Click on “Download PDF” for the PDF version or on the title for the HTML version.
If you are not an ASABE member or if your employer has not arranged for access to the full-text, Click here for options.
Flow Rates Influence on Manure Ammonia Mitigation Using an Acid-Filled Gas-Permeable Membrane
Published by the American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan www.asabe.orgCitation: Paper number 131598251, 2013 Kansas City, Missouri, July 21 - July 24, 2013. (doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13031/aim.20131598251) @2013
Authors: Amir Masoud Samani Majd, Saqib Mukhtar
Keywords: Ammonia recovery Gas-permeable membrane Ammonium sulfate Gas diffusion recipient solution
Ammonia (NH3) gas from liquid manure (LM) can be diffused into a tubular gas-permeable membrane (GPM) and recovered by capturing it in an acidic recipient solution circulating in the GPM. The objective of this research was to enhance the concentration of recovered NH3 by increasing the flow rate of recipient solution and controlling its pH. Two laboratory set-ups consisting of a closed LM chamber, a diluted sulfuric acid (H2SO4) flask and two GPM systems were fabricated. The pH value of the recipient solution was controlled between 2 and 6 by using a pH controlling device. Later, using a similar experimental set-up, the hypothesis of enhancing NH3 concentrations under field conditions was tested at a dairy lagoon. The results of the experiments conducted using the pH controlling device showed an improved NH3 recovery process that increased the concentration and mass of captured NH3 in the recipient solution. In laboratory experiments, increasing flow rate of recipient solution in GPM, from 5.6 to 36 mL/min (more than 6 folds), increased its NH3 concentration by more than 30 %. The results of field experiments showed that increases in flow rates of recipient solution in GPM from 40 mL/min to 280 mL/min (7 folds) enhanced recipient solutions NH3 concentrations by 16.5%. Additionally, the rate of NH3 recovery (concentration per unit time) in the field, with higher recipient solution flow rates than the laboratory studies, was greater than that in the laboratory studies.