defense presentation 6_26_09
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Nanofiltration Membrane Pilot Studies for Disinfection By-Product Control
by Eric Lynne, EIT
B.S. – Civil and Environmental Engineering (2007) South Dakota State University
![Page 2: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Introduction
Objective Preliminary Tests Screening Tests Large Scale Pilot Tests Conclusions
![Page 3: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
(Bergantine 2007)
![Page 4: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Restrictions
Stage 2 D/DBP Rule< 80 μg/L TTHM< 60 μg/L HAA5
Big Sioux River < 1000 mg/L TDS
Energy EfficientHigh Flow at Low Applied Pressure
![Page 5: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Background
DBP Problem
Treatment Methods: ChloraminationNF Membranes
Pilot Plant Testing
![Page 6: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Background
Chloramination
Low DBPs CreatedEffective
![Page 7: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Background – Spiral Wound Membrane
(Hydranautics 2008)
1 2 3
4 5
![Page 8: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Background
Membranes
PermeateConcentrateRecoveryStages
(AWWA 1999)
![Page 9: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Nanofiltration
PermeateConcentrate
(AWWA 1999)
![Page 10: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Background
Membrane Problems
Inorganic ScalingOrganic Fouling
Microbial or Silt Fouling
(Malki 2008, Dow 2008)
![Page 11: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Preliminary Testing
Water QualityTOCUV254
SDIAmmonia
Chloramination
![Page 12: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Preliminary Testing
ResultsWater Quality
• Well Specific
• UV254 TOC
• SDI: Raw < 5; Feed ~ 1• Naturally occuring ammonia
a) WTP Influent
b) Filter Effluent
![Page 13: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Chloramination
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Chlorine : Ammonia Ratio
Res
idua
l (m
g/L
)
Free Chlorine Total ChlorineMonoChloramine Free Ammonia
![Page 14: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Chloramination56, 59 μg/L TTHM
![Page 15: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Chloramination
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Chlorine : Ammonia Ratio
Res
idua
l (m
g/L
)
Free Chlorine Total ChlorineMonoChloramine Free Ammonia
![Page 16: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Chloramination56, 59 μg/L TTHM
10 μg/L TTHM
![Page 17: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Preliminary - Conclusions
Source Water for NF Pilot Plant Direct Nanofiltration of raw water is feasible Filter Effluent is preferred
Chloramination viable alternative with 82% TTHM reduction
![Page 18: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
NF Membrane Pilot Plants
Phase I – ScreeningKoch TFC-SR2 (K2)Koch TFC-SR3 (K3)Trisep XN45-TSF (T)Hydranautics ESNA1-LF (HE)Hydranautics HydraCoRe-70pHT (HH)Dow/Filmtec NF270 (DF)
(Trisep 2008)
![Page 19: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Phase I – Screening
Hold flux constant Vary recovery for each membrane tested
![Page 20: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Phase I – Results
TOC and UV254 removal
NF Membrane and Percent Recovery
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80K2 K3 T HE HH DF
Per
cen
t R
emov
alTOC UV254
![Page 21: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Phase I – Results
TTHM reduction
NF Membrane and Percent Recovery
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80 15 50 80K2 K3 T HE HH DF
Per
cen
t R
emov
al87% Minimum Rejection Allowed
![Page 22: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Phase I – Results
Concentrate TDS concentration
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
K2 K3 T HE HH DF
NF Membrane
Tot
al D
isso
lved
Sol
ids
(mg/
L)
Disposal limit 1000 mg/L
![Page 23: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Phase I - Conclusions
Membrane TDS < 1000 mg/L >87% TTHM reduction
Koch TFC-SR2 NO NO
Koch TFC-SR3 NO YES
Trisep XN45-TSF YES YES
Hydranautics ESNA1-LF NO YES
HydraCoRe-70pHT YES NO
Dow/Filmtec NF270 NO YES
![Page 24: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
Phase II 85% recovery
Variable Flux: 9, 12, 15 gfd
Determine design criteria
![Page 25: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Photographs of Pilot Plant
![Page 26: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Phase II - Results
TOC and UV254 removal
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
9* 12 15 9 12 15 9 12 15
K3 T HE
NF Membrane and Flux Rate (gfd)
Per
cen
t R
emov
al
TOC UV254
![Page 27: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
50%
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
9* 12 15 9 12 15 9 12 15
K3 T HE
NF Membrane and Flux Rate (gfd)
Per
cen
t R
edu
ctio
n
Phase II - Results
TTHM reduction
87% Minimum Rejection Allowed
![Page 28: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Phase II - Results
Adjusted Specific Flux
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
9* 12 15 9 12 15 9 12 15
K3 T HE
NF Membrane and Flux Rate (gfd)
Adj
uste
d Sp
ecif
ic F
lux
to 2
5°C
(gf
d/ps
i)
![Page 29: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Phase II - Results
Ammonia (NH3-N) Removal
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
9* 12 15 9 12 15 9 12 15
K3 T HE
NF Membrane and Flux Rate (gfd)
Per
cen
t R
ejec
tion
![Page 30: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Phase II – Results
Fouling
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Hours
Ad
just
ed S
F (
gfd
/psi
)
.
T HE
![Page 31: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Phase II – Results
Fouling
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Days
Con
du
ctiv
ity
(μS
/cm
)
TriSep XN45-TSF
Hydranautics ESNA1-LF
![Page 32: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Phase II - Conclusions
Blend Ratio: 44%/56%
Concentrate TDS Increased SF decreased with increasing flux Design Criteria
Applied pressures ranged from 64-165 psi Specific flux values ranged from 0.13-0.21 gfd/psi System recovery rate of 85% Permeate TTHM values ranging from 1.1-2.5 μg/L
No substantial fouling observed
![Page 33: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Phase II - Conclusions
Highest Specific Flux = Trisep XN45-TSF Highest TTHM rejection = Hydranautics ESNA1-LF
Membrane Optimum Setting Costs
Koch TFC-SR3 __ gfd ??
Trisep XN45-TSF __ gfd ??
Hydranautics ESNA1-LF __ gfd ??
![Page 34: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Recommendations
Cost Data Verify 15 gfd @ 80% recovery Select Hydranautics ESNA1-LF
15 gfd @ 85% recovery (costs?) Consistent Source Water One Membrane for Phase II Challenge Membrane to Foul
![Page 35: Defense Presentation 6_26_09](https://reader036.vdocuments.net/reader036/viewer/2022082218/55a97ecb1a28ab94668b47d2/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
Questions