LIQUID / SOLIDS SEPARATION IN WASTEWATER TREATMENT & BIOSOLIDS DEWATERING
Chemical Products Lab Testing Plant Trials
LIQUID / SOLIDS SEPARATION APPLICATIONS
Influent Water Clarification Process Water Recycling Primary Wastewater Clarification Secondary Clarification Sludge Thickening Sludge Dewatering LIQUID / SOLIDS SEPARATION UNIT OPERATIONS
Clarifiers (Many Types) WATER Filters (Many Types) OR WASTE Dissolved Air Flotation Units WATER Induced Air/Gas Flotation Units Belt Presses Centrifuges SLUDGE Screw Presses DEWATERING Plate and Frame Presses Vacuum Filters (Rotary & Horizontal)
LIQUID / SOLIDS SEPARATION PRODUCT TYPES
Coagulants (+) Low Mol Wt Organic Inorganic Blended Flocculants (+ , ---, 0 ) High Mol Wt Dry Emulsion Solution OilOil----FreeFree Flocculants COAGULANTS AND FLOCCULANTS
Act on Insoluble Particles in Water Oils, Grease, Blood, Insoluble Organics, Clay, Silicates, Metal Oxides/Hydroxides Dirt, Dust, Rust & Metal Filings
Can Act on Charged Organic Compounds Anionic Surfactants, Soaps & Dispersants
Do Not Act on Most Dissolved Solids Salts, Acids, Nonionic Surfactants, Ammonia or Soluble Organic Compounds such as Sugar, Alcohols, etc.
SUSPENSION CHEMISTRY
THE KEY TO EFFECTIVE LIQUID / SOLIDS SEPARATION SUSPENDED SOLIDS VARIABLES
Surface Charge MOST Charge Density Particle Size IMPORTANCE Composition Particle Density
Particle Shape LEAST
MICROSCOPIC FORCES
ELECTROSTATIC
BROWNIAN
VAN DER WAALS
GRAVITY Colloidal Particle in Water +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ Almost all Particles +++ +++ +++ +++ of Industrial Interest +++ Have a Negative +++ +++ Surface Charge. +++ +++ +++ +++ The Particle is +++ +++ +++ +++ Surrounded by an +++ +++ Equal Number of +++ +++ Positive Counterions. +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++
PARTICLES IN WATER REPEL EACH OTHER +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ + +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ Colloidal Particle in Water +++ +++ +++ +++ RATIO +++ +++ +++ OF EXCESS +++ +++ +++ CATIONS +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ EQUAL +++ +++ NUMBER +++ +++ OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE +++ CHARGES +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ DISTANCE FROM PARTICLE
ADSORPTION OF CATIONIC POLYMER NEUTRALIZES CHARGES AND COLLAPSES FIELDS
Van der Waals Force of Attraction Now Stronger Than The Electrical Force of Repulsion NEUTRALIZED PARTICLES COAGULATE
2 STOKE’S LAW: ν = 2Gr (ρ − ρ οοο) / 9η
ν = SETTLING RATE G = GRAVITATIONAL CONSTANT r = RADIUS OF PARTICLE ρρρ = DENSITY OF PARTICLE ρρρo = DENSITY OF LIQUID ηηη = VISCOSITY OF LIQUID
BIGGER SETTLES FASTER Effect of Decreasing Particle Size
MATERIAL DIAMETER SETTLING TIME (in mm) PER METER
Gravel 10 1 second Course sand 1 10 seconds Fine sand 0.1 2 minutes Silt 0.01 90 minutes Bacteria 0.001 1 week Colloidal particles 0.0001 2 years Colloidal particles 0.00001 20 years Colloidal particles 0.000001 200 years
EFFECT OF COAGULATION AND FLOCCULATION
MANY FEWER SMALL LARGE OPTIMUM MIXING FOR CLARIFICATION APPLICATIONS
COAGULANT FLOCCULANT NO MIXING EFFLUENT
STATIC MIXER LIQUID INFLUENT FAST SLOW SLUDGE
CHARGE BRIDGING SETTLING NEUTRALIZATION + OF FLOCS + FLOC INTER-PARTICLE GROWTH COLLISIONS
COAGULATION PROCESS
Adsorption of Cationic Coagulant Neutralizes Negative Surface Charges
Reduces Electrical Barrier
Allows Van der Waals Forces to Predominate Interparticle Collisions
Brownian Motion
Mixing Energy Primary Particles Stick Together FLOCCULATION
+++ ===
SOLIDS FLOCCULANT FLOC
COAGULATION AND FLOCCULATION
Coagulation
Charge Neutralization
Rapid Mixing (High Shear)
Promotes Interparticle Collisions Flocculation
Bridging of Microflocs
Slow Mixing (Low Shear)
Builds Floc Size TYPICAL CLARIFICATION PROGRAM
Add Cationic Coagulant to Neutralize Anionic Charges on Particles Add Anionic Flocculant to Bridge Neutralized Particles
NOTES: (1) Coagulants should be be pre-diluted in water for best results (2) Flocculants MUST be pre-diluted in water for any results (3) Add cationic coagulant as far back in the line as possible (4) Do not add anionic flocculant too close to cationic coagulant
Primary / Secondary Wastewater Treatment System
FINAL OR 2’ EFFLUENT 1’ EFF AERATION WASTE SECONDARY PRIMARY BASIN CLARIFIER CLARIFIER MIXED LIQUOR WATER
RETURN ACTIVATED SLUDGE (RAS) WASTE ACTIVATED SLUDGE (WAS)
PRIMARY SLUDGE SLUDGE DIGESTER or HOLDING TANK
LIQUID PHASE SLUDGE SLUDGE CAKE FILTRATE, CENTRATE, PRESSATE DEWATERING POLYMER CHEMISTRY
VERSATILITY IS A MUST
COAGULANTS EPI / DMA POLYMER AKA EPICHLOROHYDRIN ---DIMETHYLAMINE
OHOHOH CHCHCH 333
------CHCHCH ---CH ---CHCHCH ---N- NNN+++ ------[]222 222 n --- CHCHCH 333 ClClCl
CAS NUMBER: 42751-79-1
POLY [DADMAC] POLYMER AKA POLY DIALLYLDIMETHYL AMMONIUM CHLORIDE AKA POLY [DMDAAC]
------CHCHCH ---CH ---- CH ---CHCHCH ------[ 222 222 ] n HHH222CCC CHCHCH 222
NNN+++ ...... ClClCl ---
HHH333CCCCHCHCH 333
CAS NUMBER: 26062-79-3 INORGANIC COAGULANTS
Aluminum Sulfate: Al 222(SO 444)))333 Aluminum Chloride: AlCl 333 Polyaluminum Chloride (PAC) Aluminum Chlorohydrate (ACH) Ferric Chloride: FeCl 333 Ferric Sulfate: Fe 222(SO 444)))333 Ferrous Sulfate: FeSO 444 Sodium Aluminate: Na 222AlAlAl 222OOO444
HYDROLYSIS OF ALUMINUM (III)
1,1 1,0 1,4
1,2
Log Soluble [Al] SolubleLog 1,3
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 System pH HYDROLYSIS OF IRON (III)
1,0 1,1
1,2 1,4 Log Soluble [Al] SolubleLog 1,3
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 System pH
DEPRESSION OF SYSTEM pH WITH ALUMINUM or FERRIC SALTS
DOSAGE OF CALCULATED 28% ACTIVE FINAL pH
1 ppm 5.2
10 ppm 4.2
100 ppm 3.2
1000 ppm 2.2
ASSUMES UNBUFFERED WATER STARTING AT pH = 7.0 ORGANIC COAGULANTS ADVANTAGES OVER INORGANICS
Sludge Volume Reduction Larger, More Stable Floc Less Pinfloc and Carryover Lower Flocculant Requirements Work Over Wide pH Range (2(2----12)12) Do Not Change System pH Lower Caustic Requirements
INORGANIC COAGULANTS ADVANTAGES OVER ORGANICS
Inorganics Can Produce Very Low Turbidity Waters Because the Metal Hydroxides Can Sweep Fine Particles from Suspension Low Price per Pound Looks Very Attractive to Purchasing Agents FLOCCULANTS
NONIONIC MONOMER ACRYLAMIDE
O
CH 2 = CH - C - NH 2
AM ANIONIC MONOMER ACRYLIC ACID
O _ …… + CH 2 = CH - C – O H
AA
CATIONIC MONOMERS AETAC ADAME.MeCl QQQ-Q---9999
+ POLYACRYLAMIDE
CHCHCH 222 ---CHCHCH- CH ---CHCHCH 222 ---CH ---CHCHCH 222 ---CHCHCH C=O C=O C=O
NHNHNH 222 NHNHNH 2 NHNHNH 222
POLYMER SHORTHAND POLYACRYLAMIDE
HHH
CHCHCH 222 –––C– CCC C=O
NHNHNH 222 n n is about 282,000 @ 20 million Molecular Weight HOMOPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE
FLOCCULANTS ARE TYPICALLY 200,000+ MONOMERS
ANIONIC POLYACRYLAMIDE COPOLYMER aka AM/SA ANIONIC POLYACRYLAMIDE
HHH HHH
CHCHCH 222 –––C CHCHCH 222 ---C- CCC C=O C=O
NHNHNH OOO 222 m NaNaNa + n RANDOM COPOLYMER m + n = 1
COPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE; RED = ACRYLATE 25% ANIONIC CHARGE COPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE; RED = ACRYLATE 50% ANIONIC CHARGE
CATIONIC POLYACRYLAMIDE COPOLYMER aka AM/Q9 CATIONIC POLYACRYLAMIDE
HHH R’R’R’
CHCHCH 222 –––C CHCHCH 222 ---C- CCC C=O C=O
NHNHNH 222 OOO m
(CH 222)))222 + RANDOM COPOLYMER HHH3C NNN CHCHCH 333 m + n = 1 n CHCHCH 333 Cl
COPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE; BLUE = CAT 10% CATIONIC CHARGE COPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE; BLUE = CAT 25% CATIONIC CHARGE
COPOLYMERIZATION YELLOW = ACRYLAMIDE; BLUE = CAT 50% CATIONIC CHARGE TYPICAL MOL-WT DISTRIBUTION
RESIDUAL THIS PRODUCT WOULD HAVE AN AVG MOL-WT MONOMER OF ~7 MILLION NUMBER OF MOLECULES OF NUMBER
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415
MOLECULAR WEIGHT IN MILLIONS
TYPICAL MOL-WT DISTRIBUTIONS
CATIONICS ANIONICS NUMBER OF MOLECULES OF NUMBER
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
MOLECULAR WEIGHT IN MILLIONS LINEAR POLYMER STRUCTURE
LIGHTLY BRANCHED POLYMER STRUCTURE HIGHLY BRANCHED POLYMER STRUCTURE
CROSSCROSS----LINKEDLINKED POLYMER STRUCTURE ASHLAND WATER TECHNOLOGIES EMULSION POLYMER PRODUCT LINE 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE
GENERAL INDUSTRIAL COAGULANT AIDS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE MINING FLOCCULANTS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE
LOW pH SYSTEM FLOCCULANTS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE BIOSOLIDS DEWATERING FLOCCULANTS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE
DEWATERING VERY YOUNG HIGH F/M PURE BIOSLUDGES 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE MIXED PRIMARY/SECONDARY DEWATERING FLOCCULANTS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE
PAPER MILL SLUDGE DEWATERING FLOCCULANTS 20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE PAPER MILL PRIMARY TREATMENT
20
18
16
14
12
10
8 RELATIVE MOLECULAR WEIGHT MOLECULAR RELATIVE 6
4 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 +10 +20 +30 +40 +50 +60 +70 +80
RELATIVE POLYMER CHARGE
WATER & WASTEWATER TREATMENT LAB TESTS PREPARING SOLUTIONS
Organic, Inorganic & Blended Coagulants
Recommended Concentration: 1 ---10%
Use Correction Due to High Density Emulsion Flocculants
Recommended Concentration: 0.50 ---1.50%
Density Correction Unnecessary Dry Flocculants
Recommended Concentration: 0.10 ---0.50%
Requires Accurate Balance ( +/+/----0.01 g Minimum)
PROCEDURE FOR 1% COAGULANT SOLUTIONS
Fill a 4 oz Bottle with 99 mls of Water Determine Volume of Coagulant = 1.0 gram
VOL = 1 / ρ ;ρ ; Where ρ = Specific Gravity
Specific Gravity; ρ = D / 8.34 ; Where D = lbs/gal Add Coagulant to the Water and Cap Bottle Shake Well Until Dissolved (~30 sec) PROCEDURE FOR 0.5% EMULSION POLYMERS
Shake Neat Emulsion Polymer Sample Very Well Fill an 8 oz Bottle with 99.5 mls of Tap Water Inject 0.5 mls into the Water and Cap Quickly Shake Vigorously for at Least 2 min Let Stand for 30 min; Shaking 1 min every 10 min PostPost----DiluteDilute to any Convenient Concentration
PROCEDURE FOR 0.25% DRY POLYMERS Place 399 mls Water in a 600 ml Beaker Clamp Beaker to Keep from Moving Set Mechanical Stirrer Speed to 400 rpm Sift 1.00 grams of Dry Polymer into Vortex Over a 20 sec Period to Avoid Fisheyes Mix for at Least 1 hour at 400 rpm
If Mixing on a Jar Tester or Magnetic Stirrer, Check for Fisheyes or Lumps by Pouring Out Solution and Mix Longer, If Necessary REMEMBER ONLY ONE FORMULA 1 cc Of a 1 % Product Solution in a 1000 ml Test Volume is a
10 ppm Dosage
THE REST CAN BE OBTAINED BY SIMPLE RATIO
CLARIFICATION & SETTLING TESTS JAR TEST APPARATUS
RPM GAUGE
GANG STIRRER
BEAKERS
LIGHT BOX
LAB / FIELD DAF UNIT
MIXER NEEDLE GAUGE VALVE 120 VAC 2000 ml PLEXIGLAS CYLINDER SEARS WATER FILTER SAMPLE 150 psi AIR PORT PUMP OTHER LIQUIDLIQUID----SOLIDSSOLIDS SEPARATION LAB EQUIPMENT
CYLINDER SETTLEOMETER IMHOFF SETTLING CONE
WHICH THICKENING TEST METHOD TO USE
CYLINDER SETTLING: Good for the Accurate Measurement of the Initial Settling Rate of Slurries with a High Enough Concentration to Observe an Interface SETTLEOMETER: Good for the Determination of Sludge Volume Index (SVI) in Activated Sludge Plants (aka Biological Oxidation Systems) IMHOFF CONE: Good for Determining the Final Sludge Volume of Systems Where the Final Sludge Volume is Less Than 10% of the Initial Volume. SLUDGE THICKENING AND DEWATERING
DEWATERING METHODS
BELT PRESS CENTRIFUGE PLATE AND FRAME PRESS VACUUM FILTER
ROTARY
HORIZONTAL SCREW PRESS DRYING BEDS POLYMER BELT FILTER PRESS
FREE DRAINAGE SECTION HEADBOX
FILTRATE COLLECTION
PRESS SECTION DRY CAKE FILTRATE
BELT FILTRATE WASH
TOP OF BELT FILTER PRESS
HEADBOX ROTARY SCREEN THICKENER
POLYMER
INCOMING SLUDGE
THICKENED SLUDGE
CENTRIFUGE LINE DIAGRAM
BEACH
LIQUID SLUDGE IN MOTOR SCROLL
POLYMER
SLUDGE CENTRATE CAKE OUT
PLATE AND FRAME FILTER PRESS
HYDRAULICS
FILTRATE
SLUDGE
FILTRATE ROTARY VACUUM FILTER
FILTRATE RECEIVER TRAP DRY CAKE DISCHARGE
POLYMER VACUUM DRUM
VAT
LIQUID SLUDGE
ROCKER ARM (10-30 reps/min)
WET SLUDGE Screw Press IN OUTSIDE VIEW
PRESSURE HEADBOX PLATE
PERFORATED CYLINDRICAL SCREEN w/ 1-4 mm HOLES
SCREW MOTOR
PRESSATE COLLECTION DRY CAKE OUT WET SLUDGE Screw Press IN INSIDE VIEW
PRESSURE PLATE
SCREW GETS WIDER IN DIAMETER TO PUSH SLUDGE AGAINST SCREEN
SCREW MOTOR
PRESSATE COLLECTION DRY CAKE OUT
ROTARY SCREEN SLUDGE THICKENER SCREW PRESS WITH ROTARY
POLYMER SCREEN THICKENER
FILTRATE COLLECTION SCREW PRESS
SCREW MOTOR
CAKE PRESSATE LAB TESTS FOR DEWATERING
FREE DRAINAGE TESTS
4” PIPE NIPPLE
FILTER SCREEN GRADUATED CYLINDER BUCHNER FUNNEL COMPUTERIZED FREE DRAINAGE TESTS
RS-232 BALANCE SERIAL
SLUDGE DEWATERING MIXING FOR R&D PROJECTS
¼” SHAFT 200-250 RPM
1.5” DIAMETER ¾” APART IMPELLERS
d d should be as small as possible THE DREWPRESS
- YIELDS FREE DRAINAGE RATE - CAN BE COMPUTERIZED - YIELDS FILTRATE QUALITY - CAKE COMPRESSABILITY - SOLIDS EXTRUSION POTENTIAL - CAKE RELEASE DATA - FINAL CAKE SOLIDS
ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED BY BELT PRESS MANUFACTURERS FOR SELECTION OF FILTER MEDIA. WE ADAPTED FOR POLYMER SELECTION
Capillary Suction Test (CST)
STAINLESS TIMER STEEL CYLINDER BOX
SENSOR BLOCK
CST PAPER CST ---SENSOR BLOCK FROM TOP
TO TIMER
INNER RING
SLUDGE
OUTER CST RING PAPER
VACUUM BUCHNER FUNNEL TESTS
FILTER PAPER
BUCHNER GAUGE FUNNEL
RUBBER STOPPER
GRADUATED VACUUM CYLINDER PUMP W/ SIDEARM TRAP FILTER LEAF TESTS
FILTER CLOTH VACUUM FILTER GAUGE LEAF RUBBER HOSE
VACUUM PUMP SLUDGE
TRAP Sludge Dewatering Unit Operation Recommended Test Method
Belt Press Free Drainage Test or DREWPRESS®
Centrifuge Free Drainage Test versus Shear
Plate & Frame Press Vacuum Buchner Funnel Test or CST
Vacuum Filter Filter Leaf Test or CST
Screw Press Free Drainage Test or DREWPRESS®
Drying Beds Free Drainage Test
Free Drainage Tests
140 120 100 DF-403 80 DF-439-GR 60 DF-2478 DF-2488 40 20 Drainage @ sec: 15 Drainage mls 0 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 Polymer Dosage: lbs/ton Free Drainage Tests
140 120 100 DF-403 80 DF-439-GR 60 DF-2478 40 DF-2488 20
Drainage @ 15 sec: mls sec: 15 @ Drainage 0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 Polymer Cost: $/ton
OTHER DEWATERING CALCULATIONS
Percent Capture: C = (1- Sf /S i) * 100
where S f = Filtrate Solids % and S i = Incoming Solids % FINAL CAKE SOLIDS
Cake Solids = (DW-P) / (WW-P)*100
Where: DW = Dry Cake Weight + Pan WW = Wet cake Weight + Pan P = Pan Tare Weight
Case History INCREASING CENTRIFUGE CAKE SOLIDS
Client Averages 25 Dry Tons per Day Disposal Cost = $45 per Wet Ton
Current Solids Averaged 20.5% Polymer Dosage Averaged 10.2 lbs/ton Polymer Cost = $1.60/lb
New Polymer = $1.75/lb New Polymer Dosage Averaged 15.3 lbs/ton New Sludge Solids Averaged 22.9% Net Savings = $314/day = $114,525/yr Effect of Increasing Cake Solids on Dewatering Economics
Original New Parameter Program Program Units Sludge Throughput 25.0 25.0 Dry Tons per Day Sludge Cake Solids 20.50 # 22.90 Percent Sludge Disposal Cost 45.00 45.00 Dollars per Wet Ton Polymer Dosage 10.20 15.30 Pounds per Dry Ton Polymer Cost 1.60 1.75 Dollars per Pound Disposal Cost 5487.80 4912.66 Dollars per Day Chemical Cost 408.00 669.38 Dollars per Day Total Cost 5895.80 5582.04 Dollars per Day
$ 314 Savings per Day
Cost Breakdown
Disposal Polymer $5,488 to $4,913 per Day $408 to $669 per Day Savings = $575 per Day Increase = $261 per Day
$575 Savings on Disposal ---261 Increase on Polymer ======$314 Net Savings on Polymer Switch Hurdles to Implementation
Purchasing objected to the higher cost of the polymer and wouldn’t give an inch The disposal charges appeared on the Operations budget Implementation would make Purchasing look bad and Operations look good We eventually had to sell the program to the President of the company
EFFECT OF INCREASING CAKE SOLIDS ON THE ECONOMICS OF DEWATERING EFFECT OF BRANCHING ON DRAINAGE TIME
100 90 80 70 60 DF-2465 BRANCHED 50
40 DF-2468 LINEAR 30 20 10
FREE DRAINAGE TIME: sec TIME: DRAINAGE FREE 0 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00
POLYMER COST: $/US Ton
EFFECT OF BRANCHING ON CAKE SOLIDS
30
25 DF-2465 BRANCHED
DF-2468 LINEAR 20
15 CAKE SOLIDS: SOLIDS: % CAKE
10 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00
POLYMER COST: $/US Ton Plant with 20 Dry Tons per Day and Disposal Cost of $20 per Wet Ton
400,000 350,000 Increases are in Absolute Percentages. 300,000 Example:
3% Increase in Cake Solids 11% to 13% is 2% Absolute 250,000 Increase in Cake Solids. Savings is $204,000/yr 200,000 2% Increase 150,000
100,000 1% Increase
Disposal Savings : : $/year Savings Disposal 50,000 0 10 12 14 16 18 20 Initial Cake Solids: %