See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267510682

RELIABLE REMOVAL OF MERCAPTANS AND OTHER ORGANIC SULFIDES

USING SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE WET SCRUBBER TECHNOLOGY

Conference Paper  in  Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation · October 2005

DOI: 10.2175/193864705783869907

CITATIONS READS

0 3,568

1 author:

Robert Richardson
Pacific Rim Design & Development
6 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Marine engine exhaust NOx abatement systems by Know-NOx View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert Richardson on 29 October 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 RELIABLE REMOVAL OF MERCAPTANS AND OTHER ORGANIC SULFIDES

USING SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE WET SCRUBBER TECHNOLOGY

Bob Richardson Ph.D.

Pacific Rim Design & Development Inc

PO Box 146 Shingletown, CA 96088

ABSTRACT

We are beginning to expect more from our odor control equipment. No longer is system
performance solely tied to hydrogen sulfide destruction. Frequently, new equipment
specifications require odor control systems to remove mercaptans or other organic sulfides
from a foul air stream.

Expanded performance requirements increase the complexity of odor control equipment.

Some malodorous compounds like hydrogen sulfide and mercaptans are most effectively
scrubbed in high-pH solutions, whereas other organic sulfur compounds (dimethyl sulfide and
dimethyl disulfide for example) are most effectively scrubbed in a low-pH solution. No longer
will a single stage scrubber designed to remove just hydrogen sulfide do. Two scrubber stages
are required where members of both compound groups are present in a foul air stream.

Control ofthe sodium hypochlorite addition in both the high- and low-pH scrubbing
environments has been a problem until recently. Oxidation Reduction Potential (ORP) sensors
which effectively regulate sodium hypochlorite addition in wet scrubbers when the pH is high
(above 9.0) are unstable and ineffective in lower pH solutions.

Fortunately a cost effective and reliable controller using a completely different sensor
technology is now available which solves this problem.

KEY WORDS I PHRASES:

MULTI-STAGE ODOR CONTROL HYPOCHLORITE DOSING

OPTIMIZING SCRUBBER REDUCED SULFUR COMPOUNDS

WET SCRUBBING H2S ORGANIC SULFIDES

SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE

SODIUM HYDROXIDE

pH OXIDANT CONTROL TRS SCRUBBING

INTRODUCTION

For decades wet scrubber performance in municipal wastewater facilities has been measured
solely by hydrogen sulfide removal efficiency. Wet scrubbers performed splendidly in this
application and continue to do so today. Now we are beginning to expect more from our odor
control equipment. System performance is not solely tied to hydrogen sulfide destruction any
more. Many new equipment specifications require the removal of hydrogen sulfide AND the
other odorous compounds present in a foul air stream.

Some odors are complex and cannot be oxidized effectively in a single-stage scrubber. For
example when a foul air stream has both hydrogen sulfide and dimethyl sulfide, a two-stage
scrubber is required, with each stage operated at a different pH for destruction ofthese quite
different compounds. There are foul air mixtures that require a three- or four-stage scrubber.
For example if the mixture described above also contained ammonia, then a third stage would
address the ammonia separately before the sulfides were treated.

Effective odor control has always required selection of appropriately sized equipment but now
as we re-define scrubber efficiency, design constraints become more elaborate. An effective
design for more advanced wet scrubbers includes the following considerations:
• Odor control for complex contaminant mixtures
• Multi-stage wet scrubber configuration
• Versatility and stability under changing conditions
• Ease of adjustment to minimize chemical usage
• Automated control requiring minimal operator attention

Gone are the days when "one size fits all" applies to odor scrubber technology.

This paper will address scrubbing environments within wet packed bed odor control devices
that are conducive to the removal of hydrogen sulfide, ammonia, and organic sulfides
including mercaptans from a foul air steam. The paper will explain why different compounds
require different scrubbing environments and then explain how these environments are
created within the scrubber. Finally, attention will be focused on the theory and practical
aspects of successful automated control in each of these scrubbing environments.

METHODOLOGY

Design based on characteristics of the foul air stream

An in-depth analysis of the foul air stream is essential for good odor control equipment
design. The analysis should determine both the quantity and type of malodorous compounds
present today and accurately estimate future demands too. This is relatively easy in an
existing facility where the foul air steam is predictable and available for laboratory analysis,
but becomes "creative" on new odor control applications where the design is based solely on
theoretical or estimated data.
The value of reliable foul air characterization is all too often overlooked or not considered as

important as it actually is. Over- and under-estimation are both equally inappropriate. An

over-estimate ofthe loading can result in excessive equipment costs, wasted real estate space

and unnecessary operating costs. Over-sizing can result in reduced removal efficiency too.

The problems with under-sizing are obvious - malodorous air in the exhaust steam.

Categories of compounds: acids, bases and organic compounds.

Chemistry is the study of how matter changes fonn at the molecular level through reactions

(interactions that change the chemical nature ofthe involved compounds). In a very general

way, all compounds can be categorized by the way they react.

These categories are:

• Those compounds that act like acids. Examples include hydrogen sulfide and
mercaptans.
• Those compounds that act like bases. Examples include ammonia.
• Those compounds that do not act like either acids or bases. Examples include some
organic sulfides like dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide.

Scrubbing environment for each category of compound

Chemical reactions occur in environments that are conducive to a transformation.

• Compounds that act like acids are easily scrubbed in a basic environment with high
pH (above 9.0). These compounds are soluble in a solution with high pH. Once in
solution the malodorous compounds are destroyed by chemicals.
• Compounds that act like bases are easily scrubbed in an acidic environment with a low
pH (below 3.0). This group of compounds is soluble in a solution with a low pH. Once
in solution the malodorous compounds are destroyed by chemicals in the solution.
• Compounds that do not act like either acids or basis are often not very soluble in water
and must therefore react at the point of contact; where the air first meets the liquid
containing chemicals that will react with the malodorous compounds on the scrubber
packing surface.

The photos show examples of scrubber packing media. Packing

suppliers (in this example, Lantec Products) will assist with
selection ofthe appropriate packing and with scrubber sizing for a
specific application.

Some of the variables that affect this decision include: vessel

diameter, compound(s) being scrubbed, and pressure drop
limitations. All packing types provide surface area where
the scrubber's re-circulated liquid and the foul air meet.

"Scrubbing" occurs when compounds are transferred from

the air to liquid droplets or to a thin film of liquid (mass
transfer) on the packing surface.
Scrubber design by compound category.
A simple foul air stream with only one category of compounds can generally be scrubbed in a
single-stage scrubber. However a second stage can be cost effective in applications where a
high concentration of target compound(s) is present in the foul air. If the foul air contains two
or three compound categories at concentration ranges which are bothersome, then good
scrubber design may include a scrubbing stage for each compound type.

Scrubbing sequence
Scrubber removal efficiency and cost of operation are directly related to the sequence of the
scrubber stages. The actual sequence is determined by the foul air constituents and their
concentration. There are no hard and fast rules, just guidelines, because there are many
variables in the chemistry of odor control. One of the common guidelines is: work from low
to high pH. For example, foul air that contained ammonia, hydrogen sulfide and dimethyl
sulfide would be scrubbed in three separate stages. The ammonia would be scrubbed first at a
pH of2, fol1owed by destruction ofthe dimethyl sulfide at a pH of about 7 and finally the
hydrogen sulfide would be removed at a pH of9. This is summarized in Table 1 below.

Table 1
Scrubber Liquid Target Compound Chemical additive Additive
Stage pH removed responsible for deli very control
destruction technology
1 2 Ammonia Sulfuric acid pH
2 6.5 -7.0 Dimethyl sulfide Sodium Chlorine
hypochlorite residual
3 9.0 Hydrogen sulfide Sodium pHandORP
hypochlorite

Why are different scrubber pH settings so important for successful sulfur compound
destruction with sodium hypochlorite?
This is because of differences in the compound chemistry. Hydrogen sulfide and mercaptans
are weak acids that react quickly with sodium hydroxide solutions to form soluble salts that
stay in the liquid phase long enough for the sodium hypochlorite to destroy them. Other
sulfides in the organic group do not react with sodium hydroxide to form these salts which
remain in the liquid phase, so they must be destroyed on immediate contact with the liquid at
the packing surface within the scrubber or they will not be treated at all. Destruction of
organic sulfides requires contact with a scrubbing solution that is rich with an oxidant of
sufficient strength to do the job quickly. Sodium hypochlorite is ideal for this - but only at a
lower pH.

The fol1owing table shows the first stage of typical reactions within a wet scrubber at high pH
when sodium hypochlorite (NaOCI) and sodium hydroxide (NaOH) are used.
 Table 2
Hydrogen Sulfide H2S + NaOH ¢> NaHS + H2O
Methyl Mercaptan CH 3 SH + NaOH ¢> CH 3SNa + H2O
Dimethyl Sulfide (organic sulfide) CH3SCH3 + NaOH . .. . no reaction
Dimethyl Disulfide (organic sulfide) CH 3SSCH 3+ NaOH ... no reaction

What makes sodium hypochlorite a stronger oxidant at a lower pH?

Sodium hypochlorite in water forms two species: hypochlorous acid (HOCI) which is a strong
oxidant, and hypochlorite ion (OCI ) which is a relatively weak oxidant. The difference in
oxidizing power is so great that the reading from an ORP probe reflects mainly the amount of
HOCI available in the liquid phase. The concentrations ofthese two species in a solution are
directly related to the pH.

Graph I
Graph 1 shows the speciation
relationship between hypochlorous
HOCI Sp."''''' "" pH acid and hypochlorite ion. At high
-- . pH levels the solution is mostly
N /' !
"" :" / I OCI -. Conversely at low pH levels,
"'" ~
, 1\ V I the solution is mostly HOCI.
! \ I ! Therefore a solution at or below
f·'"
:;: 3"J!"
I
I [ ~I ! 7.0 would be rich in the stronger
I
t ""
I
+~-~ '\ .­ oxidant.
I / \ I
"" : 1/ 'I. ,I
"" [/ j
,01&
L----( " <; I
'" ., , ... u
p.

Why does ORP control work weU for the regulation of sodium hypochlorite at a high pH
(above 9.0) and not below that number?
The graph above explains that, too. When the pH is above 9.0, the slope of the curve is
relatively flat. This means that for a small change in pH there is a relatively small change in
the HOCI concentration (and therefore in the ORP). At pH >9 the water is buffered by
dissolved bicarbonate, so acid or alkali addition will cause only gradual shifts in pH. That is
why automated control with ORP sensors works successfully in this pH range. On the other
hand, when the pH is between 8.5 and 6.5, the water has little if any buffering capacity, so the
pH can change suddenly when chemicals are added, and due to the steep slope of the curve in
this region the change in pH will cause a dramatic change in the HOCI concentration, even if
no hypochlorite has been added or consumed by other reactions. Consequently, an ORP
control system is very erratic and not reliable in this pH range. Fortunately there is a control
system that solves this low-pH control problem.
How does the low pH control system work?
Hypochlorous acid (from the sodium hypochlorite added to the scrubber) is inherently
unstable and predictably decomposes into chlorine gas and water. Therefore the chlorine gas
concentration in the scrubbed air is an indication ofthe hypochlorous acid concentration in
the scrubber's liquid phase. This means that the hypochlorous acid concentration can be
regulated by monitoring the chlorine residual in the gas phase. But low pH control requires
more than accurate measurement of the chlorine residual because the hypochlorous acid
concentration in the scrubber solution is itself dependent on other variables. Ultimately the
hypochlorous acid concentration depends upon the sodium hypochlorite concentration, the
scrubber solution pH (but not to the degree ORP is pH dependent), the scrubber solution
temperature and several rates of reaction variables. Fortunately the sodium hypochlorite
addition rate (which is the end result ofthis control methodology) can be adjusted as needed
by a sophisticated software program that takes these variables into account. An effective,
control program for these variables includes multiple cascading algorithms and "if-then" logic
protocol.

RESULTS

Reliable chlorine gas concentration - easier said than done

Finding a chlorine gas sensor that works predictably in the harsh environment within a
scrubber is quite challenging. The sensor must meet the following requisites:
• Operate in a 100% condensing humidity environment and be unaffected by changes in
the humidity.
• Capable of operating at positive and negative pressures of up to 8 inches of water.
• Not cross sensitive to other compounds in the air stream.
• Directly measure the chlorine concentration without elaborate gas conditioning to
reduce humidity or remove compounds that could affect the chlorine measurement.
• Require minimal maintenance.

Our research project studied many sensors before arriving at one which meet the requirements
described above. We contacted as many chlorine sensor manufacturers as we could find. After
discussions we were able to narrow the field, and ultimately tested four models with mixed
results.

1. Interscan Corporation
Sensors are manufactured by the firm and are of an electrochemical design. Gas is pulled over
the sensor with a vacuum pump. The gas sample is pre-conditioned with a dry filter
membrane to remove particulate and partially protect the sensor from exposure to liquid.

The equipment worked well for ambient monitoring where the gas contained only momentary
peaks of chlorine provided the gas stream did not reach condensing humidity.

The sensors are quickly degraded by exposure to the moist environment within a scrubber.
Conclusion: The sensors tested at that time were not ideal for gas detection in the harsh
environment within a wet scrubber exhaust gas stream. The sensors were not tested with the
dehumidifying Nafion tubing. Interscan now makes Nafion tubing available as an extra with
the LD series detectors and these units are said to be effectively used to control wet scrubbing
applications.

2. RKI Instruments
Sensors are manufactured by another firm and included in the RKI instrumentation. Gas is
pulled over the sensor with a vacuum pump. The gas sample is pre-conditioned with a dry
filter membrane to remove particulate and partially protect the sensor from exposure to liquid.

In conjunction with RKI engineers, two different ancillary gas pre treatment methods were
tested with hopes that they would improve sensor life in the harsh scrubbing environment.
I. Air/liquid separator provided by RKI
2. Nafion tubing by Perma Pure

The airlliquid separator by RKI

(shown to right) was not effective. It
allowed enough moisture through the
trap to completely destroy gas
sensors in less than a day of
operation.

The Perma Pure Nafion tubing

(shown to right) - which is a tube
within a tube that allows moisture in
gas traveling through the interior
tube to move through the wall of this
tube (semi-permeable membrane)
and evaporate into a dry second ary
gas stream on the other side of the membrane.

Our tests confirmed that the Nafion tubing air dryer worked as designed and protected the gas
sensors from liquid damage.

Unfortunately, even when dry, the RKI sensors lost approximately 50% of their
responsiveness in less than a week's operation when continuously monitoring foul air with
two or more ppm of chlorine.

Conclusion: Even with pretreatment, the RKI sensors are not ideal for gas detection in the
harsh environment within a counter current wet scrubber exhaust gas stream.
3. Bionics (Japan)

The bionics sensors are electrochemical, but they differ from those previously tried. The

Bionics sensors are field serviceable. When the electrolyte is depleted, it can be changed in

the field by the client with no special tools or training.

The sensors are also designed to operate in 100%

condensing humidity. Our year long test proved
this claim to be true. They are also capable of
sustained operation in a gas stream of around 2
ppm without frequent servicing. (Quarterly
service is recommended, but our tests showed
they can operate for up to six months without
servicing. )

The only significant limitation we found with

these sensors was their vulnerability to pressure.
The sensors work well in air that is at a positive
pressure (as compared to ambient) and in a gas
stream that is free of pulsations caused by a fan or
other mechanical device.

Conclusion: The sensors are workable in the harsh scrubbing environment provided they are
strategically placed in an area that minimizes the effects of differential air pressure.

4. Analytical Technologies Incorporated

(ATI)
The AT! sensors are electrochemical, and they too are field serviceable. When the electrolyte
is depleted, it can be changed in the filed by the client with no special tools or training.

The sensors are also designed to operate

in 100% condensing humidity. Our year
long test proved this claim to be true.
They are also capable of sustained
operation in a gas stream of around 2
ppm without frequent servicing.
(Quarterly service is recommended, but
our tests showed they can operate for up
to six months without servicing.)

The sensors did not have any significant

limitations. They demonstrated
significantly less adverse effects from
differential pressure.
Conclusion: The ATI sensors are the best available on the market for operation in a harsh
scrubbing environment.

The path to effective low pH control equipment.

A reliable sensor is oflittle value for process control until the data is conditioned to
compensate for the many variables that make predictable process control a reality. We did not
come upon the answer all at once. The process was a long and distinguished learning
experience. In the beginning we did not even fully realize the complexity of the variables we
were working with, but good scientific method brought the picture to light over the duration
of our research and product development.

Our initial control utilized simple single loop PIO controllers designed for HVAC systems
(Honeywell Model UDC 3000). At that time we had no way to compensate for changes in
process liquid pH, or temperature and only limited ability to compensate for the process
response lag time between the initiation of sodium hypochlorite addition and recognizable
effects on the scrubber liquid. Controllers of this type were initially tested at the Arlington
County wastewater facility in Crystal City, Virginia where, despite being prototypes, they
solved a critical odor problem that could not be remedied with conventional ORP and pH
equipment.

The photo to the right

shows the scrubbers at the
Arlington WWTP
centrifuge building and
truck loading area. Two
each two stage scrubbers
exist in this complex. The
first stage of one system
scrubs ammonia and the
second stage scrubs
sulfides. Both stages ofthe
other scrubbing system are
used to treat sulfides. We
installed two prototype
control systems, one on the
sulfide stage of the
ammonia/sulfide scrubbing system. The other prototype control system was installed on the
first stage of the two stage sulfide system. See Table 3A & 3B and 4A & 4B for details.

The Arlington WWTP had a problem. The facility is adjacent to a very socially active high­
end residential district. Members of this community had the plant on "speed dial" and were
justified in making the odor complaints. The odor control equipment at the new centrifuge and
truck loading facility was not working properly. Large plumes of odorous air were discharged
into the atmosphere every time a centrifuge went through certain parts of its routine operation.
The scrubbers were equipped with Great Lakes pH and ORP equipment that was in good
working order and calibrated. Table 3A& 3B show how the equipment was operated during
this troubled time.

Table3A
Arlington VA - Ammonia / Sulfide Scrubber - PRIOR to control revisions
Scrubber Target pH ORP Set Additives
Stage Compound(s) Set point point
1 Ammonia 2 none Sulfuric Acid
2 Organic 7.0 750 Sodium hypochlorite &
Sulfides Sodium hydroxide

Table 3B
Arlington VA - Sulfide / Sulfide Scrubber - PRIOR to control revisions
Scrubber Target pH ORP Set Additives
Stage Compound(s) Set point point
1 Organic 7.0 750 Sodium hypochlorite &
Sulfides Sodium hydroxide
2 Hydrogen 9.0 750 Sodium hypochlorite &
sulfide Sodium hydroxide

PBS&J Consulting Engineers and Pacific Rim Design and Development collaboratively
derived the following control strategy (Tables 4A & 4B) to control the odors. Because time
was of the essence, the design utilized the existing chemicals and piping to the scrubbers. The
only equipment changes were increased capacities for two sodium hypochlorite metering
pumps and a revised automated control system. Although sulfuric acid addition was desired in
the first stage of the Sulfide/Sulfide scrubber, there was no practical way to add this
compound at that time. However, this pump addition and other changes were included in a
subsequent upgrade to the odor equipment. Tables 4A&B show the revised operating
conditions and control strategy. Note that some stages now utilize have chlorine sensors in
the scrubbed gas stream rather than ORP sensors for the scrubber liquid.

Table4A
Arlington VA - Ammonia / Sulfide Scrubber - AFTER to control revisions
Scrubber Target pH ORP Chlorine Additive
Stage Compounds Set-point Set-point Set-point
(ppm)
I Ammonia 2.0 none none Sulfuric Acid
2 Organic 7.0 none 0.5 Sodium
Sulfides Hypochlorite
&
Sodium
hydroxide
Table4B
Arlington VA - Sulfide / Sulfide Scrubber - AFTER to control revisions
Scrubber Target pH ORP Chlorine Oxidant
Stage Compounds Set-point Set-point Set-point
(ppm)
1 Organic 7.0 None 0.75 Sodium
Sulfides (See note # 1) hypochlorite
2 Hydrogen 9.0 750 9.0 Sodium
Sulfides hypochlorite
&
Sodium
hydroxide
Note #1: The actual process vanable for pH was generally above the set point and was
determined by the pH ofthe sodium hypochlorite solution and makeup water added to the
scrubber stage. The existing equipment did not allow the add sulfuric acid to drive the pH
down to the set-point.

The prototype low pH control technology worked successfully for over two years. The low
pH control system for sodium hypochlorite was good but still had difficulties with precise set­
point control. Fortunately it was good enough to control the odors. The phone calls stopped
and the plant re-established good relations with its neighbors.

The Graph 2 and 3 are chart recordings of the prototype controller installed in Arlington
WWTP. These charts show the degree of control available with a simple single PID loop
controller without pH and temperature compensation. Both graph 2 and 3 used the same
control parameters. There may have been differences in pump stroke, but that was the only
known variable to explain the differences in control precision (or lack thereof).

On both graphs 2 and 3 the interior plot indicates

Graph 2
the chlorine residual in parts per million. The
graph fun scaling for this variable is 0 - 10 ppm.
The outer plot depicts the pump speed and the
scaling for this variable is 0 - 100%.

The control irregularities shown in graphs 2 and 3

are far from ideal but they are actually a dramatic
improvement over the chaotic semblance of
control using the ORP probe in this scrubbing
application. With ORP there was essentially no
correlation between demand for sodium
hypochlorite and ORP in scrubber stages with pH
set-point of7.0.

The control irregularities shown in graphs 2 and 3

were the impetus to proceed with the Pump speed
development of a more sophisticated control
system.
Graph 3

At the next Arlington, VA - WWTP scrubber

upgrade (approximately two years later) the entire
scrubber system was overhauled. Vessel sizes and
ducting configurations were changed, metering
pumps and piping were upgraded and the control
system was extensively revised. During this two
year interim period, the prototype controllers
became a product provided by Automated
Environmental Controls (AEC). Two of the new
and technically improved AEC controllers replaced
the prototype controllers that had initially solved
the scrubber control problem for the plant. The new
AEC controllers have been on line at Arlington for
over three years and continue to provide reliable
Pump speed
odor control with increased chemical savings (due
Chlorine
to the better control logic).

Chlorine residual control technology has its limitations. It regulates sodium hypochlorite
addition very well in low pH applications, but is not effective when the scrubber pH is above
8. We learned this lesson at the Williamsburg VA wastewater treatment plant.

AEC controllers were specified at three different wastewater treatment plants in Hampton
Roads Virginia. The Williamsburg WWTP (See photo below) included three AEC controllers,
each regulating chemical addition to both stages of three parallel two stage counter current
packed bed scrubbers which are treating air from the plants digesters.

The scrubbers are designed to

remove organic sulfides in the first
stage (low pH scrubbing) and
hydrogen sulfide plus mercaptans
in the second stage (high pH
scrubbing). The second stage of
each scrubber is equipped with the
option to use either ORP or
chlorine residual sensors as the
control technology to regulate the
sodium hypochlorite addition.

Practical experience demonstrated

that the ORP technology was more
effective than chlorine residual
technology at sodium hypochlorite control in the scrubbers' second stage (9.0 pH set point).
This phenomenon is understood when Graph #1 is revisited. The graph shows that the
hypochlorous acid concentration drops dramatically as the pH is increased. As previously
mentioned, hypochlorous acid is the source of the free chlorine detected by the chlorine

sensor. The reduced availability of hypochlorous acid directly affects the availability of

chlorine gas. Once the pH exceeds 8.0 the chlorine gas concentration is so small that is it

below the detection limit for the sensor.

How does control technology solve the control problem at low pH?

Automated Environmental Controls (AEC) found a way to "do the math" for low pH

scrubbing. In addition the AEC unit handles the rest of the scrubbers' control requirements

too.

The AEC company reports that in wastewater scrubbing applications, their controller

integrates raw analog signals from pH, ORP, chlorine and temperature sensors located in each

scrubber stage utilizing a proprietary program written in a software that allows multiple

Proportional, Integral and Differential control loops and integrated "if then" logic decisions.

The software does more than just compensate for the effects of pH and temperature changes

to the chlorine residual value. This software confirms sensor data reliability by comparing the

raw data from two or more sensors of different types against known chemical characteristics.

For example, chlorine residual in the gas phase is pH dependant. The AEC controller is

programmed to recognize this characteristic so the controller compares the change in chlorine

concentration in the scrubbed gas with changes in pH of the scrubbers liquid. If the rate of

change is within predetermined limits all is well. If the data from the sensor comparisons does

not conform to known characteristics, an error is suspected and further checking is initiated. If

the detailed checking confirms the suspected error, an alarm condition is initiated and the

controller enters a pre-determined fail-safe operating mode.

One AEC controller (or any other PLC control system) can supply all proportional control

(addition of chemicals to the scrubber), and ancillary equipment control (fans, re-circulation

pumps etc.) for an entire scrubber of between one and four stages. The AEC controllers use

Automation Direct PLC and "Think & Do software which they claim is equally as powerful

as the more expensive hardware options. This controller/software is capable of multiple

hardware and software protocol options that facilitate communication with other control

systems within the plant and elsewhere.

When selecting control logic for odor scrubber application, it is good to include a limited data

logging capability. This feature is useful for PID loop tuning even if more elaborate data

logging is available elsewhere in the plant. Another valuable feature is accessibility to the

Internet via a modem in the local cabinet or elsewhere via the plant's Ethernet for example.

This connectivity allows technical support staffto access then check and upgrade the

equipment from their offices. This remote feature saves time and money.

DISCUSSION & CONCLUSIONS

Reliable removal of mercaptans and other organic sulfides is possible using sodium

hypochlorite in wet scrubbers provided the equipment incorporates pH specific scrubbing

environments and a reliable control system. We have seen how some sulfides are more

 effectively destroyed in high pH enviromnents while others are more effectively destroyed in
low pH enviromnents. The data also shows that control systems using ORP & pH
instrumentation in the scrubber liquid are most effective in high pH enviromnents while
control systems using scrubbed air chlorine residual & scrubber liquid pH instrumentation are
best for low pH scrubbing. Low pH scrubbing has also been seen to be most effective when a
control system incorporates the chlorine residual, pH and temperature variables into the
process control strategy.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks are also extended to the staff at Arlington County Water Pollution Control Plant in
Virginia and Williamsburg Wastewater Treatment Plant in Virginia for their collaborative
support over the years, and to Dan Dickeson of Lantec Products.

View publication stats