., Santana, J.C.C., 2015. Dyeing of cotton with with a convergence-divergence draft tube. Chem. Eng. Technol. 23, 38e45.
reactive dyestuffs: the continuous reuse of textile wastewater efuent treated Weipeng, Z., Yumei, Y., Guangji, Z., Chao, Y., 2014. Mixing characteristics and bubble
by Ultraviolet/Hydrogen peroxide homogeneous photocatalysis. J. Clean. Prod. behavior in an airlift internal loop reactor with low aspect ratio *. Chin. J. Chem.
90, 60e65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.11.043. Eng. 22, 611e621. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1004-9541(14)60089-6.
Sabarunisha, S.B., Radha, K.V., 2014. Hydrodynamic behavior of inverse uidized Wirsum, M., Fett, F., Iwanowa, N., Lukjanow, G., 2001. Particle mixing in bubbling
bed biolm reactor for phenol biodegradation using Pseudomonas uorescens. uidized beds of binary particle systems. Powder Technol. 120, 63e69. http://
Korean J. Chem. Eng. 31, 436e445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11814-013-0260- dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0032-5910(01)00348-5.
z. Wu, C., Huang, J., 1996. Bioparticle characteristics of tapered anaerobic uidized-
Sahinkaya, E., Gunes, F.M., Ucar, D., Kaksonen, A.H., 2011. Suldogenic uidized bed bed bioreactors. Water Int. 30, 233e241.
treatment of real acid mine drainage water. Bioresour. Technol. 102, 683e689. Yan, C., Fan, Y., Lu, C., Zhang, Y., Liu, Y., Cao, R., Gao, J., Xu, C., 2009. Solids mixing in a
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2010.08.042. uidized bed riser. Powder Technol. 193, 110e119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
Shet, A., Shetty, K.V., 2016. Solar light mediated photocatalytic degradation of j.powtec.2009.02.015.
phenol using Ag core - TiO2 shell (Ag@TiO2) nanoparticles in batch and uid- Yang, W.-C., 2003. Handbook of Fluidization and Fluid-particle System. Chemical
ized bed reactor. Sol. Energy 127, 67e78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Engineering. Marcel Dekker, Inc, New York.
j.solener.2015.12.049. Yu, J., Ji, M., Yue, P.L., 1999. A three-phase uidized bed reactor in the combined
Shih, Y., Tsai, M., Huang, Y., 2013. Mineralization and deuoridation of 2,2,3,3- anaerobic/aerobic treatment of wastewater. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 626,
tetrauoro-1-propanol (TFP) by UV oxidation in a novel three-phase uidized 619e626.
bed reactor (3P-FBR). Water Res. 47, 2325e2330. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Zeroual, Y., Kim, B.S., Yang, M.W., Blaghen, M., Lee, K.M., 2007. Decolorization of
j.watres.2013.02.007. some azo dyes by immobilized Geotrichum sp. Biomass Fluid. Bed Bioreact.
Shin, C., Mccarty, P.L., Kim, J., Bae, J., 2014. Pilot-scale temperate-climate treatment Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol 142, 307e316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12010-
of domestic wastewater with a staged anaerobic uidized membrane bioreactor 007-0037-0.
( SAF-MBR ). Bioresour. Technol. 159, 95e103. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ Zhang, R., Wang, A., 2015. Modication of wool by air plasma and enzymes as a
j.biortech.2014.02.060. cleaner and environmentally friendly process. J. Clean. Prod. 87, 961e965.
Si, C., Zhou, J., Guo, Q., 2011. Characterization of pressure uctuation signals in an http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.004.
acoustic bubbling uidized bed. J. Taiwan Inst. Chem. Eng. 42, 929e936. http:// Zhang, T., Wei, C., Feng, C., Zhu, J., 2012. A novel airlift reactor enhanced by funnel
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jtice.2011.05.001. internals and hydrodynamics prediction by the CFD method. Bioresour. Technol.
Singh, R.I., Kumar, R., 2016. Current status and experimental investigation of oxy- 104, 600e607. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2011.11.008.
red uidized bed. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 61, 398e420. http:// Zhao, J., Zhong, X., Xu, H., 1992. A model of solid backmixing between stages in a
dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.04.021. gas-uidized bed with perforated bafes. Powder Technol. 73, 37e41.
Soon, A.N., Hameed, B.H., 2011. Heterogeneous catalytic treatment of synthetic dyes Zhong, W., Jin, B., Zhang, Y., Wang, X., Xiao, R., 2008. Fluidization of biomass par-
in aqueous media using Fenton and photo-assisted Fenton process. Desalination ticles in a gas - solid uidized bed. Energy Fuels 22, 4170e4176.
269, 1e16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.11.002. Zhou, D., Xu, Z., Wang, Y., Wang, J., 2015. Simultaneous removal of multi-pollutants
Su, C., Chen, C., Anotai, J., Lu, M., 2013. Removal of monoethanolamine and phos- in an intimate integrated occulation-adsorption uidized bed. Env. Sci. Pollut.
phate from thin-lm transistor liquid crystal display (TFT-LCD) wastewater by Res. 22, 3794e3802. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-014-3643-8.
the uidized-bed Fenton process. Chem. Eng. J. 222, 128e135. http://dx.doi.org/ Zhu, J., Salah, M., Zhou, Y., 1997. Radial and axial voidage distribution in circulating
1514 M.M. Bello et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production 141 (2017) 1492e1514

uidized bed with ring-type internals. J. Chem. Eng. Jpn. 30, 928e937. autotrophic denitrication in uidized-bed biolm reactors. Chem. Eng. J. 284,
Zou, G., Papirio, S., Hullebusch, E.D., Van, Puhakka, J.A., 2015. Fluidized-bed deni- 1287e1294. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2015.09.074.
trication of mining water tolerates high nickel concentrations. Bioresour. Zulfakar, M., Hairul, N.A.H., Akmal, H.M.R., Abdul Rahman, M., 2011. Photocatalytic
Technol. 179, 284e290. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2014.12.044. degradation of phenol in a uidized bed reactor utilizing immobilized TiO2
Zou, G., Papirio, S., Lakaniemi, A., Ahoranta, S.H., Puhakka, J.A., 2016. High rate photocatalyst: characterization and process studies. J. Appl. Sci. 11, 2320e2326.