Silo - Tips - Pretreatment Processes For Potable Water Treatment Plants

PRETREATMENT
PROCESSES FOR
POTABLE WATER TREATMENT
7 May 2014
PLANTS
JEFF LINDGREN ENGINEERING MANAGER
B&V ‐ WATER
AGENDA
• Conventional Pretreatment
• ‐ Focus on Clarification (including Sedimentation)
• Theory/Goals of Clarification
• Review of High‐Rate Clarification Technologies
• Comparison of Technologies
• Project Examples
2
CONVENTIONAL
PRETREATMENT
• Typically…….
• Rapid Mix Flocculation Sedimentation Filtration
• Advantages
• Simplicity
• Widely used
• Handle varying water quality
• Familiarity (Regulatory, Operations)
• Disadvantages
• Large Footprint
• Higher cost, particularly with limited site
• Wind/algae growth/solids removal 3
THEORY/GOALS OF
CLARIFICATION
4
THEORY/GOALS OF CLARIFICATION
• Clarification
• Part of pretreatment process
• Multiple goals ‐ turbidity/particles, Total Organic Carbon
(TOC), etc.
• Remove solids prior to filtration – maximize
filtration processes
• Sizing often defined in hydraulic loading rate
(gpm/sf or m/hr) – translates to settling velocity
• 0.5 gpm/sf = 1.2 m/h = 0.066 ft/min
Vo = Depth/Detention Time
= Q/A (gpm/sq. ft. or m/hr)
5
THEORY/GOALS OF CLARIFICATION
• Why consider something besides conventional
clarification?
• Limited real estate available
• Cost advantages – often site specific
• Raw water quality
• Algae
• Light floc
• Regardless of clarification process chosen:
• Coagulation/flocculation ‐ conditioning of floc ‐
is critical
• Settled turbidity is not end goal
6
REVIEW OF HIGH‐
RATE
CLARIFICATION
TECHNOLOGIES
7
HIGH RATE CLARIFICATION OPTIONS
• Plate and Tube Settlers
• Upflow Solids Clarifiers (Pulsator)
• Solids Contact Clarifiers (Densadeg)
• Ballasted Flocculation
• Dissolved Air Flotation (DAF)
• Others:
• Contact Adsorption Clarifiers
• Direct Filtration
8
RELATIVE LOADING RATES
Surface Loading Rate
gpm/sq. ft.
Conventional Tube Settler Super Plate Settler DAF Densadeg Ballasted

Pulsator Flocculation
Higher Loading Rate = More Capacity 9

CLARIFICATION TECHNOLOGIES
CONDITIONS OF APPLICABILITY
Coagulant Dose, mg/l
50 DAF
(Heavy DAF (Light Particles)
Particles)
40 Conventional Sedimentation
30 Tube and Plate Settlers
Solids Clarifiers
20 Ballasted Flocculation
10 DF
CAC
0
0 15 25 50 75 100 125 150
Turbidity, NTU
10
INCLINED PLATE SEDIMENTATION
Courtesy: JMS
11
Courtesy: MRI
1. PARTICLES FALL
VERTICALLY THEREFORE
SEE THE AREA = TO THE
HORIZONTAL PROJECTED
AREA
3. AS A RESULT
A BASIN WITH
PLATES
2. THE HORIZONTAL
REQUIRES
PROJECTED AREA OF
MUCH LESS
ALL OF THE PLATES
AREA THAN A
ARE ADDED UP
BASIN WITHOUT
PLATES
13
• “Effective” surface loading rates ‐ without plates
• Surface water with Alum or Ferric
• 0.25‐0.50 gpm/ft2
• Presedimentation
• 0.75‐1.50 gpm/ft2
• Equivalent surface loading rates ‐ with plates:
Courtesy: JMS
14
• Advantages
• Small footprint area / easily covered
• Widely used
• Potential $ savings vs. conventional
• Disadvantages
• Deeper basin required
• Not always amenable to retrofits in existing basins
• Obstruct access and view of sludge collection equipment
• Considerations
• Consistency of floc size
• Sludge withdrawal
• Retrofits – space beneath plates
15
TUBE SETTLERS
• Similar concept to plate settlers
• Shorter length can often more
easily fit in existing basins
• Less $ than plates
• Less control of flow as compared
to plates
• Where large solids volume, can be
susceptible to re‐entrainment of
solids
• Longevity
16
UPFLOW SOLIDS CLARIFIER
(IDI SUPERPULSATOR)
• Sludge blanket clarifier (2 – 4 gpm/ft2)
• Flocculation and sedimentation in one basin
• Pulsed flow through the basin ‐ created by vacuum
pump
• Inclined plates with and without tube settlers
• 20+ Years of installed experience – over 150 US
installations
17
Superpulsator® Clarifier
Vent Vacuum Pump
Valve
Vacuum
Chamber
Collection
Channel
Collection
Laterals
Blowdown
Pipes
Settling
Plates
Concentrator
Distribution
Channel Distribution
Laterals
Courtesy: IDI
18
Superpulsator® Type U Clarifier
Vacuum Pump
Vent Valve
Collection Vacuum
Channel Chamber
Lamellar
Collection Tubes
Laterals
Blowdown
Pipes
Settling
Plates
Concentrator
Distribution
Channel Distribution Courtesy: IDI
Laterals
19
VENTING AND PULSING
Vent Valve Vent Valve

Vacuum Pump
Vacuum Pump Closed
Open
Vacuum
Vacuum
Chamber
Chamber
Sludge Blanket
Sludge Blanket Contraction
Expansion
Periodic sludge discharge

0.2 to 0.5% solids
Venting: 8 to 12 seconds Pulling a Vacuum: 40 to 50 seconds

Courtesy: IDI
20
(IDI SUPERPULSATOR)
21
(IDI SUPERPULSATOR)
• Advantages
• No moving parts below surface
• Ability to incorporate PAC in sludge blanket (T&O/TOC)
• Potential $ savings vs conventional
• Capable of high flocculation efficiency
• Proven performance / state acceptance
• Disadvantages
• Heavy solids can settle and require periodic removal
• Can be difficult to control when flow rate or water quality change
• Considerations
• Settling velocity of solids ‐ homogeneous and controlled
• Susceptible to upset with temperature change
• Need to manage blowdown
22
SOLIDS CONTACT CLARIFIER (IDI DENSADEG)
• High rate solids contact clarifier
(8 – 12 gpm/ft2 as compared to
0.75 – 1.5 for traditional SCUs)
• Mixing, solids recirculation,
clarification/ thickening
• Versatile – clarification,
softening, residuals handling
• Water and wastewater
applications
• 20 Years of installed experience
– over 50 US installations and
150 installations worldwide 23
Clarifier / Thickener
Rapid Mix Reactor Recirculation Cone Settling
Turbine Drive Launder Lifting Assembly Tube
Turbine Reactor Assembly Assembly
Draft Tube
Coagulant
Settling
Tube Support
Polymer
Sludge Sludge
Flow Recycle Pump Recirculation Sludge
Splitter Blowdown
24
DESIGN CRITERIA
REACTOR RETENTION:
LOADING RATE:
8-10 min
8 to 10 gpm/ft2 (clarification)
10 to 15 gpm/ft2 (softening)
CAPACITY per UNIT:

1 to 22 MGD (concrete)
0.15 to 14 MGD (steel)
RAPID MIX RETENTION:

2 to 3 min (clarification)
SLUDGE BLOWDOWN:
SLUDGE RECYCLE: CLARIFIER RETENTION:
2% to 4% (clarification)
3% to 6% 23 to 28 min
5% to 20% (softening)
25
26
• Advantages
• Small footprint area
• Ability to incorporate PAC
• Disadvantages
• Pilot testing requirements
• Lot of steel internals – maintenance
• Needs sludge inventory – longer startup times
• Considerations
• Needs polymer – effect on “filterability”
• Need to manage blowdown
• Susceptible to upset with temperature change
27
BALLASTED FLOCCULATION ‐ ACTIFLO
Kruger Actiflo
Traditional
Kruger Actiflo
Turbo
28
BALLASTED FLOCCULATION
• High rate ballasted flocculation clarifier (15‐30
gpm/sq.ft)
• Use of microsand to “ballast” flocs – makes particles
sink faster
• 50 ‐ 100 micron effective size (smaller sand tends to work
better)
• Use of hydrocyclones ‐ microsand recovery from the
sludge
• Dilute solids
• 15 Years of installed experience – over 120 US
installations
29
30
Coagulation 1 - 2 minutes
(Flash Mix)
Injection 1 - 2 minutes
(Flash Mix)
Maturation 4 - 6 minutes
(Flocculation)
Settling (20 gpm/sf): 2 minutes
: 8 - 12 minutes
Total Detention Time
31
• Advantages
• Small “footprint” area
• Quick response to adjustments
• Disadvantages
• Higher power consumption
• Low solids content in sludge
• More process elements to control and optimize
• Considerations
• Needs polymer – effect on “filterability”
• Sand is consumed (loss) ‐ ~ 8 lbs/MG
• Sand pumps/piping need special design 32
DISSOLVED AIR FLOTATION
Reaction Separation
Zone Zone
Float Sludge
Weir
Aerated Layer
Waste
Solids
Clarified Layer
Baffle
Effluent Collection
Air
Compressor Recycle
Receiver Recycle
Saturated Pump
Recycle
Saturator 33
• Float solids instead of settle
• Primarily for low turbidity/low solids applications
• Excellent for algae removal (algae likes to float) and
waters with “thermal variation”
• Options
• Conventional (2‐5 gpm/ft2)
• Stacked DAF – Filtration (4‐6 gpm/ft2)
• High Rate DAF (6‐20 gpm/ft2)
34
35
DAF DESIGN PARAMETERS
• Recycle stream pressure: 60 ‐ 90 psi
• Flocculation time: 5 ‐ 20 minutes
• Flotation zone detention time
• 5 ‐ 15 Minutes
• Surface Loading Rate: 2 ‐ 6 gpm/ft2
• High rate: 6 – 20 gpm/ft2
36
• Advantages
• Small footprint area
• Generally not polymer dependent (less likely to reduce filter runs)
• Ideal for light solids
• High sludge solids concentration (2 ‐ 5%) w/mechanical scraping
• Disadvantages
• High power costs
• Considerations
• Definition of loading rates (basin area, recycle)
• Raw water DO
• Sludge transport w/mechanical scraping
• Heavy solids can create difficulties
37
COMPARISON OF
TECHNOLOGIES
38
COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE
CLARIFICATION PROCESSES
• Each case needs to be evaluated on its own
individual circumstances
• Water quality
• Treatment goals
• Regulations
• Existing infrastructure/personnel
• Space availability
• Cost sensitivity
• So let’s look at some examples
• No space limitations
• Warm weather/water
39
SPACE/VOLUME RELATES TO CONCRETE
Conventional
31,500 sq ft
Plates
9,600 sq ft
DAF
6,000 sq ft
Actiflo
4,000 sq ft 40
EVALUATION OF DIFFERENTIAL CAPITAL COSTS
(24 MGD WTP)
$6,000,000
$5,000,000
$4,000,000
Equipment Cost
$3,000,000
Concrete
$2,000,000
$1,000,000
$0
Conv Plates DAF Actiflo
Concrete matters but equipment does too 41

EVALUATION OF OPERATING COSTS,
EXCLUDING LABOR
(24 MGD WTP)
$80,000
$70,000
$60,000 Additional Polymer
$50,000
Microsand
$40,000
$30,000 Electrical Cost
$20,000 ($.10/kWh)
$10,000
$0
Conv Plates DAF Actiflo
Power is a major variable to consider 42

COMPARISON OF TECHNOLOGIES ‐
SUMMARY
• Many choices for high rate sedimentation
• Available for new plants, retrofits
• Selection is site specific based on
• Water source
• Existing facilities
• Space availability
• Enhanced coagulation needs/DBP reduction
• Weather
• Cost
• Pilot testing may be needed
• Include filtration
• Effective coagulation still critical
43
PROJECT EXAMPLES
44
EWEB
Hayden Bridge Water Treatment Plant
45
EWEB Contact Basin No. 2 (of 3) 46
EWEB Contact Basin No. 3 (of 3)
47
UNITED WATER
20 mgd Lake DeForest WTP
Retrofit
Clarkstown, New York
48
InsightH2O High-Rate Clarification Alternatives 26 March 2013
INITIAL PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
49
REVISED PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
50
ORIGINAL SITE PLAN – 10 MGD
Sedimentation Flocculation
Aerator
Filter
Building
Control
Building
51
REVISED SITE PLAN – 20 MGD
Sedimentation Flocculation
DAF
12 gpm/sf design
15 gpm/sf pilot tested and permitted
Filter
Building
Filters Rerated from 10 to 20 mgd
Control
Building
6,000 sq. ft. pre‐engineered building
52
PRETREATMENT AT THE
CHANDLER, AZ PECOS WTP
VICTORIA SHARP CITY OF CHANDLER
CHANDLER PECOS WTP SUPERINTENDENT
PROJECT OVERVIEW
30 mgd
Conventional
30 mgd
Ballasted
Flocculation
54
A HYBRID PLANT
FWPS2
FWPS1 Conv
Basin 1
Conv Presed
Res 2 Res 1 Basin 2 Basins
RWPS1
Conv
Basin 3 • Kept existing 30 mgd of
Filters
1-8
BF
conventional
Basin 4
pretreatment.
Filters
BF
9-12
Basin 5 RWPS2
• Added 30 mgd of new
ballasted flocculation
pretreatment.
• Operate both in parallel
PROJECT OVERVIEW
upstream of anthracite
monomedia filters.
Section Heading–optional 55
WHY BALLASTED FLOCCULATION?
• Resulted in longer filter runs.
• Less tendency for turbidity breakthrough.
• Much smaller footprint than conventional basins.
• Shorter detention times allowing changes in water
quality to be apparent quicker.
• Positive feed back from the operations and
maintenance group during a tour of the Passaic
PILOTING STUDY
Valley Water Commission plant in New Jersey.
56
OPERATIONAL OBSERVATIONS
• Handles turbidity changes well.
• Changes in water quality show up in 20 minutes,
rather than hours in a conventional basin.
• Uses more chemicals.
• Less sand is needed than was original assumed by
operations.
57
30 mgd BF Basins
30 mgd Conventional Basins
58
PASSAIC VALLEY
WATER COMMISSION
110 mgd Little Falls WTP Retrofit
Clifton, New Jersey
59
LITTLE FALLS WTP – PROCESS SEQUENCE
Filter
Building
Existing
Basins 3 & 4
Existing Basins 1 & 2
Control
Building
Existing
Chemical
Building
60
Filter
Building
Existing
Basins 3 & 4
Existing Basins 1 & 2
Control
Building
New ACTIFLO®
Building
Four Trains at 40 gpm/sf 61

Filter
Building
New
Chemical
Residuals Storage
Storage
Control
Building New Ozone
Facilities
New ACTIFLO®
Building
3,600 ppd Ozone – 3.5 mg/L dose 62

GAC
Filter
Building
New
Chemical
Residuals Storage
Storage
Control
Building New Ozone
Facilities
New ACTIFLO®
Building
Converted from anthracite/sand to 42” GAC 63

CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE
COMPANY
NE BAKERSFIELD, CA WTP
PRETREATMENT
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
CAPACITY: 22 MGD
START UP: JUNE 2003
RAW WATER SOURCE – KERN RIVER
PREOXIDATION & COAGULATION
TWO STAGE FLOCCULATION
HIGH RATE SEDIMENTATION
MEMBRANE FILTRATION
SOURCE DESCRIPTION
KERN RIVER
NORMAL CONDITIONS
TURBIDITY: 3 TO 6 NTU
TOC: 2.5 – 3.0
COLOR: 50 – 100
EXTREME CONDITIONS
TURBIDITY: 16000 NTU
TOC: 6+
COLOR: 500+
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
RAPID MIX
TWO STAGE FLOCCULATION
HIGH RATE CLARIFICATION
PARKSON PLATE SETTLERS
0.32 GPM / SQ FT LOADING RATE
TRACK GUIDED SLUDGE REMOVAL SYSTEM
NORTH TEXAS
MUNICIPAL WATER
DISTRICT
900 mgd Wylie WTP Retrofit
70
NTMWD – WYLIE WTP
Plant III
328 mgd
Plant IV
164 mgd
Plant II
328 mgd Plant I
82 mgd
71
INTEGRATING OZONATION
Ozone Contactors
North Ozone Building
South Ozone Building
Ozone
Contactors
72
REPLACED TWO OF EIGHT BASINS WITH PLATES
Flocculation
Plates
Ozone
Contactors
Flumes
Two basins of 41 mgd each – 0.4 gpm/sf 73

QUESTIONS?
74
Black & Veatch 3 June 2014
CONTACT INFO
Jeff Lindgren, P.E.*, P.L.S.**
Engineering Manager
Black & Veatch
5885 Meadows Rd, Suite 700
Lake Oswego, OR 97035
503‐443‐4415 | LindgrenJM@BV.com
*Licensed in *OR, WA, & CA **OR
75
www.bv.com

Silo - Tips - Pretreatment Processes For Potable Water Treatment Plants

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Silo - Tips - Pretreatment Processes For Potable Water Treatment Plants

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PRETREATMENT

Conventional Tube Settler Super Plate Settler DAF Densadeg Ballasted

Higher Loading Rate = More Capacity 9

Vent Valve Vent Valve

Periodic sludge discharge

Venting: 8 to 12 seconds Pulling a Vacuum: 40 to 50 seconds

CAPACITY per UNIT:

RAPID MIX RETENTION:

Concrete matters but equipment does too 41

Power is a major variable to consider 42

Four Trains at 40 gpm/sf 61

3,600 ppd Ozone – 3.5 mg/L dose 62

Converted from anthracite/sand to 42” GAC 63

North Ozone Building

South Ozone Building

Two basins of 41 mgd each – 0.4 gpm/sf 73

You might also like