A Gritty Face-Off: A Gritty Face Off: Mechanical Vortex Versus

Transcription

A Gritty Face-Off: A Gritty Face Off: Mechanical Vortex Versus
A Gritty Face
Face-Off:
Off:
Mechanical Vortex Versus Stacked
Tray Grit Removal
Jeff Sober
May 27, 2011
NTMWD
Filename.ppt
Today, we will discuss:
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
North Texas Municipal Water District
District’s
s
Panther Creek Regional WWTF
Why
y we
e decided
dec ded to put ttwo
o tec
technologies
o og es
side-by-side
How we did it for as cheap
p as p
possible
The grit testing methods used
The results!
Filename.ppt
In 2007, Panther Creek
Regional WWTF was built for 5
mgd
g average
g flow
Filename.ppt
In 2009, Panther Creek
underwent an expansion from
5 to 10 mgd
g
Filename.ppt
The headworks has both forced
and free vortex grit basins
Filename.ppt
Forced vortex basins have a low
capital cost
65%
100
200
95%
300
Micron Size
•
Filename.ppt
Low headloss
400
The Headcell in theory provides
higher efficiency grit removal
95%
100
200
300
400
Micron Si
Size
e
•
•
•
•
Filename.ppt
Large surface area in a small
footprint
Short settling distance
N moving
No
i
parts
t iin-basin
b i
Same level of O&M effort
How can we provide this at the
lowest possible cost?



Don t design Headcell for peak flow
Don’t
Provide system in existing footprint
Optimize flow between systems
Filename.ppt
The headworks is rated for 10
mgd average, 30 mgd peak
Filename.ppt
Flows of 0 to 15 mgd are sent
to the Headcell
Filename.ppt
Peak flows of 15 to 30 mgd are
routed to the vortex
Filename.ppt
GRIT TESTING
Filename.ppt
To compare the units, we
utilized two testing protocols
1.
Totall grit
accumulation testing
performed by
NTMWD
2.
Third Party vertical
flow p
profile testing
g
Filename.ppt
For the first test, we isolated
each unit for one week at a time
Filename.ppt
This four week test required
weighing grit every two hours
Filename.ppt
This test focused on total grit
removed from the classifiers
Filename.ppt
This test focused on total grit
removed from the classifiers
Filename.ppt
There was a significant
difference in the total pounds
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
Week 2
Vortex
Pou
unds
1,200
Week 4
Vortex
1,000
,000
800
600
400
200
0
Filename.ppt
Week 1
Headcell
Week 3
Headcell
We also measured TS and VS
7,000
Total Pounds Removed
Total Solids Removed
6,000
Grit Removed
(Inorganics)
Pounds
s Removed P
Per Week
5 000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Week 1 (Headcell)
Filename.ppt
Week 2 (Vortex)
Week 3 (Headcell)
Week 4 (Vortex)
Results were not as expected
Avera
age Pound
ds Remove
ed Per Day
y
250
200
150
Grit Removed
(Inorganics)
100
50
0
Headcell Average
Filename.ppt
Vortex Average
TEST PROTOCOL NO. 2 –
THIRD PARTY TESTING
Filename.ppt
Grit Solutions ran vertical
profile tests before and after
the grit
basins
g
Filename.ppt
This test measures the amount
of grit that makes it past the
grit
basins
g
Filename.ppt
A non-native grit was also
used
Filename.ppt
The results show that the grit
basin was working as designed
88%
Removal
6,000
97%
Removal
5,000
Total Pou
unds
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
0
Headcell
Influent
Filename.ppt
Headcell
Effluent
Vortex
Influent
Vortex
Effluent
Why did this test not agree
with our previous results?
Filename.ppt
The system was adjusted
1
1.
2.
Blow down sequence frequency increased
Wash water rates increased
Filename.ppt
Another week of testing had
improved results
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
Pounds
Week 4
Vortex
Week 2
Vortex
1,000
800
600
400
200
0
Filename.ppt
Separate
Test
Headcell
Week 1
Headcell
Week 3
Headcell
Another week of testing had
improved results
1,200
1,000
Pounds Removed
Solids Removed
Solids Removed
Pounds Reemoved 800
Grit Removed (Inorganics)
600
400
200
0
Headcell Average
Filename.ppt
Vortex Average
Headcell Test 2 Average
Let this be a lesson, your eyes
can fool you!
Don’t assume a system is optimized, even if
it is proprietary black box information
Filename.ppt
In summary, the new grit
system does remove less
organics
g
Vortex Average
Headcell Average
80%
74%
45%
30%
Percent Solids
Filename.ppt
Percent Inorganics
Acknowledgements
1.
2
2.
3.
Steve Kramer, Plant Manager
Elizabeth Turner
Turner, NTMWD Lab
Drew Satterwhite, NTMWD Engineer
Filename.ppt