FiltratioNews-Apr 2010:FiltNews April 2009 · 2015. 4. 10. · Mkt. Research & Tech. Analysis Dr. Graham Rideal Whitehouse Scientific Ltd. Tel: +44 1244 33 26 26 Fax: +44 1244 33

I N T E R N A T I O N A L

Your Global Source

FFIILLTTRRAATTIIOONN NNEEWWSS March/April 2010

Volume 29 No. 2www.filtnews.com

Measuring Dissolved Solids AccuratelyHow the Myron L Company’s Ultrameter II delivers the most accurate electronicmeasurements of dissolved solids of any instrumentation

Special Reports:Membrane Filter Media – Choosing the Right Properties

High-Flux Tubular MF Pretreatment for RO– Industrial Wastewater Recycling



FiltratioNews-Apr 2010:FiltNews April 2009 3/3/10 6:29 PM Page 1



2 • April 2010 • www.filtnews.com

IN THIS ISSUEMarch/April 2010, Volume 29, No. 2

Wastewater | TreatmentWastewater Treatment via Dry Filter Aid/Flocculant

Addition to APFs 4

Show| PreviewAmerican Filtration and Separations Society to Hold

23nd Annual Technical Conference 13

Cover Story | Myron L CompanyMeasuring Dissolved Solids Accurately 14

MembranesMembrane Filter Media – Choosing Properties 16High-Flux Tubular MF Pretreatment for RO – Industrial

Wastewater Recycling 19

Testing | Instrumentation Cake Forming Porometer – Advanced Technology for

Evaluation of Filtration Media 24

Company | ProfileSonobond Ultrasonics Offers Wide Selection of Ultrasonic

Bonding Machines for Textile Applications 28

Product | NewsNew Upgrades to Product Line From Koch Filter 32Rosedale Introduces All New Filter Bag 33Mid-West Instrument’s Model 130Monitors

Ammonia-Air Mixture 33

Published byEAGLE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

In Association withINTERNATIONAL

MEDIA GROUP, INC.6000 Fairview Road, Suite 1200

Charlotte, NC 28210 USA

Carol and Arthur Brown, FoundersKlaas DeWaal, Publisher and CEO

Antoinette DeWaal, Associate Publisherand Vice President

Ken Norberg, Editor in Chief

Advertising Sales RepresentativesGail DawsonJoan Oakley

Debra Klupacs

Administration DepartmentBarbara Ragsdale

Circulation DepartmentCherri Jonte

Publication DataPrinted by: Allegra Print & Imaging,Wixom, MI 48393.Filtration News (ISSN:1078-4136) ispublished bi-monthly by Eagle Publications, Inc.Printed in U.S.A., Copyright 2010.This publication has a controlledcirculation - controlled by the staff of FiltrationNews; mailed bi-monthly by Bulk Mail.Filtration News is not responsible forstatements published in this magazine.Advertisers, agencies and contributing writersassume liability for all content of all submittedmaterial printed and assume responsibility forany claims arising there-from made againstpublisher.

Mailing Address for advertising, newsreleases and address changes:

Filtration News42400 Grand River / Suite 103Novi, Michigan 48375-2572

Phone: (248) 347 - 3486Fax: (248) 239 - 0670

www.filtnews.com

Application to mail at periodicals postage prices is pending at Novi, Michigan and additional mailing offices.POSTMASTER: Send address changes toFiltration News42400 Grand River / Suite 103, NoviMichigan 48375-2572, U.S.A.

Cover courtesy of Myron L Company

II N T E R N A T I O N A L

Your Global Source

FFIILLTTRRAATTIIOONN NNEEWWSS March/April 2010

Volume 29 No. 2www.filtnews.com

Measuring Dissolved Solids AccuratelyHow the Myron L Company’s Ultrameter II delivers the most accurate electronicmeasurements of dissolved solids of any instrumentation






Editorial Advisory Board

www.filtnews.com • April 2010 • 3

Editorial Board ChairmanEdward C. Gregor, ChairmanE.C. Gregor & Assoc. LLCTel: 1 704 442 1940Fax: 1 704 442 [email protected]&A, Filtration Media

Haluk Alper, PresidentMyCelx Technologies Corp.Tel: 770.534.3118Fax: [email protected] Removal – Water and Air

Jim JosephJoseph MarketingTel/Fax: 1 757 565 [email protected] Filtration

Robert W. McilvaineTel: 1 847 272 0010Fax: 1 847 272 [email protected]. Research & Tech. Analysis

Dr. Graham RidealWhitehouse Scientific Ltd.Tel: +44 1244 33 26 26Fax: +44 1244 33 50 [email protected] and Media Validation

Tony ShucoskyPall MicroelectronicsTel: 1 410 252-0800Fax: 1 410 [email protected], Filter Media,Membranes

Scott P. YaegerFiltration and SeparationTechnology LLCTel/Fax: 219-324-3786Mobile: [email protected], New Techn.

Wells ShoemakerAdvisory Board Member Emeritus

Dr. Bob BaumannAdvisory Board Member Emeritus

Andy RosolGlobal Filtration Products Mgr.FLSmidth [email protected]: 1 800 826 6461/1 801 526 2005Precoat/Bodyfeed Filter Aids

Gregg PoppeThe Dow Chemical CompanyTel: 1 952 897 4317Fax: 1 942 835 [email protected] Water, Power,and Membrane Technology

Henry Nowicki, Ph.D. MBATel: 1 724 457 6576Fax: 1 724 457 [email protected] Testing and Training

Brandon Ost, CEOFiltration GroupHigh Purity Prod. Div.Tel: 1 630 723 [email protected] Filters, Pharmaceuticaland Micro-Electronic

Gerard J. Lynch, PESigma Design Co., LLCTel: 1 973 912 7922Fax: 1 973 912 [email protected] Machinery &Product Design

Dr. Ernest MayerDuPont Co.Tel: 1 302 368 0021Fax: 1 302 368 [email protected] Solid/Liquid Separationsin All Areas

Wu ChenThe Dow Chemical CompanyTel: 1 979 238 9943Fax: 1 979 238 0651Process Filtration (liquid/gas)Equipment and Media

Peter R. Johnston, PETel/Fax: 1 919 942 [email protected] procedures

Peter S. Cartwright, PECartwright Consulting [email protected], RO,Ultrafiltration


Wastewater | Treatment


onventional wastewater treat-ment (WWT) generally uses athree-step process of clarifica-

tion (i.e., gravity settling), overflow pol-ishing by sand filters (and in some cases,bag or cartridge filters), and underflowsludge dewatering by either conventionalfilter presses or automatic pressure filters(APFs). However, when flows are low(i.e., about 200 gpm or less, dependingon solids leading) direct APF filtration inone-step is far more practical. In-line in-jection of filter aids and polymer floccu-lants have been proven successful, butpolymer dosage control has been prob-lematic, (i.e., control by Streaming Cur-rent has been quite useful buttroublesome because of probe foulingand operator inattention to cleaning). Asa result, direct batch treatment/floccula-tion with a dry mixture has been suc-cessful because dry weight feeders canaccurately control the dosage.

A brief discussion of APFs and howthey compare to traditional dewateringmethods is necessary at this juncture tofamiliarize the reader as to exactly whatan APF is and does.

Horizontal filter presses have beenused for fine pharmaceutical, pigment,food, beverage, mining, etc. dewateringfor over 100 years due to their versatility,excellent cake washing capability, highsolids cakes, and efficient capture (or ex-cellent filtrate quality), (Refs. 1, 2). How-ever, despite this versatility, many cakestend to be sticky and 100% cake releasecannot be assured. As a result, practicallyall filter press applications require oper-ator attention during cake discharge.

Another filter press development thatshould be mentioned here is the auto-matic pressure filter (APF) or towerpress, ATP) based on a Russian patent,and later developed by Hoesch and

Larox (Refs. 2-4). A subsequent some-what similar development (Filtra-Sys-tems’ Verti-Press – Refs. 5-7) offered alower-cost simpler design. Basically,these three ATP designs have movingcloth belts that assure positive cake dis-charge out their sides since these pressesare mounted vertically with horizontalfilter plates (in contrast to horizontalpresses with vertical plates, which re-quire gravity cake release from fixedcloths). However, they all suffer fromthe disadvantages of high cost, limitedfilter area, and mechanical complexity.A new version (Ref. 8) is reported toeliminate all the mechanical problemsbut it still is relatively high in cost.

APF CONCEPTAutomatic pressure filter (APF) de-

watering consists of horizontal plate(s)between which is sandwiched a filtermedium; pump pressure is used to forcethe slurry into the plates and through themedium upon which the cake collects. Inconcept, it is similar to the vertical filterpresses (or automatic tower presses(ATPs) by Hoesch and Larox) with onekey distinction; namely, APFs can usedisposable filter media much like a roll oftoilet paper fed between the plates,whereas the ATPs use a reusable clothbelt that is wound around rollers, mustbe tracked, and must be washed on its re-turn. In addition, because of their design,ATPs filter on both sides of the beltwhereas APFs filter in one direction.ATPs also operate up to 225 psig whereasAPFs operate at 30-100 psig. As a conse-quence, ATPs are mainly used to dewa-ter/wash products whereas APFs are usedprimarily for wastes, machine toolcoolants, aluminum can manufacturing,aluminum foil manufacturing, etc.

APFs are quite simple, especially

when used with disposable filter media,since the accumulated cake and media isdisposed of each cycle. As a result, beltwashing is not required, cloth blinding iseliminated and cake release is assured.Repeatable high filtration rates are alsoassured. The spent media can be re-wound for separate disposal, dumpedalong with the cake and can even be doc-tored, brushed, or washed to removeresidual cake debris. A variety of mediacan be used depending on the applica-tion, but most importantly, its strength isunimportant since a base belt can be usedfor conveyance. Extreme flexibility in fil-ter media choice is basically why APFscan be used in a wide variety of applica-tions. In addition, APFs can incorporatecake washing; can be completely en-closed for handling toxic or radioactivewastes; can utilize PLC control for com-plete unattended operation; incorporateautomatic flushing capabilities for shut-downs; have complete safety interlock-ing; assure positive dry cake discharge;and can incorporate complete integratedauxiliaries, such as pumping systems,flow controls, filter aid systems, polymerflocculant systems, etc. DuPont has usedAPFs to clean up coolant for recycle, fil-ter deionized water, dewater highly haz-ardous wastes, clarify highly hazardousacid solutions, recover catalysts for sale,clarify scrubber water, detoxify cyanidicwaste-water prior to deepwelling andlandfilling, dewater sluicing pressure leaffilter back wash and generally handle awide variety of wastewaters, particularlyheavy metals removal (Ref. 9).

Four basic APF systems have beenevaluated within DuPont, namely, Filtra-Systems’ Verti-Press (and their earlier Hy-dromation design (Refs. 5-7), J. R.Schneider’s sludge filter, Summit’s stackedcoolant filter, and Oberlin’s APF system.

C

Wastewater Treatment via Dry FilterAid/Flocculant Addition to APFsBy Dr. Ernest Mayer, DuPont



Wastewater | TreatmentThe Oberlin APF is better suited for lowwaste flows, whereas the Schneider, Verti-Press, and Summit units are better suitedfor larger volumes and flows and wherecake washing is required. The OberlinAPF system (Refs. 9-16) utilizes a singlechamber design with filtration areas upto 50 ft2 whereas the Verti-Press, Schnei-der and Summit designs incorporatestacked filter chambers in a single unitwith areas up to about 1000 ft2. In addi-tion, the Oberlin APF system was suc-cessfully demonstrated in EPA’sSuperfund Innovative Technology Evalu-ation (SITE) program at a Superfund sitein Palmerton, PA (Refs. 9; 11-14), whichutilized DuPont’s tight ~1µm absoluteTyvek® disposable media (Ref. 17).

An even newer version, the Pneuma-Press, (Refs. 24, 25) is reported to beeven simpler, more cost effective, andlower in maintenance, but it also isfairly high in cost. However, it has com-peted quite favorably against theHoesch and Larox ATPs, but it is rela-tively new and will require market de-mands to dictate its applicability towastewater dewatering (Ref. 24).

These APFs have long been used inthe machine tool coolant industry forsolids removal and recycle of expensivecoolants, as well as in the aluminumcan and foil industries (J. R. Schnei-der). On the other hand, they are rarelyused for wastewater recycle since thefiltered water is usually discharged.

Polymer flocculants and filter aids aretraditionally used via in-line injection tothese APFs used in WWT applications,(e.g., Refs. 18-21). However, in-line poly-mer dosage control has been problematic,[i.e., control by Streaming Current hasbeen quite useful (Ref. 26), but trouble-some because of probe fouling and oper-ator inattention to cleaning]. As a result,direct batch treatment flocculation witha dry mixture has been successful be-cause dry weight feeders can accuratelycontrol the dosage. This paper will dis-cuss this dry feeding approach and whereit has been successfully applied. Somecase histories will be highlighted wheretoxic constituents are removed and stabi-lized in the resultant dry cakes for secure

landfilling or incineration. One applica-tion even dealt with Hg removal; and theearliest practice of this approach can befound in Refs. 23 and 27.

CASE HISTORIES

Chemical Plant Sticky Solids RemovalThis application involved sticky solids

removal from a high-flow 125 gpm chem-ical plant wastewater prior to dischargethrough a carbon bed to the river. Bothpolymer flocculant and filter aid (calcinedrice hull ash) are injected in-line ahead ofstatic mixers to an Oberlin APF, whichproduces <0.2 NTU turbidity filtrate and~50% solids cakes suitable for incinera-tion. Flux is quite high at ~5 gpm/ft2 uti-lizing a special re-cleanable belt that iswashed every discharge cycle, which waslater converted to disposable media to re-duce the wastewater load; and due to beltblinding issues because the polymerdosage could not be controlled accuratelyfor the variable input WW stream (i.e.,the small feed sump was much too smallfor proper WW equalization). A labora-tory SCM unit (Ref. 22) was evaluatedwith satisfactory results but the plant didnot want to deal with a complicated on-line instrument, which would eventuallyfoul and minimal operator attention wasavailable. Also, the tight disposal mediaused initially (that blinded if the polymerdosage wasn’t near optimum) wasswitched to a more open ‘forgiving’ mediacoupled with a gang of bag ‘guard’ filtersto protect the carbon bed when the WWwasn’t properly flocculated. This applica-tion clearly demonstrated the need forproper polymer dosage control as well assufficient equalization to smooth out thelarge variability in WW characteristics(i.e., both in % solids and the level of sol-uble surfactant).

Elastomer Manufacturing Plant Wastewater Recycle

This application involved a wastewaterdischarge to a municipal sewage plant thatwas fouling various pieces of equipmentat the sewer plant. As a result, a consentorder was issued and steep fines were as-sessed, which prompted some sort of on-

site treatment for removal of these stickyelastomeric solids. Unfortunately, thesesolids were heavily dispersed such that0.2-micron membrane filtration was un-successful and blinding was quite rapid.As a consequence, it was opted to investi-gate closed-loop APF filtration, but sinceflow was quite high at 600 gpm, only theVerti-Press and Summit designs were con-sidered. The first step in the study was todetermine if the wastewater dispersioncould be broken with a coagulant or poly-mer flocculant. An exhaustive study withabout 30 different treatments demon-strated that only ferric chloride coagulantand a special high-charge polymer couldcoagulate/flocculate the various waste-waters under all manufacturing condi-tions albeit dosages varied significantly.Filtration of the treated wastewater wasalso difficult and tended to blind mostmedia evaluated. As a result, filter aid hadto be added and we opted to use non-haz-ardous MAXFLO (AgriLectric’s patentedfilter aid based on calcined rice hull ash)since it out-performed evaluated perlites.In addition, since flow was quite high, weopted to use a special re-cleanable beltwith a belt wash system to avoid the high~$400M annual cost of disposable media.

This system incorporates both in-line flocculation and filter-aid additionso dosages can be carefully controlled,and complete DCS control for a totallyautomatic system save for filter aidmakeup, polymer tote supply, and filtercake removal. The 100ft2 Summit APFhas been operating with consistent <1NTU turbidity filtrate, which is recycledback to the manufacturing process at anannual cost savings of about $300M.Makeup process water is added to com-pensate for evaporation losses since op-erating temperature is about 40°C.

In addition, this application utilizedan in-line SCM (Ref. 26) to control thepolymer dosage quite accurately sincea reusable filter belt was used to avoidthe high ~$400M annual disposablemedia cost.

Chemical Plant Hazardous Wastewater Treatment

This application involved treatment






of a high solids wastewater (WW)stream that was shipped off-site at con-siderable cost (i.e., >$2MM annually).The stream contained a fairly largeamount of surfactant as well, whichcomplicated the treatment and subse-quent solids removal prior to dischargethrough a carbon bed-polishing step tothe local river. An extensive laboratorytreatability study was conducted with

many different combinations of waste-water (since WW characteristics variedwidely) and treatment additives. Ferricchloride coagulant was quite effective tobreak the ~0.2µm particle-size emul-sion, but the plant didn’t want to handlethe corrosive ferric chloride. As a result,an extra high charge cationic polymerflocculant (K-144L by Stockhausen,Greensboro, NC) was found to be quite

effective and SCM could be used as acontrol tool (Ref. 26). However, eventhough the WW was effectively floccu-lated and a special filter aid (FA) added(Suspersep HCR by Traclana, Houston,TX) the WW could not be filtered. Thiswas felt to be due to the interfering sur-factant; and as a result DuPont opted toinvestigate powdered activated carbon(PAC) treatment in addition to the filteraid. Extensive testing with more than 10different PACs revealed one clear win-ner that was far superior to the others insurfactant removal after only 20 minutesadsorption time. As a result of this com-bined K-144L polymer PAC/FA treat-ment, the WW could be effectivelyfiltered and also reduce the load to thepolishing carbon beds prior to dischargeto the local river. Some typical lab treat-ment tests/results are listed in Table I.

Table I shows that the special PACtreatment when combined with the K-144L polymer and the Supersep HCR FAis quite effective to remove practically allsolids, as well as both the Surfactant(Surf.) and the Hazardous (Haz.) compo-nent to below their detection limits. One



will also note that the 2.2 g/l PAC/FAdosages were just as effective as the higher4.0 g/l dosages. Filter fluxes were quitereasonable at 1.3 gpm/ft2, which wasgreater than the required 1.2 gpm/ft2 fluxrequired for the process. As a conse-quence, this treatment protocol wasadopted along with a 36 ft2 Oberlin APF,and startup was commenced in early2004. Startup data collected are tabulatedin Table II.

The data in Table II clearly show thatdespite the higher Surf. and Haz. levelsencountered during this startup phase,the treatment protocol was effective in re-moving both to very low levels despitemuch higher 1.1-1.8% solids. Fluxes werealso acceptable at 1.2-1.7 gpm/ft2. Recentdata after the startup period when %solids decreased to normal <1.0% solidslevel have shown that both Surf. and Haz.levels were well below 0.1 ppm at the de-sired 2.2 g/l PAC/HCR dosages establishedin the lab tests. As a consequence, theOberlin APF process for this very difficultwastewater has been operating success-fully for almost 5 years. Note also that inthis case the dry filter aid and PAC pre-

treatments were added to a slurry makeuptank because the dosages were too high.

APF Wastewater Hg RemovalThis application (Ref. 23) involved

Hg removal from emulsified WWs gen-erated by pharmaceutical manufacturingplants and hospitals. The WWs fromthese sources are characterized as highlyemulsified, contain high suspended anddissolved solids, and are highly variablebut generally fairly low flow (whichmakes equalization less of an issue andis appropriate for direct APF filtration).

Extensive testing demonstrated thatconventional precipitation technologiesare stretched to their limits by the 1 ppbgoal and ion exchange and carbon ad-sorption technologies are confounded bythe high suspended and dissolved solids.New technologies were needed. This ap-plication involved the successful imple-mentation of a combinationprecipitation/absorption technology de-veloped on a filter aid back bone whichnot only treats the mercury to <50 ppt butalso deals with the other complicatingcharacteristics of the wastewater (Ref. 23).

The treatment protocols were designedto be compatible with the DuPont/Ober-lin Microfiltration technology, which wassuccessfully demonstrated in the EPA’sSITE Program in 1990-1991 (Refs. 9-14).

Table III details some of these treat-ment protocols:

The Abcel and Carbamate treatmentsblind the filter so there is low flux, whichmake these treatments uneconomic de-spite the low flux requirements of thisproject. MaxFlo SF08 and SF10 have ad-equate fluxes and Hg removal, but whencompared to SF20 produce much wetterfilter cakes, hence, MaxFlo SF20-500proved to be the best overall solution.Note here that all these treatments weredesigned to be added dry by a commer-cial dry powder feeder.

A small Oberlin APF system wasstarted up in 1994 and has been operat-ing successfully since. Unfortunately, thefirst filter cakes generated at start-uppassed TCLP for Hg, but unexplainably,failed for Pb. This problem was solved bychanging the filter aid to Profix SF20-500(Profix is the metal sequestering variantof MaxFlo which was pioneered in the



DuPont/Oberlin SITE program – Refs 9-14). This system treats about 300 gal-lons/day to levels below 50 ppt Hg(measured with a special analytical tech-nique) and generates minimal quantitiesof stable filter cake using Profix SF20-500.Also, refer to Ref. 23 for more details.

Chemical Plant Hazardous Organics Removal

This application involved toxic organ-ics removal prior to C-beds from a WWthat contained copious solids and un-dis-

solved sticky solids, which complicatedthe toxic component removals. As a re-sult, an extensive four-week lab/pilot test-ing program was undertaken to developthe best overall treatment protocol andthe key results and are:

• Significant toxic component re-ductions by both flocculant treatmentscombined with filter aid filtration, evenwithout any adsorbent being used.

• A cross-linked cationic polymer flocculant (K-290FLX) proved to bemost effective of about a dozen evalu-

ated, but the dry clay-based flocculant(Cetco C17) is even more effective(Test #33 vs. Tests 30, 34, 35).

• Scaleup of the K-290FLX floccula-tion is problematic as toxic componentremovals are poorer, (i.e., Tests #34, 35,vs #30. Note also that a higher 2 g/l fil-ter aid dose was required in the 0.3 ft2pilot test #35 where a pump was usedto feed the flocculated slurry, (i.e., toprevent or at least mitigate the organicglob extrusion into the filtrate).

• Fluxes (not shown) are quite highat about 4 gpm/ft2 such that a small24ft2 Oberlin APF would be adequate.

Thus, these lab and pilot testsdemonstrated significant toxic organicsremoval by simple flocculation/filtra-tion and that the dry clay-based floccu-lant is slightly superior to the liquidemulsion polymer that requires properactivation and careful dosage control.

The next step in this program was toevaluate the pre-blending of powderedactivated carbon (PAC) with the two dry




ingredients (C-17 + SSHCR-DC1) sincethe designed granular activated carbon(GAC) beds only had about a 3-4 weeklife due to the high organics load withonly filtration. The following findingswere made:

• The C-17 flocculant was again su-perior to the K-290FLX polymer (i.e.,since a new drum of WW was suppliedfor this round of tests – Test #40 vs. 46).

• The presently used WPX PAC is ineffective here (Test #25).

• The second-choice PAC (EI-325DHH) is reasonably effective based onfiltration performance (not shown),and organics removals (Test #66).

• The original PAC (P-1000) used atour first dry-powder addition plant is themost effective here as well, especiallywith ‘C’ removal, which is the main con-taminant of interest (Test #67).

• Mixing scaleup to a prototypicflocculation regime results in even bet-ter ‘C’ removal (Test #71).

Thus, these PAC tests demonstratedthat a single dry blend with added PACis feasible to reduce the load to the GACbeds. Estimated bed life was projected to

be about three months with the addedPAC. As a result, this 3-componentblend will be used in the final treatmentprotocol. In addition, a surplus 24ft2

Oberlin APF system will be utilizedsince it also used dry powder additionbefore the process was shut down.

Hg Removal from Plants’ OutfallThis application involved Hg removal

from a UF reject stream and solids stabi-lization for Hg so dewatered filter cakecould be safely landfilled (i.e., pass EPATCLP test). The discharge limit to theplant’s outfall was established at 20 ppt,which is very low and will require exten-sive testing of Hg adsorbents so the Hgcannot leach into the environment. Thisapplication also suggests the desirabilityof the simple dry powder addition of allthe ingredients to minimize control is-sues. Some of the key tests of almost 100conducted for this very difficult applica-tion shows:

• The basic feed slurry has very highturbidity and total suspended solids(TSS); and an Hg level much higherthan the 20 ppt limit (37 ppb or 37,000

ppt), which will be concentrated upondewatering.

• The tight Tyvek® SoloFlo™ mediaused is able to achieve low <0.2 NTUfiltrate turbidity and quite l ow <0.1ppm TSS when pretreated properly.

• The K-295FL polymer is quite ef-fective along with the SSHCR-DC1 fil-ter aid and PT-1E clay-based Hgadsorbent (Test #50), but its dosagecontrol was found to be quite critical.

• The clay-based C-25 dry flocculantseems to be more forgiving and actuallyallowed lower PT-1E dosages to be uti-lized (i.e., Tests #49, 60, 61).

• C-25 without the PT-1E adsorbent isalso reasonably effective but the filtrate Hglevel exceeded the 20 ppt limit (22 ppt).

• All cake TCLP values are well belowthe 0.2 ppm limit for safe land disposal,which indicates the efficiency of the addi-tives in stabilizing the Hg in the cake.

Thus, the testing here again demon-strated the value of a dry flocculant/filteraid/adsorbent blend to treat very diffi-cult WWs to achieve very clean filtrateand dry cakes suitable for landfilling.

Back Your Filters BetterExtensive Range of Expanded Metals & Polymers

Perfect for membrane support & backing

Assures media integrity & pleat spacing even under dynamic flow

Materials laminate for co-expansion/ contraction/flex

Openings down to 25 micron

Thickness: 0.001” to 0.2”

Dexmet Engineers welcome the challenge of your unique materials and applications

Custom-Expanded Materials from

203 294 4440 www.dexmetfilter.com


SUMMARYThe results here along with the dis-

cussion in the introduction demonstratethe viability of dry powder flocculant/fil-ter aid addition for pre-treating difficultWWs prior to dewatering in an APF toproduce dry cakes suitable for landfillingor incineration. In addition, the wide va-riety of disposable media available permitsoptimum choice for the required filtratequality (including DuPont’s tight Tyvek®SoloFlo™ ~1µm media for low <0.2 NTUturbidity and <1 ppm TSS). Furthermore,this dry pretreatment approach eliminatesthe problems associated with liquid poly-mer addition and control; and permitsbetter control via dry powder feeders in-cluding loss-in-weight ones.

Dr. Mayer is a Senior Consultant with DuPont,Wilmington, DE specializing in SLS technologysince 1980. For more information contact autorat: Tel: 1-302-695-3782 Fax: 1-302-368-0021Email: [email protected]

REFERENCES1. E. Mayer, Filtration News, 6 (3), 24-27 (May/June, 1988):“New Trends in SLS Dewatering Equipment.”2. Mayer, E., Fluid/Particle Separation J., 1(2), 129-138(1988).3. Mayer, E., Fluid/Particle Separation J., 4(4), 182-185(1990).4. Svarovsky, L., Chem. Eng., 62-76 (July 2, 1979); 93-103(July 16, 1979); 69-78 (July 30, 1979).5. A. Wright, Coal Age, 74-79 (Feb. 1985): “Putting on theSqueeze”.6. E. & M. J., p. 6, (August 1986): “E&MJ Product Develop-ment – New High Pressure Filter Produces Drier Cakes,Reduces Costs.”7. Chemical Engineering, 41, (Sept. 16, 1985): “DiaphragmFilter Squeezes More Moisture out of Cake.”8. Geiss, R., and Bardenheuer, F., CAV, “ChemicalProcesses – Achema 2000 with Double-Sided FiltrationSurface,” (May 2000).9. Mayer, E., Fluid/Particle Separation J., 6(1), 20-26 (1993):“Heavy Metals Removal with DuPont/Oberlin Microfiltra-tion Technology (SITE).”10. Martin, H. L., Paper presented at AESF/EPA 10th AnnualConf. on Environmental Control for the Metal Finishing In-dustry, Orlando, FL, (January 23-24, 1989).11. Topudurti, K., Labunski, S., and Martin, J., Superfund ’90– Proceedings of the 11th National Conference, pp. 425-431, Washington, DC., (Nov. 26-28, 1990): “Field Evaluationof a Microfiltration Technology to Treat Groundwater Con-taminated with Metals”.12. Mayer, E., Paper presented at U.S. EPA Second Forumon Innovative Hazardous Waste Treatment Technologies,Philadelphia, PA (May 15-17, 1990): “DuPont/Oberlin Mi-crofiltration System for Hazardous Wastewaters.”13. EPA SITE Technology Demonstration Summary,EPA/540/S5-90/007, (March, 1992): “DuPont/Oberlin Micro-filtration System Palmerton, Pennsylvania.”14. Mayer, E., Paper presented at AESF/EPA 17th Confer-ence on Pollution Prevention and Control for the SurfaceFinishing Industry, Orlando, FL (Feb. 5-9, 1996): “Remedia-tion Applications/Considerations with the DuPont/OberlinMicrofiltration SITE Technology.”

15. Burch, J. V., Norford, S. W., and Martin, H. L., Paper pre-sented at AFSS 11th Annual Tech. Conf. & Expo, St. Louis,MO, (May 5-7, 1998): “Maintenance History of an OberlinPressure Filter.”16. Rose, S. W., Paper presented at Annual AFSS TopicalConf. on Water and Wastewater Filtration, Anaheim, CA,(July 25-26, 2000): “Wastewater Filtration with an OberlinAutomatic Pressure Filter.”17. Lim, H.S. and Mayer, E., Fluid/Particle Separation J., 2(1), 17-21 (1989): “Tyvek for Microfiltration Media.”18. Mayer, E., Filtration News, 19 (4), 32-34 (July/August2001): “Automatic Pressure Filters (APFs) for Closed-LoopWastewater Recycle.”19. Mayer, E., Filtration News, 22 (1), 6-12, (Jan/Feb, 2004):“Automatic Pressure Filters (APFs) for High Volume-HighSolids Wastewater Dewatering.”20. Mayer, E. Filtration News, 23 (3), 6-16 (May/June, 2005):“Automatic Pressure Filters (APFs) for Difficult Waste-water Treatment.”21. Mayer, E., Filtration News, 24 (3), 30-35 (May/June,2006): “Automatic Pressure Filters (APFs) for NuclearWastewater Treatment.”22. Mayer, E., Filtration News, 25 (1), 4-16 (Jan/Feb, 2007):“Pressure Filters in the Power Generation Industry.”23. Mayer, E. and Rieber, R. S., Paper presented at AFSS1996 Annual Tech. Conf. & Expo, Valley Forge, PA (April 21-24, 1996): “Wastewater PPB Mercury Removal withDuPont/Oberlin SITE Technology.”24. Benesi, S. C., and Mayer, E., Paper presented at AFSS14th Annual Tech. Conf. & Expo, Tampa, FL, (May 1-4, 2001):“Cost Effective Liquid/Solid Separation: A Simpler More Ef-fective Dewatering Technology.”25. Filtration & Separation, 38(5), 14-17 (June 2001): “Prod-uct News.”26. Mayer, E., Paper presented at AFSS 19th Annual Tech.Conf. & Expo, Chicago, IL, (May 9-11, 2006): “StreamingCurrent Monitoring (SCM) of Industrial FlocculationProcesses.”27. Rose, S. W., Paper presented at AFSS 18th Annual Tech.Conf. & Expo, Atlanta, GA, (May 8-11, 2006).



FN



he American Filtration andSeparations Society will holdits 23rd Annual Technical Con-

ference & Exhibition on March 22-25,2010 at the Grand Hyatt Hotel in SanAntonio, Texas.

To further impact the separation soci-ety and reach out to even more experts inthe field the organization announcedthat the 2010 AFS Annual TechnicalConference will be co-located with the2010 AIChE Spring National Meeting inSan Antonio, Texas.

The co-location with the AIChE willgive excellent opportunity to approachan outstandingly big audience of morethan 500 technical and academic ex-perts, since the sessions of both organ-izations will be fully accessible to allattendees at no additional charge.

Strong emphasis is given to both liq-uid and gas separations. Within thesefields are areas of interest involving thehardware, the appropriate filter media,the overall system and its operation,product evaluation and monitoring, in-strumentation, ancillary products suchas supports, resins and adhesives, re-quirements for specific applications,safety and health aspects, selection pro-tocols, and particle science and charac-terization. Understanding the basicaspects of the processes and the math-ematical modeling of these operationswill play an important role in improveddesign and operation.

The AFS provides an important plat-form to keep companies updated onthe new opportunities in the market.The vision of the 2010 Annual Confer-ence is to discuss the challenges andthe opportunities in separations to ad-dress energy and environmental issuesand to prepare for the growth in thearea of biotechnology.

Research and development efforts inthe field of biotechnology produce ex-citing novelties nearly everyday. Novel

products and novel ways of processingimprove everybodies life and enable sus-tainability, growth and cost efficiency.This track is presenting the downstreambio processing novelties, their applica-tion and process integration.

Advances in Fluid/Particle separa-tions rely upon fundamental under-standing and application of the basicphysics. Proper models and simula-tions are essential as are well designedexperiments and observations. Thistrack has sessions for paper presenta-tions on model development, computersimulations and practical applications.Separate sessions are provided for sep-arations of nanomaterials, media de-sign, equipment design, and testing.

Theme for the Energy and Environ-

ment track is filtration and separationsimpact and role past, present and futureon energy generation and conservation,and environment preservation frommany points of view. The impact androle of filtration and separations isquite implicit and is widely interpreteddepending on specific applications.Fundamentally, however, its role is en-compassing more and more what im-pact on energy and environment itaffects, while performing its basic func-tion of maintaining and extendingequipment service life and protectinglarger and larger investments.

For information on the conference visit:www.afssociety.org/spring2010/

Show | PreviewAmerican Filtration and Separations Societyto Hold 23nd Annual Technical Conference

T

FN


Cover Story | Myron L Company


ince 1957, the Myron L Com-pany has designed and manu-factured accurate, reliable,

simple to use analytical instruments for awide variety of water quality applications.Demanding uses range from testing boilerwater to ultrapure water control and ver-ification of dialysate for artificial kidneymachines. Some of the company’s analoghandheld instruments are so reliable theyhave been in use for almost 50 years.

Ultrameter II digital handheld instru-ments are even more reliable, easier touse and more accurate than any of theirprevious analog meters. Their high per-formance not only sets them apart from

other Myron L handheld meters, but putsthem in a class superior to all other hand-held water quality meters. (See Figure 1.)

Both the Ultrameter II 6Psi and 4Pmodels measure conductivity, resistivityand Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) to within±1% of READING over the entire meas-urement range (and better than ±0.1% ator near calibration). The Ultrameter II ac-complishes this exceptional accuracythrough the proper modeling of standardsolution characteristics using built-in, pro-prietary conversion algorithms for tem-perature compensated readings andadvanced conductivity cell design.

Pure water is a very poor conductor

of electricity. Solutions with a highamount of dissolved solids conductelectricity very well because of the highamount of electrically charged particlesor ions present. This makes conductiv-ity a good indicator of the concentra-tion of dissolved solids in solution.Resistivity (the inverse of Conductiv-ity) is preferred when concentration of

Figure 1: Ultrameter II Models — Myron L Company manufactures two UMIImodels, the 6Psi and the 4P. The 6Psi measures pH and ORP in addition to dis-solved solids and features an LSI/Hardness calculator.

S

Figure 2: Example Temperature Compen-sation — The KCl values used for tem-perature compensation in the UltrameterII vary with temperature accuratelyrather than using single average values.

Figure 3: Example Error from WrongSolution Selection — The graph illus-trates the error that would result fromselecting KCl for a solution that shouldbe compensated as NaCl or as 442 inthe range of 1000 µS.

Measuring Dissolved Solids AccuratelyHow the Myron L Company’s Ultrameter II delivers the most accurate electronic measurements of dissolved solids of any instrumentation



ions in solution is expected to be verylow (e.g., ultrapure water). TDS is bet-ter for determining the actual numberof particles in a solution. Since both re-sistivity and TDS measurements arebased on conductivity, the accuracy ofan instrument’s conductivity measure-ment capability is paramount.

Solution conductivity varies greatlywith temperature. This means the con-ductivity of the same solution at dif-fering temperatures cannot be directlycompared. Compensation to a com-mon temperature, generally 25ºC, isnecessary, then, to create a basis forcomparison. A very inaccurate way todo this is to use a generic temperaturecompensation slope, for example2%/ºC for naturally occurring water,that assumes changes in conductivityare directly proportional to changes intemperature. This is actually true onlyfor a very narrow range of tempera-tures and doesn’t take into account thebehavior of solutions of varying ioniccompositions.

Because temperature compensationvalues are unique to solution type,using the proper solution characteris-tics to model is critical to accurate con-ductivity readings. Rather than use ageneric method, the Ultrameter II ispreprogrammed with compensation al-gorithms for the three common salt so-lutions, KCl, NaCl, and 442™, thatmodel the most encountered types ofsolutions. Based on extensive benchtesting, these algorithms take into ac-count critical points for changes in thebehavior of the solutions in responseto changes in temperature to get thebest measurement possible (see Figure2). Choosing the right solution com-pensation model for your applicationgreatly affects accuracy, especially forhot or cold solutions (solutions out-side the range of 15-20ºC). If thewrong conversion algorithm is applied,increased error in the reading results(see Figure 3).

The type of solution compensationmodel selected is dependent on the ap-plication in which the Ultrameter IIwill be used. KCl is typically selectedwhen historical data is based on KClcompensation. This is common in in-

dustrial applications where KCl is fa-vored for its stability. Though the solu-tion measured may not closely matchthe KCl standard, as long as the ioniccomposition of both the sample and thecalibration standard used remain con-stant over time, relative changes in con-centration will be accurate. NaCl istypically selected for brackish or seawater applications where the concen-tration of the sodium ion is very high.This model is also preferred for meas-uring dialysate, which contains a veryhigh sodium component as well.442™ is the best choice for freshwaterapplications. The 442™ standard is aproprietary formula specifically devel-oped by the Myron L Company tomodel the characteristics of naturalwater. It contains sulfates, carbonatesand chlorides, the three predominantcomponents of “natural water,” in nat-urally occurring proportions.

Conductivity cell construction alsogreatly affects the accuracy of measure-ments. The cell design must minimizepolarization caused by the accumula-tion of ions near the electrodes. Someinstruments attempt to solve this prob-lem by coating electrodes with plat-inum black to increase current density,but platinum black is very easily

scratched. This makes platinized cellsa poor choice for viscous samples andsuspensions that can damage the coat-ing. Also, the cell constant of platinizedcells drifts easily, requiring frequent cal-ibration. The Ultrameter II avoids theseissues by using electrodes made ofdurable stainless steel.

Some lower quality instruments alsouse a 2-wire cell that passes an electriccurrent through a solution to deter-mine the difference in voltage betweenthe electrodes. This method is less ac-curate because the resistivity of the so-lution and the resistivity of theelectrode are measured (due to polar-ization field effects on the electrodes).The Ultrameter II utilizes an advanced4-wire cell technology that measuresconductivity directly and needs only anegligible current to operate, eliminat-ing the influence of electrode polariza-tion. The Ultrameter II also employs aunique proprietary mechanism thatfurther stabilizes the conductivity read-ing, setting it apart from all other in-strumentation.

For more information contact: Myron L CompanyTel: 1-760-438-2021Website: www.myronl.com

Figure 4: Extreme Accuracy On-the-Spot — The Ultrameter II is lightweight andcompact, easy-to-calibrate and easy-to-use. It's also waterproof and buoyant, mak-ing it ideal for field testing. Store readings in memory and download wirelessly withoptional bluDock™ accessory.

FN



Membranes

he very name Membrane FilterMedia indicates, of course,thin materials, and with very

small pores. When considering mem-brane filter media, choosing the rightproperties for it tailored to the applica-tion is of utmost importance. Followingis a guide to making the right selections:

The material(s) of constructionmust be inert to the fluid handled, aswell as to the temperature employed.Other specific properties to measure, orknow, are: thickness, porosity, perme-ability, and the viscose-flow-averagedpore diameter. Porosity refers to theratio of void volume to bulk volume.Permeability, B, refers to the drivingpressure to push a liquid through amedium in viscose flow, stated in Eq. 1.

B (m2) = uηz/ΔP Eq. 1 u = liquid-approach velocity, m/s η = liquid viscosity, Ns/m2

z = thickness, m,Δ P = pressure drop across faces, N/m2

To determine if a liquid is in the vis-cose-flow range (at different drivingpressures), make a plot, on log/logpaper, on the vertical axis, of liquid-ap-proach velocity vs. driving pressure, onthe horizontal axis. Look to see wherethe slope is 1.0 [1].

Driving pressure means the differ-ence in pressures on the two separatefaces. With higher driving pressures,the slope falls to 0.5, indicating inertiaflow, as trying to put five pounds ofgrits into a one-pound bag. That is, take

the reading, of flow vs pressure, werethe slope is 1.0

Of course, avoid the error of includ-ing the pressure drop across the hous-ing with that across the membrane.

To determine if a gas is in the vis-cose-flow range plot, plot, on log/logpaper, on the vertical axis, the volu-metric velocity emitting from thedownstream face vs. the square of thedriving pressure, on the horizontal axis.Look for a plot with a slope of 1.0. If sothen modify Eq. 1 to state that u = ve-locity of gas from the downstream face,and η is the viscosity of the gas.

Where pores are very small, or nano-diameter fibers are present, Knudsenflow dilutes viscose flow, moving theslope towards 0.5. In those cases we

Membrane Filter Media – Choosing PropertiesBy Peter R. Johnston, Consultant

T



cannot deduce the viscose-flow-averaged pore diameter via a gas flow.

Determine the viscose-flow-averaged pore diameter, dav , from per-meability, B, and porosity, ε, via Eq. 2.

dav = (32B)0.5/ε Eq. 2

In describing pore sizes, seen on thesurface of a filter medium [2], diame-ter refers to the ratio of the cross-sec-tional area to the perimeter (thehydraulic diameter). While many writ-ers speak of pore radius, others speakof merely size, as linear measurements,and fail to tell us if size mean diameteror radius.

Among those many filter media builtfrom random arrays of building mate-rials, the pore-size distributions on thefaces all follow the same coefficient ofvariation [2]. That is, the ratio of thestandard deviation of the numbers ofdifferent pore diameters to the number-averaged pore diameter is near 0.707.

It follows that the viscous-flow-averaged pore diameter (on the sur-face) is 2.5 times the number-averageddiameter [1]; and, in viscose flow, theratio of the standard deviation of flow-pore diameters to the flow-averagedpore diameter is near 0.447.

The most-popular viscous-flow-porediameter is 4.0 times the most-popularnumber pore diameter.

In considering the thickness of amembrane, assume it consists of a stackof different layers all like the surfacelayer—and no specific-diameter-porepasses straight through. In that case,while the most-popular flow-pore di-ameter through the membrane remainsthe same as in the surface layer, thestandard deviation through the stack isless, decreasing, of course, with the in-creasing numbers of layers.

Many media are rated for “poresize,” on the basis of a filtration test.Yet, filtration efficiency is a function of

• thickness of the medium • fluid-flow rate • temperature, and • the natures of the fluid, the

particles, and the medium

Which is to say, a rated pore size de-

duced from a filtration test, must betied to that test. A different filtrationtest will yield a different rating.

That is, many writers speak of therated pore diameter of a membrane, with-out telling how that rating was assigned.

The most severe rating comes frompharmaceutical applications. Challengea small-diameter membrane disc with afreshly brewed soup of a specific-diam-eter microbe so that 108 microbes feedeach square centimeter of membranesurface, under a driving pressure of 30pounds per square inch, to obtain asterile filtrate. If that microbe has a di-

ameter of 0.45 microns then that’s therating of the membrane. [3]

Other ratings are not so demandingas the microbial rating, which is closeto absolute, that is, filtration efficiencyis 0.99999999. Yet another schoolteaches that absolute means a filtrationefficiency of 0.98, that particle diameterstopped with an efficiency of 0.98, orperhaps 0.95.

Thus, one absolute is not as absoluteas another. Then some writers speak ofthe cut-off particle diameter (no mentionof filtration efficiency) as if a filtermedium is a perfect sieve. Avoid speaking



Membranes of any filter medium as a sieve; none aresieves, consider the four variables men-tioned above that effect filtration

The non-ambiguous rating is, ofcourse, the viscose-flow-averaged pore di-ameter, Eq. 2, along with the thickness,and the material(s) of construction.

EQUATIONS OF INTERESTThe equations here apply to flat-sheet

filter media. They do not apply to, say,pleated sheets wrapped around a core in acartridge arrangement. In those cases,where fluid enters and leaves the same endof the cartridge, fluid flow through themedium is not evenly distributed over thearea, just as it is not evenly distributed incartridges of spiral-wrapped membranes.

Do not confuse the viscose-flow-averaged pore diameter, Eq. 2, with theso-called mean-flow-pore diameter, de-termined via the extended bubble-pointtest [1]. The later measurement often in-

dicates a smaller pore diameter becausegas flow is not in the viscose range.

And, of course, the bubble point,used to learn the diameter of the “largestpore,” is often an eye-ball measurement.The precise measurement is the ratio ofthe gas-flow rate (at the “bubble point”)to the gas-flow rate from a dry mem-brane at that driving pressure.

Which is to ask: Is the bubble pointthat pressure where the ratio of gas flowthrough a wet membrane is 0.001 ofthat through a dry membrane, or 0.01,or 0.1? Indeed, what is that ratio via aneye-ball measurement?

Understand this when constructing abubble-point determination for, say, a 10-inch diameter, liquid-soaked membrane,while actually measuring the gas flowfrom the top as a function of increasingpressure on the underside: At low pres-sures some gas does flow, owning to sim-ple diffusion of gas through the liquid.

That is, on a log/log plot of gas flow vsdriving pressure, the slope is 1.0. Then,with increasing pressure, at the bubblepoint, gas flow takes off. That measure-ment indeed measures the diameter ofthe “largest pore”, dL , via Eq. 3.[4]

dL = 4γ/P Eq.3whereγ = surface tension of the liquid, N/mP = bubble pressure, N/m2

For more information: Peter R JohnstonTel: 1-919-942-9092 Email: [email protected]

References [1] Johnston, Peter R., “Understanding the Ex-tended Bubble-Point Test”, Filtration News, June2009, 31-34[2] Johnston, Peter R, “Pore-Size Distributions onthe Surfaces of Filter Media Determined viaImage Analyses”, FILTRATION, 6(4), 2006, 309-311. [3] Johnston, Peter R., Fluid Sterilization by Filtra-tion, 2004, Interpharm/CRC Press.[4] Johnston, Peter R., Fundamentals of Fluid Filtra-tion, 2nd Edn, 1990, Tall Oaks Publishing Co.

FN



he role of membrane technol-ogy for wastewater recyclewill continue to grow in line

with increasing pressure on freshwater supply shortages, limiting ca-pacity of municipal wastewater treat-ment plants and escalating cost ofwater and effluent treatment. Amongthe various recycling alternatives,much of membrane development inthe past few decades has centered onreverse osmosis (RO), which canfunctionally separate most, if not all,substances in wastewater. In addition,RO is a more cost-effective techniquein handling wastewater with hightotal dissolved solids (TDS) thanother treatment alternatives. Exten-sive work has gone into determining

the factors that affect membrane foul-ing. These factors include ionic com-position, salt concentration, organicscomponents, and suspended solidsand colloids. Various applicationshave been studied for ground water,surface water and sea water, but onlyvery little has been done for the con-stantly changing complex chemicalmixtures in industrial wastewaterthat can vary from one operation tothe other.

Despite its capability to producere-usable water, a large number of ROrecycling installations have experi-enced difficult operational problemsin the field. The most common prob-lems include unreliable filtration pro-duction, decrease in salt rejection,

frequent membrane cleaning, andpremature membrane failure. Allthese deficiencies result in high oper-ating cost and in some cases shutdown of the water recycle plants. Theprimary cause for such an undesiredor unacceptable performance is thatRO membrane has low tolerance fora broad range of incompatible com-ponents in water. These substances, ifnot removed, will cause scaling, foul-ing or permanent degradation of theRO membrane. And all reverse osmo-sis membranes suppliers have estab-lished feed water quality criteria for areverse osmosis system.

The popular acceptance of RO haspaved the way for other membranetechnologies such as microfiltration

T

High-Flux Tubular MF Pretreatment for RO – Industrial Wastewater RecyclingBy Joseph Lander and Michael Chan, Duraflow, LLC



(MF) to augment its performance inthe recycling process. Because of itsversatility, robust nature and high fil-trate quality, tubular microfiltrationcould well replace traditional equip-ment including gravity clarifiers,media filters, lime softeners and ionexchangers as RO pretreatment for re-moval of unacceptable substances.More importantly, the RO incompati-

ble agents can be con-verted to MF compat-ible material forefficient removal. Atypical MF-RO recy-cling process startsfrom development ofa proper chemical re-action design.

CHEMICAL REACTIONDEVELOPMENT

Based on the typesand quantities of

fouling substances identified in thewastewater, a chemical treatmentprocess is developed to counteracteach of the fouling factors. The chem-ical treatment may take the form ofprecipitation, adsorption, chemical re-duction, pH adjustment and microbialcontrol. The chemistries are evaluatedfor their compatibility and combinedeffect. The treatment process is car-

ried out in a two- or three- stagechemical reaction. The chemical treat-ment will typically include one ormore of the following processes:

• Lime Softening - Hardness precipitation for scaling control

• Magnesium Hydroxide – Silica colloid adsorption for fouling prevention

• Dithiocarbamate (DTC) - Heavy metal precipitation and bio-growth control

• Powdered Activated Carbon - Organic reduction, oxidant destruction and bio-film prevention

• Fe/Al Coagulation – Precipitates and colloids agglomeration for membrane filtration enhancement

• pH Adjustment – pH operating zone optimization for the integrated reactions

Fig. 1 – A 10-Tube Duraflow MF Module

Membranes



MEMBRANE MF PROCESSAfter chemical reaction, the pretreated

wastewater is processed through the mi-crofiltration membrane filters designedfor separation of the incompatible precip-itates from water. The wastewater ispumped at a high velocity (12 – 15 feetper second) through the membrane mod-ules (Fig. 1) connected in series with aninlet pressure of 45 – 50 psig. The turbu-lent flow, parallel to the membrane sur-face, produces a high-shear scrubbingaction, which minimizes deposition ofsolids on the membrane surface. Duringoperation, clear filtrate permeates throughthe membrane, while the suspendedsolids retained in the recirculation loopare purged for further dewatering. Themembranes are cleaned with chemicalswhen the flux drops to below the designlevel, while an automatic back-pulsemechanism is an integral part of the op-eration design to provide physical surfacecleaning by periodically reversing the fil-trate flow direction.

NEW GENERATION MF MEMBRANEOne of the challenges for the MF

manufacturers is in the application andcontrol of the pore forming techniquein the membrane production process. Itwas well documented in the field thata number of MF products are bleedingfine particles through the membraneuntil the larger pores are all plugged bythe solids. This deficiency usually oc-curs after chemical cleaning or back-pulse and results in premature flowdecline, low-flux operation and out-of-spec performance. The Duraflow MFmembrane is manufactured to over-come this problem through extensiveR&D, QA control and field-testing.

Duraflow microfiltration mem-branes are manufactured in a tubularconfiguration capable of handling highsolid concentration. The fabricationprocess starts with preparation of a so-lution consisted of a PolyvinylideneFluoride (PVDF) polymer and othermembrane formation enhancing chem-icals. The solution is then applied toporous polymeric tubes in a controlledenvironment. Through a pore formingprocess, micro-porous PVDF mem-brane is formed on the inside surface ofthe support tubes. Fig. 2 shows the

very narrow pore distribution of themembrane with 99% of the pores lessthan 0.2 microns. The unique solutionformula and application procedureshave effectively (1) eliminated all un-desired large pores, (2) generated amuch larger number of pores persquare inch of membrane surface, and(3) formed a strong chemical bond be-tween the PVDF membrane and poly-meric tube surfaces. The first feature ofuniform submicron pore size enables

complete removal of the detrimentalcomponents and generates a flowstream with NTU (<1.0) and SDI (<3.0)values in full compliance with the ROfeed water criteria. The second featureof increasing pore number explains theability of the membrane to consistentlyoperate at twice the operating flux ofother similar MF membranes. This fea-ture will allow the design to take onehalf as many membranes to filter thesame number of gallons of wastewater.



MembranesThe third feature of forming strong sur-face bond produces a highly durableMF filter material that can extend acontinuous operation for 5 to 10 yearswithout membrane replacement. Theextraordinary chemical resistant prop-erty of PVDF permits the use of a widerange of chemicals – acids, bases and

solvents for effective cleaning of thepersistent fouling substances, whichare very difficult, if not impossible, tobe cleaned from the RO membrane ifnot removed.

REVERSE OSMOSIS PROCESSThe pretreated wastewater is typi-

cally pressured between 200 to 600 psigand processed through thin film com-posite (TFC) or cellulose acetate (CA)RO membranes. The RO process re-tains the high molecular weight com-pounds and allows a small percentage(1 to 3 %) of certain very low molecu-lar weight ions to pass through themembrane. The feed stream is sepa-rated into permeate (clean water) usu-ally 75 to 80 % of the feed (recovery)and concentrated brine containing theseparated salts (reject). Depending onthe percent recovery, the brine mayhave 4 to 5 times the concentration ofsalt than the feed water. The permeatewill have a conductivity of 20 to 100 µS(10 to 50 mg/l TDS), which is less thanmost city water supply. The nature ofthe customer wastewater and the ob-jectives for recycling and reuse will de-termine the final design and membraneconfiguration of the RO system.

MF – RO INSTALLATIONSA large number of installations have

successfully combined proper chemicalreaction with the Duraflow high-fluxtubular microfiltration and RO for re-cycling of wastewater from various in-dustries (Fig. 3). Following areexamples of selected installations:

Printed Circuits – A major multi-layer printed circuit board company inGuangzhou, China, operates a 100GPM MF/RO system for removal of

Fig. 2 – SEM of a Duraflow MF Membrane



heavy metal and 75% recycle of com-bined wastewater.

Electroplating – A large job shop inNew England operates a 200 GPMMF/RO system for removal of heavymetals and 65% recycle of combinedwastewater.

Electronics – A reel-to-reel elec-tronic connector manufacturer in Ire-land operates a 100 GPM MF/ROsystem for removal of heavy metals and90% recycle of combined wastewater.

Chemical Processing – A pigmentmanufacturing plant in Kentucky oper-ates a 200 GPM MF/RO/EVAP systemfor removal of hardness/COD/color and100% recycle of pigment wastewater.

Power – A power generation plantin California operates a 500 GPMMF/RO/EVAP system for removal ofhardness/silica and 100% recycle ofcooling tower blow-down.

CONCLUSIONMF when coupled with an appropriate

chemical pretreatment can provide an at-tractive method for pretreatment of in-dustrial wastewater RO systems.Compared to conventional wastewatertreatment operations, MF systems have asmaller footprint and lower operatingcosts. In addition, high quality and con-sistent filtrate produced by the MF canlead to improved performance of the ROsystem. As observed in the field, a well-protected RO membrane can be operatedeffectively for 3 to 4 years before replace-ment is required. In the face of today’sglobal water shortage, industries are be-ginning to realize that it makes good busi-ness sense to become more independentby recycling their own resource (water)for their own production processes.

For more information contact:Joseph Lander or Michael ChanTel: 1- 978-851-0447Email: [email protected] [email protected]

Fig. 3 – A Duraflow MF/RO Wastewater Recycle System

FN



he porometer is capable of cre-ating cakes on the sample insitu in the sample chamber

under various conditions of pressure andflow and measuring pore structure char-acteristics including bubble point, meanflow pore diameter, pore distribution, andliquid permeability. The technique savesconsiderable time for filter evaluation.

Filtration characteristics are governedby the characteristics of the filtrationmedia, the properties of the cake createdon the filtration media, influence of con-tinuously accumulating sediments, andfiltration characteristics of the compositeconsisting of the media and the cake.Such filtration involves many complexvariables including, liquid flow rate, con-centration of impurities, rate of cake for-mation, properties of the oil, andcharacteristics of the filtration media.Consequently, evaluation of the filtration

process can be very complex, time con-suming, and expensive. In this presenta-tion a novel technology is presented forcost effective and time saving evaluationof filtration.

THE INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGYA wetting liquid spontaneously fills

the pores of the filtration media. Dif-ferential pressure of a non-reacting gasdisplaces the liquid from pores andflows through empty pores (Figure 1).The pressure required to displace thewetting liquid from a pore is given by[1,2]: p = 4 γ cos θ / D (1) where p isdifferential pressure, γ is surface ten-sion of the wetting liquid, θ is the con-tact angle of wetting liquid on the poresurface and D is pore diameter. Pore di-ameter is defined as the diameter of acircular opening such that the perime-ter to area ration of the pore cross-sec-tion is the same as that of the circularopening. The pore diameters computedusing Equation 1 are the pore throat di-ameters of through pores [2]. Themeasure differential pressures and flow

rates through dry and wet samplesyield all the pore structure characteris-tics relevant for filtration.

For liquid permeability, increasingdifferential pressure on excess liquidmaintained on the sample and flowrates of liquid are measured. Perme-ability is computed using Darcy’s law.

F = k (A / µ l) (pi – po) (2) where Fis liquid flow rate, k is permeability, A isarea of sample permitting flow, µ is vis-cosity, l is thickness of sample, pi isinlet pressure and po is outlet pressure.

THE NOVEL INSTRUMENT DESIGNThe Cake Forming Porometer is

shown in Figure 1. It has one chamberfor testing filtration media, a separatechamber is for in situ cake formation onthe filtration media, and a third chamberis for liquid permeability. The flow dia-gram in Figure 2 shows the mechanismof controlled in situ cake formation onfiltration media. Liquid and particles areloaded in the slurry tank and constantlystirred with a variable speed stirrer. Theslurry is pumped to a cylindrical con-

Testing | Instrumentation

T

Cake Forming Porometer – Advanced Technology for Evaluation of Filtration MediaBy Dr. Akshaya Jena and Dr. Krishna Gupta, Porous Materials, Inc., Ithaca, NY, U.S.A.

Figure 1. Cake forming PorometerFigure 2. Flow diagram for in situ cake formation on filtration media under controlled conditions



tainer of uniform diameter. Pneumaticpressure at any desired value is appliedon the top of the slurry column and adepth sensor measures the change of theheight of the liquid in the cylindricalcontainer and determines the flow rate.Slurry from the cylindrical container en-ters the sample chamber. Liquid from theslurry drains out through the samplewhile the sediments accumulate on thesample to form cake. With continuoususe, the plumbing can get dirty andclogged. A clean liquid tank is providedso that clean liquid is pumped throughthe plumbing to clean the system.

FULL AUTOMATIONThe technology is fully automated.

The cake is created under desired condi-tions of pressure and flow. Pressure limitscan be set between any desired values.For formation of the cake under flow, theinitial and final flow values can be set.Cake formation can be continued afterinterruptions for pore structure charac-terization. Test execution is fully auto-mated. Differential pressures and flow arerecorded. The operator involvement is

minimal. Acquired data are converted topore structure characteristics using thereport software. Tabular as well as graph-ical results can be generated.

APPLICATIONDry and wet flow rates were measured

through the filtration media and themedia containing the cake as a functionof differential pressure. The cake was pre-

pared with the slurry consisting of SAE30 Motor Oil and ISO 12103-1 A2 Fine(1 g/L). Typical flow rates are shown inFigure 3 for a test with media. The pres-sure for initiation of wet flow yields bub-ble point. The differential pressures yieldthrough pore throat diameters. The half-dry curve computed from dry curveyields half of the flow rate through drysample at a given differential pressure and

Figure 3. Wet and dry flow rates of a test with media



the mean flow pore diameter. All the rel-evant through pore throat diameters arelisted in Table 1. Cake appreciably re-duces the pore diameters.

PORE DISTRIBUTIONThe pore distribution is presented in

terms of pore distribution function, f [2]. f =- [d(Fw/Fd)x100]/dD (3) where Fw is wetflow and Fd is dry flow. The area under the

distribution curve in any pore diameterrange is the percentage of flow in the speci-fied pore diameter range. Figure 4 shows thedistribution of pores in the sample with andwithout cake. The peak position haschanged from about 3 to 2 microns. Thepeak also has become very narrow. Conse-quently, the spread is considerably reduced.

LIQUID PERMEABILITYLiquid flow rate through the sample

was measured with increasing differentialpressure. The liquid permeability wascomputed using Darcy’s law. Liquid flowrates through media with and withoutcake demonstrate considerable influenceof cake formation on liquid permeability(Figure 5).

EFFECT ON PORE STRUCTUREA second filtration media, media II,

was tested without cake as well as withcake. The cake was created using theslurry containing motor oil and 10 g/Ldust. The first layer of cake was deposited

Testing | Instrumentation

Table 1. Bubble points and mean flow pore diameters of media with and without cake

Table 2. Effect of second deposition of the high concentration slurry on pore struc-ture of media II



at a pressure of 50 psi and at flow rates of 500-100 cc/min. After the media with deposit wascharacterized for the pore structure, a seconddeposit was made at a pressure of 50 psi andflow rates of 100-50 cc/min. The results arelisted in Table 2.

The second media also showed considerablechanges in the pore diameters. With increasingdeposition pore diameters decreased further, butthe rate of decrease became less. The distribu-tions shifted to lower pore diameters and thespread in the results was much less.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONAn innovative technology capable of evaluat-

ing filtration processes has been discussed. Thecapability of the technique includes characteri-zation of pore structure of media, in situ cake for-mation on media, and characterization of thepore structure of media with cake. In situ cakeformation, cake formation under pressure, cakeformation at desired flow, and automatic cleaningare some of the unique features of the technique.Examples of application of the technologydemonstrate its ability to form cakes in situunder a wide variety of conditions and to meas-ure all the pore structure characteristics relevantto filtration. The developed technology wouldmake it easier and save considerable time to in-vestigate the pore structures of media with andwithout the cake.

For more information contact: Porous Materials, Inc.Tel: 1-607-257-5544 Toll Free: 1-800-TALK-PMIEmail: [email protected]

References1. Akshaya Jena and Krishna Gupta, ‘Characterization of Pore Structure of Fil-tration Media’, Fluid/Particle Separation Journal, Vol. 14, No. 3, 2002, pp. 227-241.2. Akshaya Jena and Krishna Gupta, ‘An Innovative Technique for Pore Struc-ture Analysis of Fuel Cell and Battery Components using Flow Porometry’, Jour-nal of Power Sources, Vol. 96, 2001, pp. 214-219.

FN

Figure 5. Liquid flow rate through media with and without cakeFigure 4. Pore distribution of media with and without cake



Company | Profile

onobond Ultrasonics an-nounced recently that it nowhas 10 machines, plus several

modules for original equipment manu-facturers (OEMs), that provide fast, re-liable, and cost-effective ultrasonicbonding of woven and nonwoven tex-tile products. According to Vice Presi-dent, Melissa Alleman, “Manufacturersand assemblers can confidently useSonobond units to bond textiles thatare 100% synthetic, as well as blendsthat have up to 40% natural fibers.Felted filter media are among the non-woven materials that our machines

handle effectively.”The following is an overview of the

ultrasonic bonding equipment for woventextiles and nonwovens currently avail-able from Sonobond Ultrasonics.

SEAMMASTER The SeamMaster™ seals, “sews,”

and trims nonwoven and synthetic fab-rics in one quick, reliable step. The unitis similar in appearance and operationto traditional sewing machines, butuses no thread, glue, or other consum-ables. The SeamMaster fuses and sealsseams so effectively that it can be used

in the assembly of medical disposablesthat must comply with OSHA regula-tions for barrier seams. This makes itideal for use in the production ofgowns, facemasks, and mattress covers.The unit, which is up to four timesfaster than conventional sewing ma-chines and up to 10 times faster thanadhesive machines—is also frequentlyused in the assembly of filters and pro-tective products.

HIGH PROFILE BONDERThe SeamMaster High Profile Bonder

has a larger pattern wheel and a higherclearance above the bench than the gen-eral-purpose SeamMaster. This makes itthe ideal choice for applications involv-ing bulky materials, hand-guided opera-tions with tight tolerances, and forworking around curves. Like the gen-eral-purpose SeamMaster, the High Pro-file Bonder has fast production speedsand virtually eliminates fraying or un-raveling of bonded edges and seams.

It is especially popular with bodyarmor manufacturers who use the unit toseal the outer nylon shell of ballistic vestswith the ballistic-resistant materials in-side. The reliability of the bond helps thebody armor comply with the latest Na-tional Institute of Justice (NIJ) submer-sion test standards (NIJ 0101.06) thatrequire protection from submersion for30 minutes, rather than protection from aspray shower. The unit’s dependabilityand performance also make it ideal formanufacturers who must satisfy OSHAregulations for barrier seams in medicalapparel. In addition, a special fixture isavailable for sewing pleated filters. It isalso available as a modular unit for easyintegration into the production process.

ULTRASONIC CUTTER/SEALERThis table-mounted version of the

S

Sonobond Ultrasonics Offers Wide Selection of Ultrasonic Bonding Machines for Textile Applications



popular SeamMaster is ideal for han-dling a variety of patterns up to 10mmwide. Fraying and unraveling are to-tally eliminated along the sealed edgeas a double layer of fabric passes underthe unit to automatically join the twolayers as they are slit and sealed. TheSeamMaster 10 is much faster thansewing or adhesive machines and oper-ates at speeds of up to 60 feet perminute. The working area is 16” x 20”with the pattern wheel located in thetable for easy interchange.

MODULES FOR OEMSThese modules are cost-effective

tools for OEMs in the textile industry.They incorporate seaming, slitting,crosscutting, and trimming capabilitiesinto special-purpose ultrasonic bond-ing machines. Like all machines in theSeamMaster line, the modules feature arotary ultrasonic system and wheel forresults that are superior to those pro-

vided by stationary sonic methods. Sin-gle, multi-, or dual head arrangementsare available in addition to a variety ofeasy-to-change pattern wheels. Seam-Master modules provide trouble-freecontinuous action and include themotor drive for the sonics and the pat-tern wheel.

FILTER BAG MACHINE, COLLAR BONDERThese ultrasonic bonding units at-

tach plastic collars to felted filter mediaand have been specially designed forhigh-quality assembly of the filter bagsused for chemical and industrial liquidapplications. Custom tooling accom-modates different bag sizes and ring di-ameters. By using these machines forfilter assembly, manufacturers eliminateproblems associated with stitch holes orwith threads getting caught in pumps.

The RingMaster™ features threewelding heads and a two-step processthat is completed in less than 10 sec-

Filtration

Mergers, Acquisitions

and Divestures

GL Capital, LLC

We understand the nuances ofthe domestic and internationalfiltration industry and bringover 70 years of combinedbusiness, technical and finan-cial expertise. The current eco-nomic climate is an ideal timefor sellers to locate buyersseeking to diversify and forbuyers to identify growth op-portunities through acquisition.

For a confidential conversation contact:

Edward C. Gregor704-442-1940

[email protected]

P. John Lovell719-375-1564

[email protected]

The SeamMaster is a versatile, general-purpose unit that ultrasonically seals,“sews,” and trims synthetic fabrics and nonwovens. It does this in one quick passwithout using thread, glue, or other consumables.



Company | Profileonds. The unit produces up to 250bags per hour.

The Filter Collar Bonder™ is ideallysuited for low-production applications.It creates a reliable 360º bond in as lit-tle as 45 seconds and can produce be-tween 50 and 80 bags per hour.

ULTRASONICS PLUNGEBONDERThis versatile and powerful machine

is designed for applications involvinglarge or difficult-to-bond materials.This makes it a popular choice for seal-ing filter bag ends and for producingbox-style filters.

The PlungeBonder™ can accommo-date different thicknesses and multiplelayers of materials in just one pulse.The unit delivers superior repeatableperformance and can be customized tosatisfy specific customer applications.It features a rigid rectangular supportcolumn that eliminates deflection, evenat the full 660-pound force level. Theunit also has a built-in leveling feature

in the base with“T” slot and toeclamps for fixtureholding. No moreshims are neededto level the nest.

Custom tool-ing of the Plunge-Bonder enablesstraps made ofcoated syntheticmaterial to bebonded within theseams of a ballis-tic vest’s outershell. This doesnot compromisethe integrity of theu l t r a son i ca l l ysealed outer shell.As a result, thebody armor cancontinue to com-ply with currentNIJ submersionrequirements.

SURECUT CUTTERS/SEALERSThese loom-mounted or hand-held

tools cut cleanly, while sealing the edgeof synthetic films and fabrics in onenoiseless pass.

Sonobond’s SureCut™ Cutters/Seal-ers help reduce labor costs by doingaway with extra trimming steps. Fray-ing, unraveling, and material buildup(beading) along the cut edge are elimi-nated. These cost-effective units areideal for ribbons, trims, labels, and Vel-cro strips. They are designed for cuttingand sealing of knitted, woven and non-woven fabrics made of polyester, nylon,polypropylene, thermoplastic urethane,and other synthetic blends.

HAND-HELD CUTTERS/BONDERSSonobond’s hand-held cutters/bon-

ders are lightweight, compact, and easyto operate. They are ideal for cuttingand bonding lightweight synthetics,nonwovens, and plastic films. They giveoperators exceptional control and accu-racy in handling delicate assemblies.

Customers can choose from severalmodels including the HandWelder™HG35 for spot welding of plastics andsynthetics in applications involvingsmall or tight areas, the HandWelderHW35 for sealing the edges of plasticpackages, such as blister packs, and theHandWelder HW70 for welding, cut-ting, and bonding plastic films andminiature plastic components.

These units eliminate the need formechanical fasteners, adhesives, or heatbonding.

CYLINDER ARM MACHINESCylinder Arm Machines provide spe-

cialized assembly of synthetic fabrics andnonwoven materials. They are especiallysuited for the production of side seamsand for curved or circular piece goods.Applications include sleeves, pant legs,cuffs, vests, filters, edge binding,swimwear, surgical gowns, and othermedical disposables. Manufacturers andassemblers can achieve various stitch pat-terns through a choice of pattern wheels.

As the name implies, the machinesfeature a cylindrical “arm” extension,

The RingMaster is specially designedfor the high-quality assembly of filterbags. The unit attaches plastic collarsto felted filter media in less than 10seconds and can produce up to 250bags per hour.



which allows curved and straightpieces to be “sewn” (fused). Off-the-arm applications include the produc-tion of lengthwise side seams.Around-the-arm applications involveattaching sleeves, cuffs, and collars.

LACEMASTER BONDING MACHINEThis fabric-decorating machine is

designed specifically for the productionof high-quality lace and trim on wovenand nonwoven materials. It is availablewith over 500 optional and inter-changeable pattern wheels for slitting,lacing, embossing, and tacking, and itproduces patterned trims up to 2-7/8inches wide. Although similar in ap-pearance to traditional sewing ma-chines, it is much faster and moreefficient. LaceMaster™ applications in-clude: hemming and lacing of blouses,dresses, lingerie, bathing suits, table-cloths, and pillows; embossing of pack-aging, apparel, ribbons, and trim edges;and printing of fabric trim, edging, andspecial effects.

ULTRASONIC ASSEMBLYUltrasonic vibrations fuse nonwo-

ven and woven synthetic materials,eliminating the need for needles,thread, or glue. As a result, there are nostitch holes or glue gaps. This makesultrasonic bonding the optimal choicefor assembling such medical productsas hospital mattress covers and bodybags. In addition, Sonobond’s Soft-Seam™ ultrasonic process is excellentfor producing surgical masks, gowns,and drapes that have soft, reliable, non-abrasive seams. These seams are capa-ble of satisfying tough regulatoryrequirements while protecting medicalpersonnel from hazardous fluids.

In discussing the advantages of ultra-sonic bonding, Vice President Allemansaid, “We are pleased that all our textileassembly machines are environmentally-friendly and easy to operate with onlyminimal training. Most important of all,Sonobond technology is very cost-effec-tive and extremely reliable.”

LEADER IN ULTRASONIC WELDING Sonobond is a worldwide leader in

the application of ultrasonic weldingand bonding technology. Over the past49 years, the company has earned anoutstanding reputation for its pioneer-ing work and quality-engineered prod-ucts. The company manufactures acomplete line of ultrasonic welding andbonding equipment for a wide varietyof customers in the filtration, apparel,medical, automotive, appliance, elec-trical, HVAC, and aerospace industries.In addition, Sonobond personnel pro-vide solid technical support and supe-rior service before, during, and afterinstallation of equipment. They arecommitted to helping companies findcustomized solutions to their specificultrasonic bonding needs.

For more information contact: Sonobond Tel: 1-800-323-1269 Website: www.SonobondUltrasonics.com

FN



Product | News

New Upgrades to Product Line From Koch Filter

FN

och Filter announced severalimportant upgrades to itsproduct line and to help cus-

tomers make better filter choices withtheir Green Air Filtration SelectionGuide, ANSI/ASHRAE 52-2-2007 up-dated air filter standards guide and theAll Products Brochure/APB-4.

Multi-Pleat XL8 (MERV 8) – TheMulti-Pleat XL8 is produced with ahighly specialized, 100% syntheticmedia, developed by Koch Filter Cor-poration specifically for use in ex-tended surface air filters. Developed todeliver a “one of a kind” performance,the M-Layer media technology is themost important part of a filter. The M-Layer operates on mechanical filtrationprinciples, which allow efficiency to

increase, low pressure drop, high dustholding capacity, and superior overallvalue. The M-Layer 100% syntheticmedia will maintain a MERV 8 per-formance before and after conditioningsteps. It is offered in 1”, 2”, 4”and 6”sizes. Product Offering; HEPA,Medium and High Efficiency, Rigid Fil-ters, Extended Surface Filters/Pockets,Pleats and Self Support Pleats, Inter-nally Supported Panel/Link Filters,Cartridge and Replacement Filters, Au-tomatic Roll Filters and ReplacementMedia, Disposable Air Filters, Bulk fil-ter Media, Pads and Specialty Media,Paint Filters, Arrestors and Acces-sories, Filter Frames and OriginalEquipment, Carbon Filters and An-timicrobial Filters.

Multi-PleatElite™ – Highp e r f o r m a n c eMERV 8 mechan-ical air filtermedia is self-sup-porting and re-quires no metalsupport griddownstream. Nometal compo-nents, means thefilter is com-pletely incinera-ble after use.E x c l u s i v evForm™ Pleat-ing Technologymaintains uni-form pleat spac-ing in every filter.The new 2” self-s u p p o r t i n gpleated filter (noexpanded metalbacking neces-sary) is in pro-duction andready to ship.

Multi-Pleat Green 13 ™ - MERV 13performance rating is in accordancewith ASHRAE Test Standard 52.2-2007.The Multi-Pleat Green 13 is a LEEDsustainable component and is offered in1”, 2” and 4” sizes. Koch Filter uses theKoch Green Icon to designate productswithin their line that contribute to asustainable environment in variousways. The Koch Green Icon meansusers will know that the product meetsor exceeds Koch’s criteria in one ormore of the following categories: EarnsLEED points, reduces energy cost, ex-tended filter lifecycle, conserves re-source and improves indoorenvironmental quality. It is available in1", 2" and 4".

Offering; HEPA, Medium and HighEfficiency, Rigid Filters, ExtendedSurface, Filters/Pockets, Pleats andSelf Support Pleats, Internally Sup-ported Panel/Link Filters, Cartridgeand Replacement Filters, AutomaticRoll Filters and Replacement, Media,Disposable Air Filters, Bulk filterMedia, Pads and Specialty Media,Paint Filters, Arrestors and Acces-sories, Filter Frames and OriginalEquipment, Carbon Filters and An-timicrobial Filters.

Choosing the right filter has also be-come easier with Koch’s three newguides to help customers choose theright filter for any application. Theguides cover green air filtration selec-tion, as well as commercial, industrialand hospital applications and standardsfor filters.

For more information contact: Koch Filter Corporation. Tel: 1-502-634-4796 Website: www.kochfilter.com

K



id-West Instrument’sModel 130 is available inmaterials designed specifi-

cally for service in ammonia environ-ments such as Selective CatalyticReduction (SCR) NOX reduction sys-tems. Both wetted and external parts

are engineered for this harsh environ-ment. Typical applications include flowindication, flow balancing and filtermonitoring. These products have aproven track record of over eight yearsof trouble free field operation in thisharsh environment.

For more information contact: Mid-West InstrumentTel: 1- 586-254-6500 Fax: 1-586-254-6509Website: www.midwestinstrument.com

osedale has introduced an allnew filter bag. The company isnow producing their own felt

in a controlled environmwnt, ensuringpurity and consistency as well as com-petitive pricing. Their new RPO Bag of-fers the best bag-to-housing seal intoday’s marketplace, and the bag guar-antees a positive seal every time, whenused in a Rosedale housing.

Among the features are:• Plastic collar attached into

opening.

• Collar has integral handles as astandard feature, making removal faster and easier. No metal toworry about.

• Standard felt finish is glazed.• Available in all standard bag sizes.• Priced the same or less than

competition.• Optional welded or sewn

construction

For more information contact:Rosedale Filtration Products, Inc.Tel: 1-800-821-5373 or 1-734-665-8201

Fax: 1-734-665-2214Website: www.rosedaleproducts.com

FN

FN

R

M

Rosedale Introduces All New Filter Bag

Mid-West Instrument’s Model 130Monitors Ammonia-Air Mixture



Min

i Mar

t Ads



Mini M

art Ads

To place your Mini Mart Ad

[email protected]


A2Z Filtration Specialities 8 www.a2zfiltration.comAmerican Filtration & Sep. Society IFC www.afsscociety.orgAir Filter, Inc. 11 www.airfilterusa.comAshby Cross Co. 18 www.ashbycross.comChase Machinery 22 www.chasemachine.comContract Pleating Services 26 www.solentech.comDexmet Corporation 11 www.dexmetfilter.comEd Gregor 29 [email protected] Technology Sys. 16 www.filtrationtech.comFN Buyers' Guide IBC www.filtnews.comIndustrial Netting 31 www.industrialnetting.comInterstate Specialty Products 9 www.interstatesp.comJadtis Industries 33 www.jadtis.comJCEM 25 www.jcem.chLawrence Industries, Inc 31 [email protected] Inc. 33 www.magnetoolinc.comMatrix Separations LLC Back Cover www.matrixseparations.comMetalex 30 www.metlx.comMetcom Inc. 32 www.metcomusa.comMid-West Inst. 28 www.midwestinstruments.comMyron L Company 1 www.myronl.comOrival Inc. 13 www.orival.comPerCor Mfg. 18 www.percormfg.comPerforated Tubes 10 www.perftubes.comRosedale Prod. 7 www.rosedaleproducts.comSealant Equipment 27 www.sealantequipment.comSerfilco Limited 12 www.serfilco.comShelco Filters 23 www.shelco.comSolent Technology Inc. 20 www.solentech.comSonobond Ultrasonic 21, 29 www.sonobondultrasonics.comSpati Industries, Inc. 19 www.spatiindustries.comSpin Tek Filtration 5 www.spintek.comXinxiang Tiancheng Aviation 17 www.tchkjh.com

Advertiser IndexPage Website

To Advertise Email: [email protected],[email protected], [email protected]



2010 Buyers’ Guide

Early Bird RatesEarly Bird RatesAdvertisers:First Category $ 99.00 Each Additional Category $ 75.00 Non-Advertisers: First Category $115.00Each Additional Category $ 80.00Logos (1 time charge) $ 50.00

Advertisers:First Category $115.00 Each Additional Category $ 80.00 Non-Advertisers:First Category $145.00Each Additional Category $ 85.00Logos (1 time charge) $ 50.00

After May 31, 2010Up to May 31, 2010

Take Advantage of this Special Offer...For more information contact Joan Oakley:

Phone: 248-347-3486 - Email: [email protected]



Documents

FiltratioNews-Apr 2010:FiltNews April 2009 · 2015. 4. 10. · Mkt. Research & Tech. Analysis Dr. Graham Rideal Whitehouse Scientific Ltd. Tel: +44 1244 33 26 26 Fax: +44 1244 33