See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.

Downloaded via UNIV FED DE MINAS GERAIS on July 13, 2020 at 11:03:35 (UTC).

BRYANT FITCH

An authoritative critique of the established and recently proposed methods of thickener design

advances have been made in recent years
Substantial
in defining principles of sedimentation. The prac-
ticing engineer will ask, “How do they affect design of
thickeners?” This paper will seek an answer by
appraising current theories. Then it will suggest
design procedures which seem appropriate at the present
incomplete state of the art.
Coe and Clevenger (7) postulated two regimes of
thickening: In one, particles were assumed to settle
without any mechanical support from those below.
Particle weight is borne solely by reaction with fluid.
They named such behavior “free settling” and we retain
the term. However, they also assumed that under
such conditions settling rate u will vary only with solids
concentration C. Their procedure relies upon the
latter assumption, as does that of Kynch (7), and we will
take it as defining a “zone settling” regime.
In their other regime, particles are close enough to
AUTHOR Bryant Fitch is Director of Research for Dorr-
Oliver, Inc., Stamford, Conn. He has been with Dorr-Oliver
or its predecessor companies since 1944 and is a recognized world
leader in design of equipment for physical separation processes.
touch one another, and at least some supporting force
is transmitted through interparticle contact. There-
fore, layers of solids exert a squeeze or compressive force
on those below, so the regime is named compression.
As long as particles are subsiding, some of their weight
is borne hydrodynamically, but when subsidence is
complete, this component disappears.
ZONE SETTLING
The classic Coe and Clevenger procedure (7) is to
determine zone settling rate u over a range of concentra-
tions C by observing initial interface subsidence rate in a
series of batch tests. They deduce that the solids
handling capacity or flux Ge of any concentration layer
existing at steady state must be related to settling rate
and pulp consistency by the equation
=
(1)
Ge
K(D-Df
“and the maximum capacity possible will be the smallest
value of Go obtained by applying the formula to a series
of tests made upon pulps ranging in consistency from
that of the feed to that of the thickest free-settling pulp,

18 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY

and taking for Du the ratio of fluid to solids desired in
the underflow” (our notation substituted for theirs).
If the thickener is fed at a greater solids rate, a zone
of “critical” concentration corresponding to the smallest
value of Ge will form and build because solids cannot
pass through it as fast as they are fed up to it (3). At a
lower feed rate the zone will dwindle and disappear.
Because KD =
1/C 1 jps and u =
—
G/C, by simple
substitution
G =
G-' (|)G (2)
Equation 2 defines operating line in a plot of G vs. C,
an
as shown in Figure 1. Such an operating line, drawn
through any point a on the flux curve and Cu on the C-
axis, will intersect the G-axis at a value Ge. A line
drawn tangent to the flux plot as at b will show the
smallest intercept G„ m io, which is the one defining
maximum possible thickener throughput. This Yoshioka
(27) construction, as well as a related one using reduced
variables introduced by Wallis (79), is a useful and con-
venient graphical way of applying Coe and Clevenger
zone settling theory. The Yoshioka and Wallis methods
do not, in themselves, constitute a new concept in
thickener design.
Coe and Clevenger adequately explain both steady-
state zone settling and the sudden appearance of a zone
of intermediate concentration Cb when a continuous
thickener is overfed. However, Kynch (7) in 1952
presented an elegant analysis which explains nearly all
zone settling behavior and launched a modern era of
thickening research. What is being done today is
largely elaboration of principles taught in his illuminating
paper.
Kynch Theory
Kynch’s theory was exciting because it established
quantitative relationships between flux plots and batch
settling curves. It showed how to construct a flux plot,
or at least the important part of one, from a single batch
test. We hoped, therefore (75), that thickener unit
area could be determined directly from one such test,
rather than from a series of them as in the Coe and
Clevenger procedure.
Kynch deduced three relationships or theorems of
primary interest:
Theorem I. If a concentration discontinuity is
propagating in the direction of settling with a velocity
S, then
VOL. 58 NO. 10 OCTOBER 1966 19
where AG is the instantaneous settling flux difference through it. By material balance
across the discontinuity (equal to AS in zone settling r*ta f*ta

regime). AC is instantaneous concentration difference. AGdt =

ACa I udt —

ACa \ fidt
j*ta
o Jo Jo
Derivation. The flux into one side of a discon- But
tinuity must equal that out the other. If the dis-
continuity is propagating with a velocity 5, then at any fidt =
Ha
I
instant:
Then, if settling rate ua is constant, it is equal to Ra
Ci(u\ —

5) =
C2(«2
—

5)
2sol ids (Rja + Ha)
ACa ACa. =

because C\u i =
Gi and C2u2 =
G2
and if initial concentration G0 is uniform
Gi —

G2 AG
~ ~ ^solids AHoCo =
ACaHext
C! -

C2 AC So

Theorem II. If
a concentration gradient exists in
the neighborhood of concentration Ci, then the locus of
this concentration will propagate in direction of settling
with a velocity /3 such that
Derivation. Theorem II can be deduced from
continuity equations in any of several equivalent ways
(7, 17). Perhaps it is simplest to note that as C2 —Ci,
a discontinuity dwindles to the locus of C\.
Its instantaneous propagation velocity is
lim AG /5G\
^ Xoto ~
Xc \dC/,
Theorem III. Theorem III is best expressed graphi-
cally. Figure 2 is a batch settling curve, reduced by
dividing both scales by CoHo (5, 21). The theorem
asserts that if a tangent is drawn to a settling curve
some point a, its intercept with the ordinate axis measures
1/Ca, where Ca is concentration existing just below
slurry-supernatant interface at point a.
Derivation. If a zone of constant concentration
starts propagating from the bottom of a column, by the
time it reaches the surface all solids must have passed
l Hex t
C0H0
which is Theorem III.
While Kynch did not apply his theory to steady-
state operation, many others have, and the following
corollaries of Theorem III have been recognized: The
abscissa of the Kynch tangent line at an ordinate value
of 1 /Cu measures unit area 1 /Ge required in a thickener
to handle a zone of concentration Ca. This is the
Talmage and Fitch construction (15). Intercept of the
tangent with the abscissa axis is equal to the value of
1/S corresponding to Ca (13). Thus, a batch settling
curve appears as a transform or mapping of the flux
plot onto a 1 /C, 1 jS plane under Theorem III rules.
It is important to note that Kynch Theorems I and
II, being derived from material balance or continuity,
are generally valid, whether the pulp is in zone settling.
Theorem III, on the other hand, is highly restricted, and
at applies specifically to batch settling. It holds only if
settling rate in the zone at all times remains constant,
and the zone propagates from the bottom of the column.
The first condition implies zone settling, the second will
be investigated later in considering the effects of com-
pression. Derivation of the corollaries will be obvious
from Figure 2.

Figure 1. Graphical solution for Go on flux curve [after Yoshioka

(20,21)] Figure 2. Kynch Theorem III constructions

20 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY


Equations 1 and 2 can be deduced from Kynch
theory, but this is an unnecessarily roundabout way of
applying material balance. Coe and Clevenger and
Talmage and Fitch deduce Equation 1 directly from
fluid flux balance. Yoshioka (21) deduced Equation 2
from solids flux. All are functionally interrelated and
equivalent; there is nothing fortuitous (6) in their
correspondence. Kynch theory, in itself, does not
constitute a new concept in thickener design, although
it did promise a simplified way of collecting the requisite
flux data.
Limitations of Zone Theory
If settling obtained over the entire concentration
zone
between feed and underflow, thickener design
range
would offer no problems. Coe and Clevenger zone tests
would give the answer, whether calculated by their
equation or worked out graphically on a flux plot made
from the data (6, 17, 21). Zone settling does occur
over much of the concentration range in pulps made up
of uniformly sized, nonflocculating particles. But in
most flocculent industrial pulps it does not. There
are many evidences of this (4, 5). Only the most
direct and cogent will be cited here.
Continuous thickeners operate with a thick bed or
profile of settled solids in which concentration varies
with height. Two typical profiles from the work of
Comings (2) are shown in Figure 3. In these two cases
throughput flux Ge was maintained constant. Under-
flow rates, and hence Cu, were different. The material
was calcium carbonate.
Now each and every concentration which exists in the
profile at steady state must transmit exactly the same
thickener flux Ge. Its settling flux must then be as
specified by Equation 2. In other words, the settling
flux provided by the slurry and that demanded by the
operating or material balance line must coincide over
the entire range of concentrations observed in the profile.
Therefore, the flux plot for profile 1 would have to
look something like Figure 4. This is unlikely enough.
The chance that a flux plot would have a linear range
seems remote. The probability that Gtt and Cu would
be chosen in such a way as to make the operating line
Figure 4. Flux plots corresponding to profiles of Figure 3
coincide exactly with a postulated linear segment of a
flux plot is infinitesimal. But when the underflow
concentration is changed (profile 2), a new operating
line is established and a profile of varying concentration
is still obtained. This requires that the flux plot coincide
with the new operating line also, over the concentration
range observed in profile 2. This is absolutely impossible
if S is a function of C only.
Over at least the wide range of concentrations common
to both profiles, some other variable must enter to change
the flux plot. And by logical induction this must be
true for any concentration which can be observed in
any such profile.
While the effect of the new variable might conceivably
be considered secondary (13), it is certainly not minor.
Even if the settling rates corresponding to profile 1
could be considered roughly or approximately a function
of concentration, those for profile 2 are far different.
It is irrelevant to note that a conical vessel or perhaps
rake action might give thick bed profiles of qualitatively
the shape observed here because the cited tests were
carried out in a cylindrical thickener and the profile
extended far above the zone of rake action. Settling
rate of solids is not even approximately a single-valued
function of concentration. The profiles cannot in any
sense be explained on the assumption that it is.
Profile concentrations cannot be in zone settling, so
maybe they are in compression. That was the classical
view before attempts were made (6, 9, 10, 13, 18, 19, 21)
to explain all or most settling behavior on the basis of
zone settling and Kynch.
COMPRESSION
Coe and Clevenger
Coe and Clevenger’s concept of compression has been
widely misconstrued. They present data for seven
different pulps, six characterized as metallurgical, and
one chemical. In their context, metallurgical pulps
are those resulting from grinding of ore; the chemical
one was a precipitate. They observed that after what
they conceived to be compression was reached, then
“further elimination of water becomes approximately a
function of time, insofar as tests for metallurgical prac-
VOL. 58 NO. 10 OCTOBER 1966 21
tice are concerned.” Their detention time basis for By force balance around this plug they deduce that
compression thickening is based on this empirical interface subsidence rate R will be:
observation.
With regard to chemical pulps they say: “It would 4>\
seem that in this type of pulp the law of compression
R =
u (\
\
_

AH
_

d) (6)
being a function of time would not hold.” By now
that must be one of the most thoroughly reconfirmed And for a batch test
conclusions in sedimentation literature. They give a
different design procedure for such pulps. (\ d-A
R0 =
u - _

(7)
Unfortunately, some subsequent literature gives the \ H0 d)
impression that their metallurgical procedure is univer-
sally valid. But it wasn’t Coe and Clevenger’s idea, Note that initial changes in floe structure observed in
and in the demiworld of industrial know-how it has some pulps is not taken into account here.

long been recognized as not universally true (3, 5). The Michaels and Bolger approach will now be ex-
The hypothesis Coe and Clevenger advanced to tended to the region below the control plug. Because
explain detention time behavior is as follows: “It seems it will be applied to industrial thickeners, d is large and
probable that the relationship of pulp consistency to effects of wall shear may be neglected. Then at all
time of thickening is an indirect one, depending upon points the compression stress p will be equal to <r, and
the effect of compression caused by the depth of pulp will be a function of C.
being counteracted by the resistance in the pulp to the By force balance around a lamina at x at some fixed
escaping water, and to the admixture of the pulp in the time it follows that
upper portions of the thickening layer with the ascending
water from lower regions.” This, which has been
accepted as the gospel of Coe and Clevenger theory, is G = S 1
(8)
somewhat ambiguous, and as often interpreted can be C(ps —

pf) _

shown to be logically inconsistent.

If the resistance to flow of escaping water exists in the Derivation
overlying layers, then by force reaction or balance the
flow provides hydrodynamic support to the overlying The unbuoyed weight of solids per unit area at time t
in a lamina of thickness dz equals
layers. Unless there is some other sort of resistance
arising locally in the floe structure itself, all the resistance
results in hydrodynamic support of overlying layers, and ckuziAj,
no compression exists. The pulp remains in zone Ps

settling.
Also in a continuous thickener there is no ascending
water—the water flux is at all points downward below
the feed point. And, in batch settling, the total flow
past any level is zero, so the ascending flux of water
equals in volume the descending flux of solids at that
level. It is not otherwise related to any trades in posi-
tion between solids and water at any other level. There-
In free settling, the entire unbuoyed weight of solids is
borne by the pressure gradient necessary to push fluid
through solids at a superficial velocity or space rate
relative to solids equal to u. At low Reynolds number
flow, Darcy’s law should hold so that the fraction of
solids weight supported by fluid drag at a subsidence
rate, v, will be equal to v/u. Because v/u G/S, the =

fore, the idea of admixture requires much further support given by fluid flow through the lamina equals
explanation to be meaningful.
Coe and Clevenger, then observed, but did not
adequately explain, compression behavior.

Michaels and Bolger Hypothesis The support given by dp is the difference, so

Michaels and Bolger (8) present a hypothesis or

model of compression which lends itself to mathematical
analysis. They postulate that solids structure in a com-
pressing pulp will have some yield value <r for com-
pression and another r for shear. They tacitly assume bp
Ps
that deformation of the plastic structure will be so slow bz
G S 1
that viscous stresses are negligible compared to yield
—

C(ps
—

Pf).
values.
At the top of any originally uniform column of pulp But if p =
p(C),
starting in compression there will then always remain
some control plug of initial concentration because
through its height AH, the squeeze, p, generated does not
exceed yield value <x.

22 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY

 If we substitute back into Equation 8,

If we rearrange,

Equation 10 gives a relationship between C and z, in

terms of G, S, and the value of (dx/dC)* observed in a
batch test after subsidence is complete. The latter
group are functions of C and can be evaluated. Thus,
flux G is determined at any concentration by thickener
material balance. S can be determined from deep
batch tests to be described later. The expression, (dx/
dC) *, is by definition an experimentally determined func-
Figure 5. Postulated flux plot showing compression region tion.

Combining continuity with Equation 8 gives a Calculation of Compression Depth

general differential equation for compression thickening.
It is formidable. Fortunately only steady-state solu-
Integration of Equation 10 leads directly to thickness
of a thick bed of compressing pulp.
tions are appropriate for design of continuous thickeners,
r»Cu
and they can be obtained simply. At steady state,
(11)
dC/dz becomes independent of time and, hence, is a
complete differential dC/dz.
When there is no longer subsidence in a batch test a Limitations of Compression Theory
steady state has been attained. Equation 8 is valid, We are now out of the dilemma posed in Figure 3,
with G = 0 and dC/dz = (dC/dx) *. Thus, and the compression hypothesis seems tenable (Figure 5).
But when Talmage (14) tried to check it experimentally,
dp he ran into an unexpected surprise.
P)dC 1 An experimental thickening column, as shown in
Figure 6, was operated with thick beds (concentration
~

C(Ps
-

Pf) (dC/dx)*
varying with height), ranging in depth from about 8
to 70 inches, with and without constant concentration
ONE FOOT DIAMETER PILOT THICKENER
settling zones backed up above them. The device was
run continuously during most of the years 1956 and
1957. Concentration profiles observed were in com-
plete agreement with those of Comings (2).
Superelevation tubes measure fluid pressure at their
lower ends. Superelevation, or difference between
levels in the tubes and in the thickening column, meas-
ures Ap caused by friction loss associated with flow
FEED-'"'^
RESERVOIR
through solids above the measuring point. Such tubes
have been described by Hassett (6) and are standard
equipment on Fahrenwald or Dorrco hydrosizers.
In every one of the great number of tests run, fluid
pressure at any depth was approximately what would
be predicted if all solids in the profile were hydro-
dynamically supported. Data were erratic, but there
was little difference detectable which could be ascribed
to squeeze.
Now it might be argued that squeeze was present,
but was small. However, as can be seen in Figure 4,
flux G through any given concentration is substantially
less for a low profile with a low value of Cu than it is for a
high one. Therefore, much less of the solids weight is
carried hydrodynamically. Even though there might
be but little mechanical support in high profiles, there
still would have to be a substantial amount in the case
of low ones.

VOL 58 NO. TO OCTOBER 1 966 23

 We have shown that such thick beds in which C varies
with height cannot be in zone settling. But if they are
to be explained by compression, substantial squeeze
should have been detectable in lower profiles at least.
One should not jump to the conclusion that com-
pression is never a factor. Tory and Shannon {18)
give convincing evidence that it determines final concen-
tration in batch settling. But as far as Talmage’s
CaCO3 slurries are concerned, it seems necessary to
conclude that over the thick bed profile solids aren’t
in zone settling and they aren’t explained by compression
either. We escape from a dilemma but fall into con-
fusion. Something previously uncounted must happen.
ANOMALOUS BEHAVIOR
IN BATCH SETTLING
Figure 7 illustrates a type of settling behavior generally
observed in metallurgical pulps. It shows initial sub-
sidence rate Ra plotted against initial concentration C0
in batch tests made at three different initial heights H0.
The solids are gold ore ball-milled to 15% minus 200
mesh.
Initial subsidence rate seems to be more or less in-
dependent of initial depth up to the final set at 580
grams of solids per liter. The final set behaves as
might be expected in compression, with deeper columns
showing higher initial settling rates.
Note, however, that from somewhere around 350
grams of solids per liter through the set of 510 grams per
liter, subsidence rate Ra remains almost constant. There
is a range of initial concentrations over which initial
settling rate does not vary. Such behavior is de-
scribed by Coe and Clevenger and is shown in three
of the four pulps for which settling rate data are given by
Talmage and Fitch.
Samples pipetted from V2 inch below the interface in
the 510 grams per liter set after 75 minutes of settling
24 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
showed the following concentrations: 7-inch column,
256 grams per liter solids; 14-inch column, 313 grams
per liter solids; 25-inch column, 324 grams per liter
solids. These are all lower than the 510 grams per
liter initial concentration and correspond at least roughly
to the subsidence rate observed. Lower concentrations
are propagating downward faster than the
settling rate
of the pulp. For this to happen, settling rate must
increase with concentration because by Kynch The-
orem II
dG d{uC) Cdu
~
_
~
_
~
u + (12)
dC dC dC
If
P> u
Thus, the true R vs. C plot might run as indicated by the
dotted line (Figure 7). Such behavior almost has to
arise from channeling or short-circuiting of fluid through
the higher concentrations. It cannot reasonably be
attributed to segregation of pulp because it does not
happen at lower concentrations, where separation of
slower settling solids is most favored (5). It presumably
might be attributed to cracking of solids structure
through interparticle forces, except that equivalent
behavior was observed in the flux plot for water-fluidized
beds of nonflocculent sea sand (4).
PHASE SETTLING
A possible answer is phase settling (4). Kynch
arguments show that if a reverse concentration gradient
exists (higher concentration above) it will propagate to a
discontinuity if dS/dC is negative and d2S/dC2 is positive.
That is, because dS/dC is negative, loci of constant
concentration will propagate upward (Theorem II).
If cPS/dC1 is positive, lower concentration loci will
propagate upward more rapidly than higher ones.
This gives the usual Kynch behavior with normal
concentration gradients. With a reverse gradient,
lower concentration loci from below overtake higher
ones above. The lower concentration loci do not pass
through higher ones. As shown by Kynch, such a
situation gives rise to a discontinuity.
Now reverse concentration gradients on a large scale
are alien to our thinking, but they must arise locally
due to small random fluctuations in solids concentration.
When they form, they tend to propagate locally to dis-
continuities, with more concentrated pulp above. If
the discontinuity does develop, the faster settling pulp
below may settle away from that above, leaving either a
water-filled parvoid (6) if there is no particle transfer
across the boundary, or a lean phase bubble if there is
limited transfer. Whether or not the bubble will per-
sist and grow depends upon the stability of its roof dis-
continuity, but studies (72) made of voids in fluid beds
show mechanisms by which bubbles are stabilized.
 It is concluded, therefore, that in regions of positive
flux plot curvature, a lean phase may segregate and
short-circuit upward through settling pulp. In ex-
treme cases this is noticeable as intermittent flow of clear
liquid through channels. In the case of limited phase
behavior it will appear as a local swirling or turbulence.
The evidences supporting the possibility of phase
settling are many (4). Among the most direct are:
—As discussed above, it can happen. The necessary
mechanism exists.
—It is universally observed in gas fluidization. There
is also evidence of it in water fluidization (4).
—Channeling is observed in batch settling tests.
—Something like it must happen to explain the
As solids transfer to mechanical support at the bottom
of a column, they build up a compression region. The
upper boundary of this region at Hc builds up at some
rate a. Any Kynch zones propagating upward at a
lesser rate will be overrun and eliminated (11, 16, 19),
If the solids are incompressible, they collapse onto the
bottom, of the column with some concentration Cc, and
have zero flux. The superjacent Kynch zone feeding
the compression region has some concentration Cd and a
flux Sd. By Theorem I, the discontinuity between zone
settling and nonsettling pulp will propagate with a
velocity a such that
a -
-sd
Cc
-

cd
anomalies in settling behavior discussed above.
To be the superjacent zone, Cd must propagate with
Phase settling would not occur until past the point of an equal velocity. That is
inflection on a flux plot. In most cases it seems to have
dS
an upper limit, in that there is a maximum amount of —

= a
lean phase which can pass through a zone (4). It dC d

probably doesn’t extend far into the true compression or

regime because, before a void could form, discontinuity dS -Sd

forces would have to be great enough to overcome
=
(13)
dC d Cc
—

Cd
squeeze. Therefore, a flux plot with both phase settling
and compression might look like Figure 8, although some Now Cc is a constant, dS/dC d and Sd are functions of Cd.
\

qualifications will appear later.
EFFECTS IN BATCH
SETTLING
Limitations of Kynch Theorem III Constructions
It is recognized that the Kynch analysis of a single
batch test cannot safely be used to determine thickener
area (5, 13).
To determine flux as a function of concentration from
a single batch test, Kynch Theorem III, which is quite re-
Therefore, from Equation 13, Cd is constant and thus so
is a. The top of the compression zone will build linearly,
as shown in Figure 9. A Kynch zone of concentration
will
Cd propagate upward just above it. Those of lower
concentration will propagate from, the origin to the
pulp-supernatant interface in zone settling all the way.
Theorem III conditions are fulfilled, and it is valid up to
emergence of the compression region at e.
If the solids are compressible, particles at the top of
the compression zone will be subsiding, and Sc will not,
in general, be zero. It will be so at t 0, and Equation —

stricted, must be used. We now consider the effects of 13 thus holds as t —> 0. However, the top of the com-
these restrictions on batch settling curves. pression region will not build linearly, but will have a

h fnnlt
Figure 9. Settling curve for noncompressible pulp showing linear
Figure 8. Postulated flux plot showing phase settling region buildup of compression region

VOL. 58 NO. 10 OCTOBER 1966 25

slope which decreases with time as more compressing
solids accumulate.
Kynch zones having concentrations below Cd will
propagate from the origin and for them Theorem III
remains valid. Between Cd and Ce zones will form and
propagate tangentially from the top of the compression
region (Figure 10). They are still in zone settling, but
do not start from the origin. Theorem III construc-
tions are invalid for this part of settling curve.
The above has an interesting consequence. Flux into
the compression region is determined by the superjacent
important, are not considered here. We treat two
questions only: How much area is needed and how
much depth?
There are several possible modes of sedimentation (5),
including: Clarification, in which solids settle either
individually or are collected into separated floccules, each
of which settles at its own characteristic rate; zone
settling, in which particles cohere into a structure such
that all in a given neighborhood subside at the same
rate, but the structure does not lend mechanical support
and u —

/(C); compression, in which the structure is

free settling zone and by the rate at which the top of capable of mechanical support and v /(C, i/); and
=

the region propagates upward. In the range of initial phase settling, in which gross inhomogeneities form in
concentrations below Cd, the zone superjacent to the the solids structure and which may occur in either zone
compression region is independent of initial pulp concen- settling or compression.
tration or depth. Therefore, until the compression Different regimes form one below the other in a con-
region emerges at e (Figure 10), its rate and manner of
growth will be independent of C0 and H0,
Figure 11 shows how to solve Equation 13 graphically
for Cd on a free settling flux plot. It also demonstrates
that if solids are taken at an underflow concentration Cu
which is equal to or lower than that, C„ at which they are
capable of supporting compression, Theorem III con-
structions are valid because, by Figure 1, the concentra-
tion corresponding to Gg min will then be equal to or
lower than Cd. But in a majority of practical cases
underflow will be desired at a concentration within the
compression regime. In any case, there is no apparent
way to recognize Cd from a single batch test and to know
whether or not one is dealing with the range in which
Theorem III is valid. Therefore, it, together with the
Talmage and Fitch corollary, is of little practical value
for thickener design.

Effects in Compression Regime

In his excellent work on batch settling of calcium

carbonate slurries, Tory (77) finds v approximately a
function of C even in the compression regime. How
can this be reconciled with the argument accompanying
Figure 10. Settling curve for compressible pulp showing free-settling
Figure 4, which shows it cannot be so in continuous range in which Theorem III is invalid
thickening?
First, from Equation 7, whenever initial column
height H0 is large with respect to yield height Hv, and
diameter large with respect to dy, initial settling rate Tit,
will be approximately u, which is the settling rate with-
out compressive support. Tests made under such
conditions would not give much evidence of compression
even if it exists.
Second, it was argued that the thick bed profiles may
be the result of phase settling rather than compression.
Phase behavior has not been subjected to mathematical
analysis and we don’t know in any quantitative way
just what it does.

HOW SHALL WE DESIGN THICKENERS?

To design a thickener, we must know what is needed to
handle a specified flow, keep unwanted solids out of the
overflow, and deliver underflow at the desired concen-
tration. Several design factors enter which, though Figure 11. Construction for Cd

26 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY

tinuous thickener, although all are not necessarily
present. For example, zone settling regions will be
observed only in overloaded thickeners. Clarification
will constitute a design problem only if feed dilution is so
great that a fully cohesive solids structure is not formed.
A compression region will be absent if underflow solids
are withdrawn at a concentration below Cc. However,
solids pass downward in sequence through whatever
regimes are present. Area provided in the thickener
must be great enough to satisfy whichever demands the
most. Total depth must equal the sum of those re-
quired by each. Clarification will not be discussed
here. Although it is limiting in some cases, it is outside
the context of modern thickening theory.
Figure 12. Construction for Gg minimum and for
CS-G)
Figure 13. Plot of pulp depth vs. concentration from final dilution test
Zone settling imposes an area requirement. The area
needed can be determined by the classical Coe and
Clevenger batch settling technique, using initial settling
rates. Kynch Theorem III interpretations of a single
batch test cannot safely be used. Zone settling imposes
no depth requirement because such zones have no depth
in any but an overloaded thickener.
Compression presents an unsolved problem. As
shown by this paper, hypotheses advanced to explain it
lead to either logical or experimental inconsistencies.
And much of what has been considered compression
may actually be phase behavior. This leaves us with
no truly rational design procedure based on batch tests.
Modern concepts, however, do lead to a tentative
conclusion on area demanded by the thick bed or com-
paction region, whatever it may be (9). All have in
common the idea of a maximum free settling flux for any
given concentration. Actual flux may be less if there
is mechanical support, or if the upper limit of phase
behavior has not been attained, but it will not be greater.
Such free settling flux at any concentration imposes a
minimum demand or lower bound on area. At least
enough must be supplied to accommodate desired solids
rate through whatever concentration shows the lowest
free settling flux, whatever the regime. A corresponding
test procedure is given in the next section of this paper.
The only rationally valid design procedure for com-
paction depth is continuous piloting, or a semicon-
tinuous procedure such as that described by Coe and
Clevenger for chemical pulps. However, such pro-
cedures are time-consuming and are seldom used in
practice.
A frequently used empirical design method is to
determine a detention time for pulp in compaction
according to the procedure recommended by Coe and
Clevenger for metallurgical pulps, and to specify that
determining Sf the depth of the compaction zone shall not exceed 3
feet. For slowly compacting pulps this results in an
area demand in excess of that required by zone settling.
A procedure based on the Michaels and Bolger
model is given in the last section of this paper. It is
untested, but we feel it should give values for compaction
depth which will be as good a guide as any.
To summarize, modern theory has not basically
changed our design concept for zone settling. It has
rightfully challenged the misconception that underflow
density will always be a function of solids detention only,
but has as yet given no rational alternative basis for
predicting it from batch tests. From an engineering
standpoint modern theory has not answered the prob-
lems unsolved by Coe and Clevenger, and in this respect
we are not greatly more advanced than they left us half
a century ago.
FREE SETTLING TESTS
All hypotheses agree that the initial subsidence rate
in batch tests with large column diameter d and initial
c*
depth H0 will be essentially free settling rate u. We
don’t know a priori just how large the settling tube should
VOL. 58 NO. 10 OCTOBER 1966 27
 Note that if point a lies at a concentration where
( dx/dC)* is not equal to zero, thickener depth will be
infinite. Even when this is not so, calculated depth
may be greater than acceptable. In such a case choose
a lower value of Ge, draw a new operating line, and
repeat the calculation. By trial and error an acceptable
combination of G0 and depth will be discovered.
Remember, however, that the depth thus calculated
is to be taken only as indicative. There is yet no experi-
mental proof that the compaction depth actually ob-
served in a thickener will equal that calculated by this or
any other batch procedure.
NOMENCLATURE
C —
concentration mass solids/volume pulp
d =
column diameter
dy =
yield diameter, diameter at which constant concentration plug is just sup-
ported by shear t
D =
dilution, mass water/mass solids
G =
settling flux = S in zone settling
Gd = thickener throughput flux
Figure 14. Graphical integration for depth of compression region in H height from bottom of column
—

thickener Hv =
yield height; height of constant concentration plug which can be supported

Hext= interception ordinate axis of line drawn tangent to batch settling curve
AH height of constant concentration plug in compressing pulp
but suggest starting with one about 3 feet in working
—

be, K Coe and Clevenger dimensional constant, L*/M

=
1/p/ **

depth and 4 inches in diameter. Ap =

pressure head available to drive fluid through array of particles
R subsidence rate of pulp surface in batch test
To make an individual zone test, pour about 3 feet
=

S —
zone settling flux = G in zone settling
of slurry at some concentration Ca into the tube, mix
free settling rate of particles with respect to pulp
thoroughly, and then observe subsidence rate of the
u =

v =
actual settling rate of particles with respect to pulp
sludge-supernatant interface. It will often happen that x = distance measured in direction of settlement in batch test
z distance measured in direction of settlement in continuous thickener (z =>
rate increases for a time, presumably because floe struc-
=

x + mt) where m is downward movement of pulp as a whole

ture is changing. It will finally reach a maximum value, a propagation velocity in direction of settlement of top of compression region
=

in batch tests; always has a negative value

and this should be used in subsequent calculations. /S
=
propagation velocity of locus of constant concentration in direction of settle-
Make zone tests at a series of concentrations ranging 5 =
propagation velocity of concentration discontinuity in direction of settlement
from that of thickener feed to that of expected under- p/ =
density of fluid
pa =
density of solid particles
flow. Calculate flux RC for each zone, and plot against a =
yield value of solids structure for compression
C as shown in Figure 12. t =
yield value of solids structure for shear
p =
squeeze or compression stress in solids structure
Thickener underflow concentration Cu must next be
Subscripts
specified. Usually it will be determined with aid of a
fixed value of variable
final dilution test to be described later. Draw a con- a =

c = value of variable at entrance to compression regime

struction line through Cu on the C axis and tangent to d = value of variable at point d defined by Equation 13
0 initial value
the underside of the flux curve at some concentration Ca.
=

u =
It will intercept the RC axis at the value of Ge min which is
an upper bound for the throughput flux possible in a
# =
continuous thickener.
COMPACTION DEPTH BASED ON MICHAELS
AND BOLGER MODEL
Allow pulp to settle in a large deep tube for several
days, or until subsidence is essentially complete. Sample
at different depths to determine concentration profile.
Plot C vs. depth x (Figure 13). From this test choose
an attainable and acceptable value for Cu to use in zone
test calculations.
At a selected value of C determine (dx/dC)* from
Figure 13, and the ratio S/(S G) from Figure 12.
—
value of variable in thickener underflow
Superscript
value of variable in batch test when subsidence is complete
REFERENCES
(1) Coe, H. S., Clevenger, G. H., Trans. AIME 55, 356 (1916).
(2) Comings, E. W., Ind. Eng. Chem. 32, 663 (1940).
(3) Fitch, B., “Biological Treatment of Sewage and Industrial Wastes,” Vol. 2,
p. 159, Reinhold, New York, 1958.
(4) Fitch, B., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 5, 129 (1966).
(5) Fitch, B., Trans. AIME 223, 192 (1962).
(6) Hassett, N. J., Ind. Chemist 32, 116, 169, 489 (1958); 37, 25 (1961); 40, 25
(1964).
(7) Kynch, G. J., Trans. Faraday Soc. 48, 166 (1952).
(8) Michaels, A. S., Bolger, J. C., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 1, 24 (1962).
(9) Moncrieff, A. G., Bull. Inst. Mining Met. 73,729 (1964).
(10) Porter, J. L., Scandret, H. F.,“ Extractive Metallurgy of Aluminum, I,” p. 95,
Interscience, New York, 1963.
(11) Roberts, E, J., private communication (1955).
(12) Rowe, P. N., Henwood, G. A., Trans. Inst. Chem. Engrs. London 39, 431 (1961),
(13) Shannon, P. T., Tory, E. M., Ind. Eng. Chem. 57, 18 (1965).

(14) Talmage, W. P,, private communication (Dorr-Olivcr report) (1959).

The product of these will equal dz/dC for thickener
operation at the selected value of C. Repeat for the
full range of concentrations observed in Figure 13.
Plot dz/dC vs. C (Figure 14). Depth of thick bed can be
determined by graphical integration under the curve
from C 0 to Cu.
—
(15) Talmage, W. P., Fitch, E. B,, Ind. Eng. Chem. 47, 38 (1955).
(16) Tory, E. M., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 4,106 (1965),
(17) Tory, E. M., Ph.D. thesis, Purdue University, 1961.
(18) Tory, E. M., Shannon, P. T., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundamentals 4, 194 (1965).
(19) Wallis, G. B., Symposium on Interaction between Fluids and Particles, Inst.
Chem. Engrs., London, June 20-22, 1962.
(20) Yoshioka, N., Hotta, Y., Tanaka, S., Kagaku Kogaku 19, 616 (1955).
(21) Yoshioka, N., Hotta, Y., Tanaka, S., Naito, S., Tsugami, S., Ibid., 21, 66

(1957).

28 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGJNEERING CHEMISTRY