AIR BINDING IN RAPID GRAVITY FILTERS

N. ABBOY P.A. THOMPSON

Umgeni Water, P.O.BOX 9, Pietermaritzburg, 3200
ABSTRACT

Water treatment plants can experience filter blinding problems caused by the precipitation
of dissolved gas from super-saturated raw water. This results in extensive headloss,
shorter filter runs, increased backwashing frequency, higher water usage, increased
electricity costs and ultimately higher operating costs.

Over the past five years Umgeni Water has undertaken detailed studies to determine the
cause and possible solutions to the problem. Pilot plants have been designed to evaluate
the process efficiency and lifecycle costs of the different solutions before full scale
implementation. This paper reviews the cause of air binding and provides a summary of
the proposed solutions for alleviating the problem.

BACKGROUND

The Durban Heights Water Works has a capacity of 720 Ml/d and provides 80% of
Durban’s water supply. The first phase of the Durban Heights Water Works was
constructed in the 1940's. Water is abstracted from the Nagle Dam via a system of four
aqueducts and tunnels.

The treatment process consists of pre-chlorination using gaseous chlorine, addition of

bentonite and lime followed by coagulation with a polyelectrolyte (Dially Dimethyl
Ammonium Chloride – DADMAC). Flocculation occurs in Degremont Pulsators followed by
filtration through Moore and Degremont type “T” filters. The Degremont filters are
characterized by a low water depth of 500mm above the sand. There are a total of 34
Degremont “T” filters and 24 Aqua Aid filters which have a similar design to the Degremont
“T” type filter. Current filtration velocity ranges between 5-6 m/h.

Durban Heights Water Works has been experiencing problems associated with scum
formation for a number of years. This problem was seasonal before 1996 but thereafter
became a permanent occurrence in the plant. In addition to aesthetic problems, the
accumulation of scum on the filters resulted in frequent filter clogging and shorter filter
runtimes. The filter run times have been reduced to the extent that filters are now
backwashed every 12 hours rather than the traditional 36 hour filter cycles. This has
resulted in increased power consumption, higher water losses and lower production
efficiency. The problem will get worse with increased flow rates through the plant and there
is a high probability of the plant not being able to realise its assumed capacity of 720
Ml/day. This could result in the possible downgrading of the capacity of the plant to 550
Ml/day.

CAUSES OF AIR BINDING

Rapid gravity sand filtration is the flow of water through a bed of granular media used to
remove any particulate matter that remains after flocculation and settling. The filter
process operates based on two principles, mechanical straining and physical adsorption.
Sand filtration is a "physical-chemical process for separating suspended and colloidal
impurities from water by passage through a bed of granular material. Water fills the pores
of the filter medium, and the impurities are adsorbed on the surface of the grains or
trapped in the opening (1).

Air binding in filters occurs when bubbles formed inside the filter hinders performance by
creating unwanted head loss. Air binding in the filters is caused by the precipitation of
dissolved gas in the feed water entering the filters. Water gets supersaturated with
dissolved gas and this is caused by a number of factors, including photosynthesis,
reduction in the pH of the raw water which increases the dissolved CO2, ozonation as well
as air entrapment in pipelines. The dissolved air can be released during a number of
stages in the treatment process, however the bulk of the dissolved gas is released as air
bubbles during the filtration step due to the high pressure losses experienced in this unit
processes. (5).

Umgeni Water has investigated the cause of the filter blinding problems and has confirmed
that it is caused by the precipitation of air from the super-saturated raw water (2). The
problem is accentuated during the filtration process due to the high head loss experienced
during the filtration process. The head loss in the filters increases with time during filtration
and eventually exceeds the applied hydrostatic pressure, resulting in what is commonly
known as “negative head”. This causes a release of the dissolved gases, which collect in
the sand bed restricting flow through the filter. The sand particles further accelerate the
formation of bubbles by acting as nucleation sites (1).

A question that comes to mind is “Why has this problem only been experienced during the
last three years?” Two possible explanations for this are suspected – both are related to
flow rate and are as ff:

• The increased demand and flow rate over the last five years has increased the velocity
in the pipelines/aqueducts. This increased velocity is increasing the rate of air
adsorption especially at non-functional air valves.
• Head loss in filtration is directly proportional to the square of the filtration velocity. The
increased filtration velocity over the last five years would have increased the rate of
head loss development in the filters, thus accelerating the onset of bubble formation
and release of air in the filter.
PROPOSED SOLUTIONS

A number of solutions were considered to alleviate the problem, viz.

• Use of a coarser grade of sand to delay the rate of headloss development and allow
deeper bed penetration. Figure 1 shows typical head loss curves that will be obtained
at the end of a filter run for various floc strengths (4). Curve “A” would be obtained
when the floc is too tough and is not able to penetrate the filter bed. A similar curve
would also be obtained if the top layer of the filter media is too fine. Curve type “B”
would be obtained when the floc is too weak resulting in low head loss and floc
breakthrough of the filters. A “B” type curve would also be obtained if the filter media
particle size was too large. Curve type “C” is the ideal type of head loss curve with a
good balance between head loss development and filter run time.
• Pilot filters have been operated on site with different grades of sand to determine the
rate of head loss development and quality whilst ensuring that filtered water quality is
not compromised. Plans are in place to undertake a similar evaluation on a full-scale
basis to evaluate the coarser sand in four of the filters with the installation of eight
permanent pressure transducers in one of the filters in each of the four plants to
measure the rate of head loss development.
• Addition of a chemical that would accelerate the release of air from the water at the
head of works.
• Reduction of pressure over the inlet canal by application of a vacuum which would
accelerate the release of dissolved air before the water reaches the filtration stage.
• Installation of lamellae or inclined plates over the inlet canal to accelerate the
separation of air from the raw water.
• Reduce air entrapment in the intake works and at air valves along the aqueducts.
• Increase the hydrostatic head on the filters, however this would mean a deeper filter
box and it would necessitate the raising of the entire hydraulic profile of the plant by
500 mm or more. This can only be done in new filter designs and would be very difficult
and expensive to retrofit on this scale. Due to the practical limitations and cost factor
this proposal was not considered.

Figure 1: Head Loss Pressure Curves for Various Floc Strengths (4)

PILOT FILTER DESIGN

The specific objectives of the pilot filter are to compare the rate of the development of air
binding using different filter media sizes. Parameters that would need to be evaluated
include headloss development, filtration rate, filter run time, and time of breakthrough for
various media sizes, temperatures and filtration rates.

The pilot filter design has been modeled on the Degremont T-Filter to ensure that the
hydraulics and results can be extrapolated to the full scale plant conditions. The
Degremont-T Filter is a constant rate filter designed to operate at a filtration velocity
ranging between 4m/h and 5 m/h.

These filters are fitted with long stemmed nozzles which are screwed to a removable floor
made up of slabs of concrete. The scour air is distributed below the "suspended" floor via
a feed pipe and is distributed uniformly over the whole surface area of the filter by an air
cushion created by the long-stemmed nozzles.
The water level in the filters is controlled by a concentric siphon fitted with a partialisation
box. The siphon consists of two concentric tubes, with the filtered water flowing from the
inside branch to the outside branch. The partialisation box is a control device that
introduces air at the top of the siphon to control the water flow rate through the siphon.
The float of the partialisation box floats on the unfiltered water above the sand bed of the
filter. The float, through the partialisation box, governs the quantity of air which is bled into
the top of the siphon. The quantity of air which is bled into the top of the siphon,
determines the vacuum at the "neck" of the siphon, and thereby controls the filtered water
flow rate through the siphon. The greater the quantity of air bled into the neck of the
siphon, the smaller the vacuum and thus the filtrate flow rate and vice versa. In this
manner the level of the unfiltered water in the filters is controlled.

The following design parameters were taken into consideration in the design of the pilot
filters: number of filters, filter dimensions, type and depth of filter bed, filtration rate, filter
control system, backwash methodology, type of filter under drain, available head loss, filter
waste handling, and replacement of filter media.

Design of Optimum Dimensions of filter

The required depth was calculated using the sand depth, under drain depth, maximum
operating depth of water and freeboard. The total surface area required was found using
the following equation:
Q
A= [1]
V
Where A is the total surface area, m2
Q is the throughput of water, m3/hr
V is the filtration rate, m3/m2/hr

Optimum lengths and widths are dependant on the surface area of each filter:

(LOPT )(WOPT ) =A
[2]
N
Where LOPT is optimum length, m
WOPT is the optimum width, m
A is the total surface area, m2
N is the minimum number of filters

BACKWASHING
The cleaning mechanism in backwashing is hydrodynamic shear, which tears adhered
material away from medium grains. The backwash velocity is different for each grade,
therefore it is imperative that the correct velocity is used to prevent excessive increases in
shear.
The backwash parameters were matched as closely as possible to existing Degremont “T”
filters.

a) A filter bed with an effective media size of 0.9 mm.

b) Scouring of the filter bed by air at a flow rate of 45 m3/m2/h followed by a combined
air/water wash at 45 m3/m2/h and 12 m3/m2//h respectively, and a final water rinse at 24
m3/m2/h.
c) 0, 5 m depth of water above the sand.

Siphon Design
Limited data is available on the design of siphons for pilot filters.
Figure 2 shows a schematic of the pilot filter and siphon/partialisation control system. The
sizing of the pilot filter was based on direct extrapolation from three different sized full
scale filters, viz, the Durban Heights Degremont Filters, the Durban Heights Aqua Aid
filters and the Craigieburn Filters that are operated by Umgeni Water. The minimum size of
the inner pipe of the concentric siphon was based on the size of inlet pipe of the pilot filter
to minimize headloss through the filter.
Table 1: Design Details of Concentric Siphons and Pilot Filter
Durban Durban
Parameter Heights-New Heights- Craigieburn Pilot Plant
Degremont Aqua Aid
filters
Filtrate Pipe Diameter, m 0.42 0.37 0.24 0.15
Siphon Top diameter, m 0.8 0.65 0.37 0.3
Siphon middle diameter, m 0.48 0.43 0.28 0.2

Figure 2: Schematic diagram of pilot filter with siphon and partialisation valve
EVALUATION OF COARSER MEDIA - FULL SCALE HEADLOSS MEASUREMENTS

A full scale investigation of a coarser grade of sand is underway at the Durban Heights
Filters. Eight pressure transducers have been installed in three of the filters as indicated in
Figure 3. The media in two of the filters has been replaced with coarser media (1.2 mm).
The third filter has the original media (0.95 mm) and is being used as the control for the
trials. The pressure transducers are placed 100-150 mm apart and will measure the
headloss at various depths of the filter.

Figure 3: Position of Pressure Transducers in Full Scale Filter

DEGASSING OF RAW WATER

Degassing of the raw water was considered as a practical solution and a pilot plant has
been designed to evaluate the efficiency of this unit process. Figure 4 shows the locality of
the pilot Deaeration unit relative to the inlet aqueduct at the head of the water works.

Figure 4: Locality Sketch - Durban Heights Inlet Works –

 Figure 5: Detail of Durban Heights De-Aeration Pilot Plant

Figure 5 shows the details of the design of the pilot Deaeration Unit. 1000 l/s of the raw
water from the main aqueduct pipe will be diverted into an inverted siphon. The inverted
siphon will be manufactured from 100 DN mild steel pipe with an air accumulator on the
top. Air will be continuously bled from the system by a vacuum pump. Parameters that will
be measured will include the volume of air removed as well as the total dissolved gas
concentration before and after deaeration of the water.

CONCLUSION
Air binding can cause major operating problems at water works resulting in lower
production, excessive use of wash water as well as increased power consumption due to
higher frequency backwashing. Eight possible solutions have been proposed for the
remediation of air-binding at the Durban Heights Water Works. The eight proposals have
been ranked in terms of capital and operating costs. Two of the proposals are being
evaluated on pilot plant scale before proceeding with full scale implementation. Limited
information is published on this subject and it is hoped that this paper will stimulate
discussion and lead to innovative solutions to this problem which is probably occurring at
many water works in South Africa.

REFERENCES
1. R L Sanks, “Water Treatment Plant Design for the Practicing Engineer”, Pub
Butterworth-2. Heinemann, USA, p 677, 708-709. (1978).
2. P A Thompson, Umgeni Water, Filter Blinding Problems, Umgeni Water-Internal Report
No PS 012, 2004.
3. RL Monk, Design of Filtration System, Public Works, 1984.
4. Degrémont, Water Treatment Handbook.” Vol 2, pub Degrémont (J L Brault), p794-798
(1991).
5. P Scardina, M. Edwards, Advances in rapid granular filtration in water treatment,
International Conference, London, UK, (2001).