What s new in water treatment
Download
1 / 40

What’s New in Water Treatment? - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 70 Views
  • Uploaded on

What’s New in Water Treatment?. How well could filters remove Particles? Coagulants and Filter Aids Sticky Particles and Sticky Media. Filter Performance Models. Iwasaki (1937) developed relationships describing the performance of deep bed filters.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' What’s New in Water Treatment?' - sonya-banks


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
What s new in water treatment

What’s New in Water Treatment?

How well could filters remove Particles?

Coagulants and Filter Aids

Sticky Particles and Sticky Media


Filter performance models
Filter Performance Models

  • Iwasaki (1937) developed relationships describing the performance of deep bed filters.

C is the particle concentration [number/L3]

l0 is the initial filter coefficient [1/L]

z is the media depth [L]

The particle’s chances of being caught are the same at all depths in the filter; pC* is proportional to depth


Filtration performance dimensional analysis
Filtration Performance: Dimensional Analysis

  • What is the parameter we are interested in measuring? _________________

  • How could we make performance dimensionless? ____________

  • What are the important forces?

Effluent concentration

C/C0 or pC*

Only effective in the attachment phase

Electrostatic

London van der Waals

Inertia

Viscous

Gravitational

Thermal

Need to create dimensionless force ratios!


Choose viscosity as the common force that inhibits transport

Gravitational

Thermal

Viscous

Viscous

Choose viscosity as the common force that inhibits transport

  • We will use viscosity as the repeating parameter and create a set of dimensionless force ratios

But these forces are functions of …


Gravity
Gravity

forces

velocities

v

pore

Gravity only helps when the streamline has a _________ component.

horizontal

Use this equation


Diffusion brownian motion
Diffusion (Brownian Motion)

v

pore

Diffusion velocity is high when the particle diameter is ________.

kB=1.38 x 10-23 J/°K

T = absolute temperature

small

dc is diameter of the collector


Geometric parameters
Geometric Parameters

  • What are the length scales that are related to particle capture by a filter?

    • ______________

    • __________________________

    • ______________

    • Porosity (void volume/filter volume) (e)

  • Create dimensionless groups

    • Choose the repeating length ________

Filter depth (z)

Collector diameter (media size) (dc)

Particle diameter (dp)

(dc)

Number of collectors!


Write the functional relationship
Write the functional relationship

attachments per contact

Length ratios

Force ratios

doubles

If we double depth of filter (or a) what does pC* do? ___________

How do we get more detail on this functional relationship?

Empirical measurements

Numerical models


Total removal ssf conditions

20 cm/hr

0.2 mm sand

1 m deep

Particle density of 1040 kg/m3

Total removal (SSF conditions)

Plots based on numerical models


How deep must a filter ssf be to remove 99 of bacteria
How deep must a filter (SSF) be to remove 99% of bacteria?

  • Assume a is 1 and dc is 0.2 mm, V0 = 20 cm/hr

  • For 1 m of sand pC*=____

  • Depth for pC* of ____ is _____

  • What does this mean?

20

2

10 cm

If the attachment efficiency were 1, then we could get great particle capture in a 1 m deep filter!


Total removal rsf conditions
Total removal (RSF conditions)

  • dc=0.5 mm

  • Approach velocity is 5 m/hr

  • 1 m deep

  • Particle density of 1040 kg/m3


How deep a rapid sand filter will remove 90 of cryptosporidium
How deep a Rapid Sand Filter will remove 90% of cryptosporidium?

  • Assume a is 1 and dc is 0.5 mm, V0 = 5 m/hr

  • dp is 4 mm

  • pC* is ____ for 1 m deep filter

  • z is ________________

1.8

1 m/1.8=0.55 m

We need flocculation to produce larger and more dense particles to get good removal in RSF


Slow sand filtration
Slow Sand Filtration cryptosporidium?

  • First filters to be used on a widespread basis

  • Fine sand with an effective size of 0.2 mm

  • Low flow rates (10 - 40 cm/hr)

  • Schmutzdecke (_____ ____) forms on top of the filter

    • causes high head loss

    • must be removed periodically

  • Used without coagulation/flocculation!

filter cake


Typical performance of ssf fed cayuga lake water
Typical Performance of SSF Fed Cayuga Lake Water cryptosporidium?

1

Fraction of influent E. coli remaining in the effluent

0.1

0.05

0

1

2

3

4

5

Time (days)

(Daily samples)

Filter performance doesn’t improve if the filter only receives distilled water


How do slow sand filters remove particles
How do Slow Sand Filters Remove Particles? cryptosporidium?

  • How do slow sand filters remove particles including bacteria, Giardia cysts, and Cryptosporidium oocysts from water?

  • Why does filter performance improve with time?

  • Why don’t SSF always remove Cryptosporidium oocysts?

  • Is it a biological or a physical/chemical mechanism?

  • Would it be possible to improve the performance of slow sand filters if we understood the mechanism?


Slow sand filtration research apparatus
Slow Sand Filtration Research Apparatus cryptosporidium?

Manometer/surge tube

Cayuga Lake water

(99% or 99.5% of the flow)

Manifold/valve block

Peristaltic pumps

Sampling Chamber

Auxiliary feeds

(each 0.5% of the flow)

Sampling tube

Lower to collect sample

To waste

1 liter sodium azide

1 liter E. coli feed

Filter cell with

18 cm of glass beads


Biological and physical chemical filter ripening

Quiescent Cayuga Lake water cryptosporidium?

1

Sodium azide

(3 mM)

Control

0.1

0.05

0

2

4

6

8

10

Time (days)

Biological and Physical/Chemical Filter Ripening

Continuously mixed Cayuga Lake water

1

Physical/chemical

Fraction of influent E. coli remaining in the effluent

Gradual growth of _______ or ________

0.1

biofilm

predator

0.05

0

1

2

3

4

5

Time (days)

What would happen with a short pulse of poison?


Biological poison

1 cryptosporidium?

Control

Sodium azide pulse

Sodium chloride pulse

0.1

0.08

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

Time—h

Biological Poison

Biofilms?

Abiotic?

q

Fraction of influent E. coli remaining in the effluent

predators

Grazers or suspension feeders?

___________________________ are removing bacteria

Suspension feeding predators


Chrysophyte
Chrysophyte cryptosporidium?

long flagellum used for locomotion and to provide feeding current

short flagellum

1 µm

stalk used to attach to substrate (not actually seen in present study)


Particle removal by size
Particle Removal by Size cryptosporidium?

1

control

3 mM azide

0.1

Recall quiescent vs. mixed?

Fraction of influent particles remaining in the effluent

Effect of the Chrysophyte

0.01

What is the physical-chemical mechanism?

0.001

0.8

1

10

Particle diameter (µm)


Role of natural particles in ssf
Role of Natural Particles in SSF cryptosporidium?

  • Could be removal by straining

  • But SSF are removing particles 1 mm in diameter!

  • To remove such small particles by straining the pores would have to be close to 1 mm and the head loss would be excessive

  • Removal must be by attachment to the sticky particles!


Particle capture efficiency
Particle Capture Efficiency cryptosporidium?

  • Sand filters are inefficient capturers of particles

  • Particles come into contact with filter media surfaces many times, yet it is common for filters to only remove 90% - 99% of the particles.

  • Failure to capture more particles is due to ineffective __________

  • Remember the diffusion surprise?

attachment


Techniques to increase particle attachment efficiency
Techniques to Increase Particle Attachment Efficiency cryptosporidium?

  • Make the particles stickier

    • The technique used in conventional water treatment plants

    • Control coagulant dose and other coagulant aids (cationic polymers)

  • Make the filter media stickier

    • Potato starch in rapid sand filters?

    • Biofilms in slow sand filters?

    • Mystery sticky agent imported into slow sand filters?


Mystery sticky agent
Mystery Sticky Agent cryptosporidium?

  • Serendipity!

  • Head loss through a clogged filter decreases if you add acid

  • Maybe the sticky agent is acid soluble

  • Maybe the sticky agent will become sticky again if the acid is neutralized

  • Eureka!


Attachment mediating polymer amp
Attachment Mediating Polymer (AMP) cryptosporidium?

  • Concentrate particles from Cayuga Lake

  • Acidify with 1 N HCl

  • Centrifuge

  • Centrate contains polymer

  • Neutralize to form flocs


Amp characterization
AMP Characterization cryptosporidium?

Alum!

Did I discover alum?


Which part of amp is the important actor
Which part of AMP is the important actor? cryptosporidium?

  • What causes the particle removal?

    • Alum

    • Iron

    • the organic matter (the volatile solids) or a

    • Combination of Al and organic matter


The dilution delay
The dilution delay cryptosporidium?

  • Students compared filters treated with AMP, aluminum, and iron

  • They used the amount of aluminum and iron that was in the AMP

  • Found that AMP was far superior

  • We concluded _______________________________

  • 4 years later we discovered that they had made a dilution error and hadn’t actually applied nearly as much aluminum and iron as was present in the AMP

  • Further experimentation revealed that alum improves filter performance just like AMP

the organic matter was significant


E coli removal as a function of time and al application rate
E. coli cryptosporidium? Removal as a Function of Time and Al Application Rate

No E. coli detected

Log remaining is proportional to accumulated mass of Al in filter


Head loss produced by al
Head Loss Produced by Al cryptosporidium?


Aluminum feed methods
Aluminum feed methods cryptosporidium?

  • Alum must be dissolved until it is blended with the main filter feed above the filter column

  • Alum flocs are ineffective at enhancing filter performance

  • The diffusion dilemma (alum microflocs will diffuse efficiently and be removed at the top of the filter)


Performance deterioration after al feed stops
Performance Deterioration after Al feed stops? cryptosporidium?

  • Hypotheses

    • Decays with time

    • Sites are used up

    • Washes out of filter

  • Research results

    • Not yet clear which mechanism is responsible – further testing required


Sticky media vs sticky particles

Sticky Media cryptosporidium?

Potentially treat filter media at the beginning of each filter run

No need to add coagulants to water for low turbidity waters

Filter will capture particles much more efficiently

Sticky Particles

Easier to add coagulant to water than to coat the filter media

Sticky Media vs. Sticky Particles


Future work
Future Work cryptosporidium?

  • Develop application techniques to optimize filter performance

  • How can we coat all of the media?

  • Will the media remain sticky through a backwash?

  • Will it be possible to remove particles from the media with a normal backwash?

  • What are the best ways to use aluminum as a filter aid in SSF and in RSF?


Conclusions
Conclusions cryptosporidium?

  • Filters could remove particles more efficiently if the _________ efficiency increased

  • SSF remove particles by two mechanisms

    • ____________

    • _______________________

  • Log remaining is proportional to accumulated mass of alum in filter

attachment

Predation

Naturally occurring aluminum






How can we make filter media sticky why do slow sand filters work
How can we make filter media sticky? cryptosporidium?Why do slow sand filters work?

  • Slow sand filters don’t use any coagulants, yet their performance improves with time

  • Their improved performance is due to natural particulate matter that is captured by the filter

  • What is it about this particulate matter that makes the filters work better?


ad