本文選題：青貯玉米秸稈 + 厭氧消化��； 參考：《蘭州理工大學》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文以青貯玉米秸稈為原料,研究了青貯玉米秸稈與牛糞在總固體(Total Solid,TS)比3:7混合、接種量30%、37±1℃條件下厭氧消化產(chǎn)甲烷特性和系統(tǒng)穩(wěn)定性的變化。嘗試應用4.5%氨水(Ammonium Hydroxide,AH)和4%Na OH(Sodium Hydroxide,SH)對青貯玉米秸稈進行聯(lián)合預處理,并使用Modified Gompertz方程和Logistic函數(shù)對試驗數(shù)據(jù)進行擬合和分析,為青貯玉米厭氧消化產(chǎn)業(yè)化應用提供一定的參考和依據(jù)。本研究得出以下結論:1.青貯玉米秸稈與干黃玉米秸稈厭氧消化特性對比青貯玉米秸稈(ME)在青貯24個月后厭氧消化產(chǎn)氣特性與干秸稈(DC)相近,差異在1%以內,揮發(fā)性固體(volatile solid,VS)產(chǎn)氣率較DC組提高約3.40%,VS產(chǎn)甲烷率提高約2.63%。2.由不同青貯玉米秸稈與牛糞混合厭氧消化試驗可得:(1)不同青貯玉米秸稈與牛糞混合厭氧消化在原料特性、產(chǎn)氣特性和系統(tǒng)穩(wěn)定性相近。(2)通過產(chǎn)甲烷潛力(Biochemical Methane Potential,BMP)試驗和Modified Gompertz方程、Logistic函數(shù)的擬合,FA組最大甲烷累積產(chǎn)量約為204.02~209.86m L·g-1TS,最大產(chǎn)甲烷速率約為10.20~10.22 m L/g·d-1 TS,延滯期約為12~14d,厭氧消化試驗綜合表現(xiàn)最佳。3.青貯玉米秸稈經(jīng)氨聯(lián)合處理后厭氧消化試驗結果:(1)各處理組運行穩(wěn),化學需氧量(Chemicals Oxygen Demand,COD)消解率遠大于未處理組。(2)各處理組間差異明顯,且無顯著延滯期或延滯期較短。結合通過BMP試驗和兩個模型可知,兩個模型對AH-PA組的擬合效果均不理想(R2分別為0.7148和0.6903),其余處理組的擬合數(shù)據(jù)表明Logistic函數(shù)的擬合更佳,R2最小值出現(xiàn)在AH-FA組(0.9788)。AH-LB組延滯期最大,約為5~6d。(3)氨處理在一定程度上降低了青貯玉米秸稈的厭氧消化產(chǎn)氣特性,其中AH-FA組整體降幅最大,累積產(chǎn)氣量約降低63.71%;AH-PA組的降幅最小,累積產(chǎn)氣(甲烷)量、TS/VS產(chǎn)氣率降幅分別為17.24%、22.22%、17.24%和3.05%。4.青貯玉米秸稈經(jīng)堿聯(lián)合處理后厭氧消化試驗結果:(1)同氨處理組,系統(tǒng)穩(wěn)定性高。(2)各處理組差異明顯,無顯著延滯期或延滯期較短。結合通過BMP試驗和兩個模型可得,兩個模型對Na OH處理組的擬合均不理想(SH-LB和SH-ME組除外,兩個模型的R2均大于0.99),整體上Logistic函數(shù)的擬合效果更優(yōu)異。(3)Na OH處理對不同青貯原料的產(chǎn)氣特性影響不同:SH-CB組各項數(shù)據(jù)均大于未處理組,其中VS產(chǎn)甲烷率提升最大,較未處理組提升約28.30%;SH-FA、SH-ME和SH-PA組則是部分提高部分下降;SH-LB組的各項指標均低于未處理組,其中TS產(chǎn)甲烷率降幅最大,約為33.40%。5.同等條件下氨聯(lián)合處理與堿聯(lián)合處理對青貯玉米秸稈影響的對比:(1)共性:兩種處理方式均明顯的中和青貯玉米秸稈的p H,并加速原料的水解酸化過程,提升厭氧消化系統(tǒng)對原料的利用率和轉化率,縮短厭氧消化試驗的周期,厭氧消化系統(tǒng)的穩(wěn)定性和效率優(yōu)質很改善。(2)差異:氨處理組除平均甲烷體積分數(shù)方面比未處理組提高約0.92~3.08%(AH-CB、AH-FA和AH-LB)外,其它方面均遠低于未處理組;Na OH處理組則表現(xiàn)各異,SH-CB組各項數(shù)據(jù)均大于未處理組,SH-FA、SH-ME和SH-PA組則是部分提高部分下降,SH-LB組的各項指標均低于未處理組。(3)兩個模型對AH-PA和SH-PA組的擬合效果均不理想,且整體上看Modified Gompertz方程的擬合效果均不如Logistic函數(shù),且較Na OH處理組更適于氨處理組的擬合。
[Abstract]:In this paper, the silage corn straw was used as the raw material to study the change of methane production and system stability in the anaerobic digestion of silage corn straw and cow dung mixed with total solid (Total Solid, TS) and the inoculation amount 30%, 37 + 1 C. 4.5% ammonia (Ammonium Hydroxide, AH) and 4%Na OH (Sodium Hydroxide, SH) were applied to the silage corn straw. Combined with Modified Gompertz equation and Logistic function, the experimental data were fitted and analyzed in order to provide some reference and basis for the industrial application of anaerobic digestion for silage corn. The following conclusions were drawn: 1. comparison of the anaerobic digestion characteristics of silage corn straw and dry yellow corn straw (ME) in green corn straw After 24 months of storage, the characteristics of anaerobic digestion were similar to that of dry straw (DC), the difference was within 1%. The gas yield of volatile solid (volatile solid, VS) was raised about 3.40% compared with that of DC group. The methane production rate of VS was improved by 2.63%.2. by the mixed anaerobic digestion test of different silage corn stalks and cow dung: (1) mixed anaerobic digestion of different silage corn stalks and cow dung In the properties of raw materials, the gas production characteristics and system stability are similar. (2) with the methane production potential (Biochemical Methane Potential, BMP) test, the Modified Gompertz equation and the Logistic function fitting, the maximum methane accumulation of FA group is about 204.02~209.86m L. G-1TS, the maximum methane production rate is approximately 10.20~10.22. 14d, anaerobic digestion test showed that the best.3. silage corn straw combined anaerobic digestion test results: (1) the treatment group runs steadily, the chemical oxygen demand (Chemicals Oxygen Demand, COD) digestion rate is far greater than the untreated group. (2) the difference between the treatment groups is obvious, and there is no significant delay or delay period. Combined through BMP test And the two models showed that the fitting effect of the two models to the AH-PA group was not ideal (R2 0.7148 and 0.6903 respectively). The fitting data of the rest of the treatment groups showed that the fitting of the Logistic function was better, the minimum R2 value appeared in the AH-FA group (0.9788).AH-LB group, and the 5~6d. (3) ammonia treatment reduced the silage corn straw to a certain extent. In anaerobic digestion, the total reduction of AH-FA group was the largest, the cumulative gas production was reduced by 63.71%, the decrease of AH-PA group was the smallest, the cumulative gas production (Jia Wan), and the decrease of TS/VS production rate were 17.24%, 22.22%, 17.24% and 3.05%.4. silage corn stalk after alkali treatment. (1) the system stability was high in the same ammonia treatment group. (2) the difference of each treatment group is obvious, there is no significant delay or delay. Combining the BMP test and two models, the fitting of the two models to the Na OH treatment group is not ideal (except the SH-LB and SH-ME group, the R2 of the two models are greater than 0.99), and the fitting effect of the Logistic function on the whole is better. (3) Na OH treatment for different silage materials The effects of gas production were different: the data of SH-CB group were greater than those in the untreated group, and the methane production rate of VS was increased by 28.30%, while SH-FA, SH-ME and SH-PA were partly reduced, and the indexes of SH-LB group were lower than those in the untreated group, and the methane production rate of TS was the largest, which was about the same conditions as 33.40%.5. under the same condition. The effects of combined treatment and alkali treatment on silage corn straw were compared: (1) common: two treatment methods were all obviously neutralized with silage corn straw P H, and accelerated the hydrolysis acidification process of raw materials, improved the utilization rate and conversion rate of anaerobic digestion system to raw materials, shortened the cycle of anaerobic digestion test, and the stability of anaerobic digestion system. And the efficiency is better. (2) difference: the ammonia treatment group is far lower than the untreated group in addition to the average methane volume fraction 0.92~3.08% (AH-CB, AH-FA and AH-LB), and the Na OH treatment group is different, the SH-CB group is larger than the untreated group, SH-FA, SH-ME and SH-PA groups are partially improved. All the indexes of the SH-LB group were lower than those in the untreated group. (3) the fitting effect of the two models to the AH-PA and SH-PA groups was not ideal, and the fitting effect of the Modified Gompertz equation on the whole was not as good as the Logistic function, and it was more suitable for the fitting of the ammonia treatment group than the Na OH treatment group.
【學位授予單位】：蘭州理工大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：S816.53

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 夏嵩;晏恒;付尹宣;付嘉琦;;餐廚垃圾厭氧發(fā)酵產(chǎn)沼氣潛力及其動力學研究[J];能源研究與管理;2016年04期

2 袁志慧;尤朝陽;王磊;張路廣;;中溫NaOH預處理對玉米秸稈發(fā)酵產(chǎn)沼氣的影響[J];江蘇農(nóng)業(yè)科學;2016年06期

3 陳瑩;尹常凱;朱南文;袁海平;樓紫陽;;電刺激條件下初始pH值對剩余污泥厭氧消化效果的影響[J];中國環(huán)境科學;2016年03期

4 韓婭新;張成明;陳雪蘭;李硯飛;岳瑞雪;姜立;李十中;;不同農(nóng)業(yè)有機廢棄物產(chǎn)甲烷特性比較[J];農(nóng)業(yè)工程學報;2016年01期

5 李超;劉剛金;劉靜溪;陳柳萌;張誠;董泰麗;鄧良偉;;基于產(chǎn)甲烷潛力和基質降解動力學的沼氣發(fā)酵物料評估[J];農(nóng)業(yè)工程學報;2015年24期

6 司清蕊;;氨化處理對秸稈的作用機理[J];畜牧獸醫(yī)科技信息;2015年10期

7 龔舒靜;段青松;楊姝;秦向東;;NaOH預處理對雜交狼尾草厭氧發(fā)酵產(chǎn)沼氣的影響[J];環(huán)境工程學報;2015年04期

8 張洪;李勇;郭志偉;倪海亮;任維琰;顧廣發(fā);;混合比對市政污泥與餐廚垃圾二級高溫共消化的影響[J];可再生能源;2015年03期

9 高樹梅;趙明星;許之揚;余益輝;王永會;黃振興;阮文權;;餐廚垃圾固渣厭氧發(fā)酵產(chǎn)甲烷潛力及Logistic動力學研究[J];安全與環(huán)境學報;2015年01期

10 任海偉;姚興泉;李金平;李志忠;王鳴剛;王春龍;張殿平;孫永明;;青貯玉米秸稈與牛糞混合厭氧消化產(chǎn)氣性能的試驗研究[J];中國沼氣;2015年01期

相關會議論文 前2條

1 張萬欽;郎乾乾;吳樹彪;董仁杰;龐昌樂;陳理;;豬不同生長階段糞便產(chǎn)沼氣潛力與特性[A];2012中國沼氣學會學術年會論文集[C];2012年

2 侯方安;康云友;;玉米秸稈的飼料加工利用技術探析[A];全國農(nóng)作物秸稈綜合利用學術研討會論文集[C];2004年

相關博士學位論文 前3條

1 夏益華;預處理對水葫蘆和稻秸厭氧消化產(chǎn)沼氣性能的影響研究[D];浙江大學;2014年

2 陳祥;餐廚垃圾兩相厭氧發(fā)酵氨氮特性與控制方法研究[D];浙江大學;2014年

3 袁紹春;蚯蚓處理污水污泥工藝及蚯蚓糞土地利用研究[D];重慶大學;2012年

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 趙拓;添加劑對玉米秸稈與白菜混貯品質影響及細菌多樣性研究[D];蘭州理工大學;2016年

2 葛振;城市垃圾厭氧發(fā)酵沼渣堆肥及其利用研究[D];北京建筑大學;2014年

3 美合熱阿依·木臺力甫（Mihray Mutallip）;乳酸菌與纖維素分解菌混合添加劑對青貯飼料品質的影響研究[D];新疆大學;2014年

4 徐清華;秸稈飼料復合化學調制效果研究[D];石河子大學;2014年

5 張亞甜;氨化預處理對稻草和玉米秸厭氧發(fā)酵產(chǎn)氣性能影響的試驗研究[D];北京化工大學;2013年

6 沈佳悅;太陽能加熱的三級恒溫沼氣生產(chǎn)系統(tǒng)運行策略優(yōu)化研究[D];蘭州理工大學;2012年

7 張慧強;常溫下氣動UASB反應器處理城市生活污水的性能研究[D];青島理工大學;2011年

8 朱瑩瑩;青貯飼料新工藝的研究[D];黑龍江大學;2011年

9 楚莉莉;不同原料及其配比厭氧發(fā)酵產(chǎn)氣效果研究[D];西北農(nóng)林科技大學;2008年

10 鄭萬里;熱堿預處理對秸稈厭氧發(fā)酵的影響[D];中國農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2004年

，

本文編號：2044104