PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL
               For

        CARBON ADSORPTION
              for the
 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
          Technology Transfer
                By
    SWINDELL-DRESSIER COMPANY
A DIVISION OF PULLMAN INCORPORATED
         441 SMITHFIELD ST.
  PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA 15222
         Program #17020 GNR
         Contract #14-12-928
            October, 1971

-------
                               EPA REVIEW NOTICE

This report has been reviewed by the Office of Research & Monitoring, EPA, and approved
for publication. Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and
policies of the Environmental  Protection  Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
                                         n

-------
                                     FOREWORD

The formation of the Environmental Protection Agency marks a new era of environmental
awareness in America. This Agency's goals  are national in scope and encompass broad
responsibility in the area of air and water pollution, solid wastes, pesticides, and radiation. A
vital part of EPA's national water pollution control effort is the constant development and
dissemination of new technology for wastewater treatment.

It is now clear that only the most effective design and operation of wastewater treatment
facilities, using the latest  available techniques, will be adequate to meet the future water
quality objectives and to ensure continued protection of the Nation's waters. It is essential
that this new technology be incorporated into the contemporary design of waste treatment
facilities to achieve maximum benefit of our pollution control expenditures.

The purpose of this manual is to provide the  engineering community and related industry a
new source of information to  be used in the  planning, design, and operation of present and
future municipal wastewater treatment facilities. It is recognized that there are a number of
design manuals,  manuals of standard practice, and design guidelines currently available in
the field that adequately  describe and interpret current engineering practices as related to
traditional plant design. It is the intent of this manual to supplement this existing body of
knowledge by describing new  treatment methods, and by discussing the application of new
techniques for  more effectively removing   a broad  spectrum  of  contaminants  from
wastewater.

Much of  the  information presented  is based on  the evaluation  and operation  of pilot,
demonstration and full-scale  plants. The design  criteria thus generated represent typical
values. These values  should  be used as a  guide and  should be tempered with  sound
engineering judgment based on a complete analysis of the specific application.

This manual  is one of four now available through the sponsorship of the Environmental
Protection Agency to describe recent  technological advances and new information in  the
following subject areas:

                               Carbon Adsorption
                               Phosphorus Removal
                               Upgrading Existing Plants
                               Suspended Solids Removal

These manuals are the first edition copies and  will be updated as warranted by the advancing
state of the art to  include new data as it becomes  available, and  to refine design criteria as
additional full-scale operational information is generated.
                                         in

-------
                                      ABSTRACT

The use of activated carbon for removal of dissolved organics from water and wastewater
has long since been demonstrated  to  be feasible. In fact, it is one of the  most efficient
organic removal processes available to  the engineer. The increasing need for highly polished
effluents  from  wastewater treatment plants,  necessary  to accommodate the  stringent
requirements for both surface water quality and water reuse,  has stimulated great interest in
carbon  treatment systems. Both the great capability for organic removal and the  overall
flexibility of the carbon adsorption process have encouraged its application  in a variety of
situations.  It  readily  lends itself  to  integration into  larger,  more comprehensive  waste
treatment systems.

Activated carbon adsorbs  a great  variety of dissolved organic  materials including many
which are  non-biodegradable. Adsorption is facilitated by the large surface areas  on the
carbon granules which are attributable to its highly porous structure. Biological degradation
occurring on the granules complements the adsorption process in removing dissolved organic
material. Carbon in certain configurations also functions as a filter. The greatest cost within
the carbon  treatment  process is the cost of the carbon itself. Thermal regeneration of the
spent  carbon  makes  the  process  economically feasible; the  cost  of the  regenerating
equipment, however, represents only a  small fraction of the total capital equipment cost.

The most  important design parameter  is contact time, the usual range being 15  to 40
minutes. Hydraulic loading, within  the ranges normally used, has little effect  on adsorption.
The basic process configurations of the physical plant include upflow or downflow, either
under force of gravity or pump  pressure, with fixed or moving beds, and single (parallel) or
multi-stage (series) arrangement.

Data from both pilot and laboratory  tests,  as  well as experience from existing  full-scale
plants,  must be carefully interpreted  prior to the design of a  new plant.  Procedures for
preliminary tests are discussed here, and the characteristics of some full-scale plants, planned
or operating,  are presented as well  for illustrative purposes.  Indications are  that operating
personnel requirements for the carbon portion  of the wastewater treatment plant will not
significantly increase the requirements for the entire plant.
                                          IV

-------
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS

       Item                                                                 page

Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION

  1.1 The Use of Carbon in Waste Treatment 	   1-1
  1.2 Wastewater Characteristics	   1-2
  1.3 The Place of Activated Carbon in Wastewater Treatment	   1-3
  1.4 Effluent Quality	   1-3

Chapter 2 GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

  2.1 Variations in Flow	   2-1
  2.2 Establishment of Design Flow 	   2-2
  2.3 Performance Specifications 	   2-3
  2.4 Distribution of Capital and Operating Cost Components	   2-4
  2.5 Carbon Inventory	   2-6
  2.6 An Additional Note on Carbon Regeneration	   2-6

Chapter 3 PROCESS CONFIGURATIONS

  3.1 Introduction	   3-1
  3.2 Downflow  	   3-1
  3.3 Upflow	   3-1
  3.4 Gravity and Pressurized Flow	   3-2
  3.5 Single or Multi-stage	   3-2
  3.6 Carbon Regeneration Systems 	   3-3
  3.7 Carbon Transport  Systems	   3-3

Chapter 4 PROCESS DESIGN PARAMETERS

  4.1 Carbon Properties	   4-1
  4.2 Absorption	   4-3
  4.3 Contact Time	   4-8
  4.4 Hydraulic Loading	   4-8
  4.5 Particle Size of Carbon	  4-10

Chapter 5 EQUIPMENT DESIGN

  5.1 Contactors	   5-1
  5.2 Regeneration of Spent Granular Activated Carbon	   5-8
  5.3 Air Pollution Control during Activated Carbon Regeneration  	  5-10
  5.4 Carbon Transport	  5-10
  5.5 Backwash	  5-11
  5.6 Piping	  5-13
  5.7 Pumps 	  5-14
  5.8 Control System 	  5-15
  5.9 A Typical Plant Design	  5-15

-------
                    TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont.)
                                                                      page
Chapter 6 PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANTS

  6.1 General	   6-1
  6.2 Physical-chemical Treatment Plants Being Built	   6-1

Chapter 7 EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF CARBONS FOR
  WASTEWATER TREATMENT

  7.1 Introduction	   7-1
  7.2 Wastewater Characterization 	   7-1
  7.3 Pretreatment Requirements	   7-2
  7.4 Adsorption Isotherm Tests	   7-2
  7.5 Other Criteria	   7-4
  7.6 Pilot Plant Testing  	   7-4

Chapter 8 PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

Chapter 9 PLAN AND SPECIFICATION REVIEW CHECK LIST

REFERENCES	

APPENDIX A: Glossary	   A-l

APPENDIX B: Carbon Regeneration Furnace Specifications	   B-1
                                    VI

-------
                                  LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Number                                                                page

   3-1 Regeneration System with Drain Bin	  3-5
   3-2 Regeneration System with Storage Tank  	  3-6
   3-3 Regeneration System without Storage Tank	  3-7

   4-1 Photomicrograph of Carbon Granule	  4-2
   4-2 COD Breakthrough Curves (Ideal) 	  4-6
   4-3 COD Breakthrough Curves (Non-ideal)	  4-7
   4-4 Pressure Drop vs. Hydraulic Loading	  4-9

   5-1 Pressurized Contactor I  	  5-3
   5-2 Pressurized Contactor II	  5-4
   5-3 Pressurized Contactor III	  5-5
   5-4 Pressurized Contactor IV	  5-6
   5-5 Gravity Contactor  	  5-7
   5-6 Bed Expansion during Backwash 	5-12
   5-7 Process Flow Diagram  	5-16

   6-1 Pomona Carbon Contactors	  6-8
   6-2 Pomona Regeneration System  	  6-9
   6-3 Lake Tahoe Carbon Contactor	6-10
   6-4 ARCO Gravity Flow System  	6-10

   7-1 Typical Adsorption Isotherm	  7-5

   B-l Regeneration Furnace  	B-2


                                  LIST OF TABLES

Table Number                                                                 page

   1-1 Typical Performance of Granular Carbon Treatment	  1-4

   2-1 Breakdown of Capital Costs in the Granular Carbon Process  	  2-4
   2-2 Breakdown of Operating Costs in the Granular Carbon Process	  2-5

   4-1 Specifications of Several Commercially Available Carbons	  4-4

   6-1 Design Specifications of some Physical-chemical Treatment Plants 	  6-2
   6-2 Physical-chemical Treatment Plants Being Built	  6-4
                                        vn

-------
                                      CHAPTER 1

                                   INTRODUCTION

 1.1  The Use of Carbon in Waste Treatment

 Activated carbon can be used to reduce the pollutional load of many kinds of waste and raw
 waters. It is particularly well suited for  removal  of  various types of dissolved organic
 materials. Most but not  all dissolved organics can  be  adsorbed  by carbon, and the exact
 degree of removal  from  the liquid phase depends upon a number of factors which will be
 discussed later. An important aspect  of carbon adsorption is its capability of removing
 organics which are  not  completely  removed by conventional biological treatment.  Since
 biodegradable organics are also adsorbable, carbon can be used in either of two  ways: to
 upgrade or to replace  conventional biological treatment. In this  manual, both applications
 will be considered, although the  use of carbon in  purely physical-chemical plants will be
 emphasized.

 Carbon removes these dissolved  organics  through  the action of two distinctly  different
 mechanisms. The first  of these is  adsorption, which actually removes the dissolved organics
 from solution.  Organic molecules in  solution are drawn to the porous surface of the carbon
 granule by inter-molecular attraction  forces,  where the organics become  substrates for
 biological activity. Biodegradation is thus the second mechanism  by which carbon improves
 water quality.  It is theorized that  adsorption  is the  principal  mechanism by which the
 dissolved  organics are removed from solution  and that biological activity functions as a
 regenerant of the adsorption sites  by  reopening the porous surfaces of the carbon. The exact
 mechanism is unknown, but a comparison  between isotherm data and pilot plant data has
 shown  that  the biological  contribution  to  the removal  capacity  is quite  significant.
 Adsorption is probably predominant when a carbon column is first  put into  service.  As
 operation proceeds, however, the  biological process grows in importance as  the numbers of
 the microorganisms increase. One  can thus speak of a removal capacity different from and in
 excess of the adsorptive capacity of the carbon. The biological  contribution to treatment
 may become as important as that of adsorption. However, this is speculation because as yet
 little performance data is available on biodegradation on carbon.

 Wastewater treatment with  activated  carbon  involves two major and  separate  process
 operations:

 1.1.1 The Contacting Systems

 The water is contacted with the  carbon by passing it through a vessel filled either with
 carbon  granules  or  with a  carbon  slurry. Impurities are removed  from  the water by
 adsorption when sufficient contact time is provided for this process. The  carbon system
 usually consists of a number of columns or basins used as contactors.  These are connected
 to a regeneration system.

 1.1.2 The Regeneration System

 After a period of use, the carbon adsorptive capacity is exhausted. The carbon must then be
 taken out of service and regenerated thermally  by  combustion  of the organic adsorbate.
 Fresh carbon is  routinely added to the system to replace that lost during hydraulic transport
and  regeneration. These  losses include  both attrition  due  to physical deterioration and
burning during the actual  regeneration process.
                                         1-1

-------
So far, the carbon process has been discussed in very general terms which apply equally well
to either  powdered  or granular  carbon.  However, this design manual will be concerned
exclusively with granular  carbon. Despite their many theoretical similarities,  the granular
and  powdered  carbon processes  present  many strikingly  different  design  and operating
problems. For this reason,  powdered carbon treatment will be considered separately.

1.2 Wastewater Characteristics

Contactors for  granular carbon also function as filters for the removal of suspended material
from the  influent water.  This is true  only  for packed  bed (either upflow  or downflow)
contactors.  Expanded bed  upflow  units do  not  function  effectively as  filters.  If the
incoming  raw water contains appreciable  suspended solids, these soon form a cake  on the
surface of a packed carbon bed. This clogging effect usually penetrates some distance below
the surface of the bed. As this filter cake  grows, it increases the pressure drop through the
contactor. Backwashing is routinely necessary to reverse this situation. Expanded beds do
not suffer from this problem.

Unless the suspended solids content of the raw water is  very  low, say less  than  50—65
mg/l(l),  it is usually advisable to employ dual-media filtration, chemical coagulation, or
other particulate removal techniques before applying the water to the carbon bed. Activated
carbon is too expensive to be used primarily as a filter medium.

Carbon's prime function is the removal of  dissolved organics. However, while many organics
are adsorbed, those molecules which are  small or  highly  polar are  not readily captured.
Methanol, formic acid, or  sugars for example, are not easily  adsorbed. While most inorganics
are not removable by carbon, some may be retained through  precipitation or biological
assimilation mechanisms.

The biological  contribution  to  carbon treatment can also be  greatly influenced  by the
chemical  characteristics of the wastewater.  Toxic substances might destroy all biological
metabolisms  and  reduce  the carbon's removal capacity to  the same  level as its purely
adsorptive capacity. Another common inhibition to biological treatment might be the pH of
the waste. For example, very high pH not only inhibits adsorption,  but could also inhibit
biological activity. This might occur in a system where a high pH chemical clarification step
(e.g. lime) precedes  the carbon  step. To  date,  high pH wastewaters have been neutralized
prior to carbon adsorption and so no particular reduction of adsorption capacity has  been
reported.

Unfortunately,  our understanding of all these factors in the  carbon treatment process is very
incomplete, and it is not possible to accurately  predict the treatment performance based
upon a chemical analysis of the wastewater alone. Wherever  carbon appears to be applicable,
it is necessary  to  make a number of comprehensive tests, including at least  a laboratory
adsorption test  and a pilot-scale evaluation (see Chapter 7).

In general, carbon can significantly improve the quality of most effluents from secondary
biological treatment of municipal wastewater. Biological secondary effluent implies a water
with less  than  100 mg/1 COD, and not more than 50 mg/1  of suspended solids. If the waste
contains any substantial amount of industrial effluent, the industrial contribution should be
adequately characterized and taken into account during all preliminary testing.
                                         1-2

-------
1.3 The Place of Activated Carbon in Wastewater Treatment

Activated  carbon  is  almost always  a component in  some larger  wastewater treatment
scheme.  Since it is a relatively versatile process, it can be fitted into this larger system in a
variety of ways. However,  this versatility and its ability to produce a high quality effluent
does not mean that it is a universal solution to all wastewater problems.

As has been noted,  carbon has certain limitations to its ability to adsorb organics and to
tolerate suspended solids. The biological contribution can be a distinct advantage. However,
some adverse  side-effects  are  possible if  not controlled,  such as sulfide  generation.
Therefore, the design of carbon systems must consider two different questions:  the ability
of carbon  to adsorb organics from a  particular waste stream, and the proper position of
carbon in the total system.

It  has already been suggested that carbon treatment can be used in either of two ways: to
upgrade  biological treatment or to replace it.  The first of these two uses will more likely
apply to an existing biological plant than to a newly constructed plant. Carbon adsorption is
an excellent way to upgrade product quality in a biological plant unable to otherwise meet
discharge or reuse  standards; however, it should not be used  as a substitute for optimizing
the biological process. During the conceptual  planning of a new plant, however, a purely
physical-chemical treatment (PCT) scheme  should be  given serious consideration. In such a
scheme,  the sequence  of basic processes is the same  as in a  conventional biological plant:
gross solids removal, suspended solids removal,  dissolved organic removal. The most obvious
sequence of processes in  such  a PCT plant is: chemical clarification, filtration,  carbon
adsorption.

Carbon is usually thought of as a removal  device for  "refractory"  organics, which refers to
non-biodegradable  organics. This definition of "non-biodegradable" becomes uncertain in a
purely physical-chemical plant. Carbon removes biodegradable as well as non-biodegradable
dissolved organics. When a non-biodegradable material is adsorbed on a carbon column with
abundant  biological  activity,  there  is  a  much longer  retention time  available for
biodegradation than would be the case in, e.g., an activated sludge system.

The following specific advantages have been suggested for PCT plants (which necessarily
include activated carbon systems):
   a) Land  area requirements are much less than those for conventional biological plants,
perhaps only one-fourth or one-third as much.
   b) A  wide variety  of pollutants can be removed,  many of which  are refractory to
conventional biological treatment.
   c) Process control is much more  reliable than in  biological plants, and PCT plants are
relatively insensitive to "upsets," changes  in organic loading, or surges  in flow. The PCT
plants may therefore lend themselves to automation.
   d) Plant  expansion  is  more  easily  obtained because of the  modular  nature  of the
processes.

1.4 Effluent Quality

The effluent quality obtainable from granular carbon treatment depends on the character of
the wastewater being treated. Therefore, in  documenting the probable effluent quality of
carbon plants, the nature of the raw wastewater and the effect of pretreatment must be
cited. Table 1-1  shows  some  typical effluent quality  data  for various raw  municipal

                                         1-3

-------
wastewaters. Although the mass of data on purely PCT plants is somewhat scanty, it is clear
that the product of a PCT plant (including carbon treatment) will equal or exceed that of a
well-operated conventional biological plant.

No general rule can be given for the results to be expected from the treatment of industrial
wastes,  because  this depends upon the  particular chemical species present  in  the raw
wastewater.
Feed
1. Raw
2. Primary
3. Primary
4. Primary *
5. Secondary
6. Secondary
Influent COD
(mg/1)
305
235
192
50(TOC)
30
40
                                                                        Carbon contact
                                                                        time (minutes)
                                      TABLE 1-1

              TYPICAL PERFORMANCE OF GRANULAR CARBON TREATMENT

                                 Clarifier effluent    Carbon effluent
                                    COD(mg/l)         COD(mg/l)

                                        46

                                        177

                                        67

                                        15(TOC)

                                        N/A

                                        25

                                      * upflow operation

1. Bishop, D. F., et al., "Physical-Chemical Treatment of Wastewater" U. S. Dept. of Interior, October,
  1970. (Table 2)
2. Rizzo, J. L. & Schade, R. E.,  "Secondary Treatment  with Granular Activated Carbon", Water &
  Sewage Works, August, 1969 (p. 310)
3. Villiers, R.  V., et  al., "Treatment of Primary Effluent by Lime  Clarification  & Granular Carbon"
  (in press)
4. Weber, W. J., Jr. et al., "Physicochemical Treatment of Wastewater," JWPCF 42, 1 (1970) (p. 91)

5. English, J. N., et al.,  "Removal of Organics  from Wastewater by Activated Carbon" Chem. Engr.
  Symposium Series, Vol. 67, No. 107 (1970) (p. 152)
6. Culp, R. L. & Culp, G. L., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment" (1971) (p. 289)
13
44
27
4(TOC)
8
10
35
32.6
45
36
40
17
                                          1-4

-------
                                          Reference

1. Recommendations by Hager, D. J. and Rizzo, J. L. of Calgon Corporation at Advanced Wastewater
  Treatment Technology Transfer Seminars, 1971.
                                            1-5

-------
                                     CHAPTER 2

                          GENERAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

2.1 Variations in Flow

Streams of wastewater vary in their volume and chemical composition because of changes in
the processes or in the events  which generate  these streams. These variations  frequently
exhibit clearly defined cycles. Municipal wastewater exhibits diurnal cycles corresponding to
the life patterns of the population, which are, however,  influenced by length of sewer and
the size  of the town. Industrial wastes may be influenced by the working hours of the
plants, shift changes, week-end  shutdowns, summer holidays, or fluctuations in production
rates  caused by  seasonal  marketing patterns.  It is  important  to recognize  that these
fluctuations occur in the chemical character of the wastewater as well as in its volume.

Other fluctuations are related to changes in the weather, such as those due to ground water
infiltration, illegal connections, and extraneous water entering the collection system.

Some provisions must  therefore  be  made for  dealing with  these  variations  when a
wastewater treatment plant is being  designed. The major elements in a conventional plant
are usually designed on the basis of the  average expected flow during the design period of
the plant. However, smaller elements such as the internal piping are designed on the basis of
peak flows. Peak flows are frequently assumed to be 2-3 times the average flow.

In cases of above average flow,  wastewater is permitted to pass through the treatment plant
as usual,  but the increased  flow results in  relatively poorer treatment and an unsatisfactory
effluent is discharged for the duration of the surge.

One method of avoiding this impaired effluent quality is to construct a flow equalization
basin. Excess flows or highly concentrated wastes could  then be accumulated during surges
and later be allowed to enter the  plant gradually without impairing treatment efficiency.
Equalization basins are probably advantageous  in most  situations, although they may be
more necessary in complicated process sequences  than in simpler ones. Some form of flow
equalization  may be advisable in  any  situation  where  the processes  themselves cannot
accommodate the variations in flow.

The requirements  of flow equalization in a carbon treatment  system are  different  from
those in conventional  biological plants or for other physical-chemical  processes in  two
principal respects. First, since the carbon is usually preceded by one or more solids removal
processes, these preliminary treatment stages act not only as pretreatment steps, but also to
dampen variations in flow and organic loading. The reader is referred to the EPA Process
Design Manual for Suspended Solids Removal for consideration of flow equalization with
regard to solids removal processes.

Secondly,  it  should  be  recognized  that the  carbon  process  itself  can accommodate
significant  variations in  flow  or organic  loading  without any substantial  immediate
disadvantage. At any given  time, only a  portion of the carbon contactor is actively engaged
in the  bulk of the adsorption, filtration, or biodegradation work. Any  sort  of excessive
loading merely throws a greater burden on the portion of the carbon contactor which is less
active in treatment,  i.e., the downstream end.  An organic  shock loading may cause the
column  to  be more rapidly exhausted, however, the effluent quality may not be seriously
affected.  If the carbon is close to exhaustion,  effluent  quality will be seriously affected.

                                        2-1

-------
However, this need be only  a  transient effect since the exhausted contactor would be
immediately replaced by a fresh one. It may thus be desirable to build some excess capacity
into the  regeneration system for use during such organic surges in lieu of flow equalization.
This is  far superior to overdesigning the carbon contactors, since  excess regeneration
capacity  is a much less significant  capital item than are the contactors, (see Section 2.4).
Surges in solids concentration which  are not  dampened  by the pretreatment system are
accommodated by increased backwash frequency.

The handling of sudden increases in  flow rate  through a carbon  contactor present other
problems for the designer. A pumped system will require additional capacity for flow and
head in  the feed pumps.  In a gravity flow system, the energy requirements for increased
flow can only be obtained by increasing the available head in the contactor. In conclusion it
can be seen that the carbon plant can be designed to handle considerable fluctuations in
wastewater organic concentration through the relatively inexpensive technique of installing
excess regeneration capacity. The accommodation of  large  flow surges  may be more
expensive because  of the  problems associated with allowing for  increased  head. A good
economic comparison of the relative costs of flow equalization basins versus increased plant
capability for carbon plants has  not yet been developed. At the present time, it is necessary
for designers of carbon plants to evaluate several alternatives for  a particular situation by
making specific  studies for that  situation. However,  as long as wastewater streams show
variations in quantity and concentration, the  question  of  flow  equalization cannot be
ignored.

2.2 Establishment of Design Flow

One of the more important design decisions which the engineer must make is the selection
of the design  flow for the carbon  treatment  plant. This  question is intimately  connected
with those of handling diurnal variations in flow and of making an accurate forecast of the
volume and character of wastewater which a community will produce during the course of
the design period. The diurnal factor has been considered above. Selection of the proper
design flow requires an analysis of the following factors:

   1. Useful operating lifetime of the plant
     a. as influenced by wear-and-tear
     b. as influenced by technological obsolescence.

   2. Interest rates and the rate of currency inflation, during the life of the plant.

   3. Population changes in the service area of the plant during its useful life.

   4. Changes in domestic living habits and consumer patterns (i.e., standard of living) during
     the  plant's lifetime.

   5. Changes in levels and types of industrial activity in the plant's service  area during its
     useful life.

   .6. Changes in requirements for treated water quality during the plant's lifetime.

With an  anticipated useful lifetime  for the plant on the order of 20 years, at least from the
standpoint of wear-and-tear,  it  is evident that accurate  forecasts of  the  above listed
parameters are difficult.

                                         2-2

-------
A better approach is to design for a relatively short term, taking into account only those
future events and trends which can be foreseen with some precision. At the same time, the
plant should be built so that its capacity can be increased as needed without scrapping or
greatly changing  the original equipment. The best way to accomplish this is by what might
be  called  the  modular approach to  plant design. This  means that plant expansion  can be
obtained by building  a  new plant  beside the old  one  in parallel with it, with the flow
proportioned between them. Physical-chemical treatment plants (and the carbon process in
particular) readily lend themselves to the modular design approach.
Design  capacity  can be increased  by more frequent regeneration of the  carbon. In  the
original design, it is often relatively inexpensive to oversize the regeneration equipment and
operate it initially on a part time schedule. As the treatment load grows, the utilization of
the furnace can be increased until it is running steadily at full capacity. Another furnace can
then be installed if needed. Of course, more frequent regeneration  will add to total carbon
replacement cost, but the cost per unit of water treated will not change greatly. Meanwhile,
the capital cost is kept down.
The plant can also be expanded to accommodate a greater future flow by initially designing
the carbon contactors to have slightly more  than the minimum necessary freeboard. The
initial  capital cost for vessels is  of course higher for  this option. The original carbon
inventory can be fixed at that  needed for initial operation, however, thereby minimizing
first cost. The resulting unused volume in the contactor vessels will not interfere in any way
with operations. As the flow to be treated increases in the course of time or as its character
changes, the carbon bed depth and  the carbon inventory in  the plant  can  simply be
increased  to  keep pace  with the flow. See Section 2.4 for the relative costs  of various
portions of the carbon system.
It is also possible to increase the treatment plant's capacity by adding additional contactor
vessels as needed. The major requirement is that the initial design should provide space for
the later addition of these vessels.


In summary, it seems best to design the major components of a carbon system for flow and
water quality specifications  which are based upon the present  situation  and only those
short-term  changes  which can be accurately estimated. It is in the nature of the carbon
process itself that later expansion can generally be handled economically.
2.3 Performance Specifications

It  is important to prepare suitable performance specifications as part  of the design of a
carbon treatment plant. While this is a consideration in the design of any waste treatment
plant, it deserves particular attention in the case of carbon. The carbon process has not yet
been applied very widely, and so little experience can be cited from existing full scale plants.
It  is  therefore  important for the designer  to conduct appropriate preliminary testing
programs  to cover his own situation. Municipalities or industries may be protected against
deficient  future  plant  performance  only  by  periodic reevaluations  of influent  waste
characteristics and plant operations. The same testing programs used during the initial design

                                         2-3
  441-505 O - 71 - 2

-------
phase can  be repeated whenever changes in the plant are anticipated. Such testing may
include isotherm tests or even pilot column studies (see Chapter 7 for discussions of these
tests). The carbon process provides  the plant operator with a considerable degree of process
control and flexibility which may help him to meet changing treatment requirements with a
minimum of difficulty.

The design flow should be stated exactly and the plant should be equipped with a suitable
flow meter. Design influent and effluent quality should also be clearly defined.  Analytical
and  monitoring procedures  to be used  should  be described  in the  specifications. The
characteristics of the fresh and regenerated carbon should be specified. Carbon regeneration
capacity  may be stated, but the average regeneration rate and  carbon  usage can only be
estimated. Both of these parameters will vary with flow rate and raw water quality — both
of which will themselves fluctuate.

2.4 Distribution of Capital and Operating Cost Components

In designing a  carbon treatment  plant, many alternative schemes are  available  to  the
engineer. Optimizing  the design becomes largely the problem  of choosing among these
alternatives. Capital and operating costs play  important parts  in this choice, but these
considerations  should   be  tempered  by considering ease of  operation, availability  of
personnel, reliability, etc. In making these decisions, it is helpful for the engineer to know
the relative  costs of various plant components. He can then direct his cost reduction efforts
to the more expensive items before considering the  less expensive  ones.

The distribution of capital costs among the main operating segments of a  typical plant are
given in  Table 2-1. Based upon a plant with 2-stage  pressure downflow  contactors(l), this
analysis divides the total installed  cost of the  plant among three operating functions. All
capital cost items in the design and  construction of the plant (including engineering) are
distributed among these functions.

The carbon contacting function includes costs for carbon inventory, contacting vessels and
carbon storage facilities. The relative  cost of the carbon inventory itself is, however, shown
separately.  The  carbon regeneration sector covers the regeneration  furnace, fans,  air
pollution control, and  materials handling  (including dewatering) at  the  furnace. The
pumping function includes pipe, pumps and intermediate tanks. General materials such as
foundations, structural  steel, paint,  instruments and  building are distributed proportionally
over the three functional areas. The costs for design, purchase,  fabrication, shipment, and
field construction for the complete plant are included in the appropriate categories.

                                       Table 2-1
           BREAKDOWN OF CAPITAL COSTS IN THE  GRANULAR CARBON PROCESS

                 Function                                     % of Capital Cost
          Carbon contacting                                          61
            (Carbon inventory 20)
            (Carbon contactors and auxiliary equipment 41)

          Carbon regeneration                                        12

          Pumps                                                    27
          Total Plant Cost                                            100%

                                         2-4

-------
The  above cost distribution does not include any pretreatment facilities or equalization
basins. It applies particularly to plants whose capacity is on the order of 10 million gallons
per day. For smaller plants, the relative cost of the regeneration section will tend to rise.

Operating costs may be divided into a number of categories, including carbon replacement,
power, fuel, labor, backwash water, maintenance, amortization, bond interest, etc.

Typical operating cost distributions are shown in Table 2-2.
                                      Table 2-2

         BREAKDOWN OF OPERATING COSTS IN THE GRANULAR CARBON PROCESS

                     Cost Component               % of Operating Cost

                  Carbon replacement                     20

                  Operating labor                         12

                  Electric power                          12

                  Fuel                                     2

                  Backwash water                          4

                  Maintenance                            10

                  Amortization (20 years, 4%)              40

                  Total                                  100%
This situation is based upon the same type of plant as was used in the previous analysis of
capital costs(l,2,3,4). No provision  has been made  for general overhead, bond interest,
taxes, and  insurance. The item shown for amortization can, of course, be changed to suit
other depreciation bases as desired.

The backwash  water  cost  shown presumes  the use  of carbon effluent  for this  purpose.
However, the influent to  the carbon process may be suitable for use as backwash water in
many instances, e.g. when carbon is used as a tertiary process, or when the influent is
well-clarified during pretreatment. The cost of using carbon effluent for backwash purposes
must be recognized where this practice occurs.

An examination  of the capital cost  distribution clearly shows  the great importance of
carbon inventory in determining total plant cost. Changes in  the amount of the carbon
inventory  will directly affect not only the inventory cost, but also change the size, and
therefore cost, of the contact vessels  and their auxiliaries. On the other hand, the total cost
is not very sensitive to changes in the cost of the regeneration section.

The operating cost tabulation shows that carbon treatment is a heavily capitalized process,

                                        2-5

-------
as indicated by the relatively large burden for amortization. The capital cost study showed
that some 61% of the capital load is due to carbon contacting. Designers should direct their
efforts particularly to this aspect of the plant.

2.5 Carbon Inventory

The "total" carbon inventory refers to the total amount of carbon actually at the plant site
at any given time and is the sum of the "active" carbon and "idle" carbon. The  active
carbon is the amount of  carbon that is actually engaged in the wastewater  treatment
process.  "Idle" carbon is that  portion  of the total carbon that  must be available in  the
system to ensure  continuity of operations at the treatment plant.  The minimum amount of
idle  carbon required for regeneration is  equal to that  capacity required for  one spare
contactor. An additional amount should be in storage for make-up to replace losses incurred
during regeneration and handling. The  amount of carbon held up irj the regneration furnace
itself is usually small, in some cases less  than  1% of the total carbon inventory.

To effect  a  smooth  and  efficient  operation during the  regeneration sequence, it is
customary  to  provide spare vessels, at least one of which is filled with carbon.  When  one
vessel is  taken offstream for regeneration,  a spare vessel (already filled with  carbon) is
inserted in  its place preventing  interruption  of service. The rearrangement of contactors in
series is accomplished by installation of appropriate piping and valve arrangements so that
any contactor can be taken out of service and any contactor can be used at the head  of the
series (See Section 5.9).

Investigations  to determine the optimum amount of idle carbon have shown that minimum
process costs result from systems in which 10% to 20% of total carbon inventory is "idle"
carbon(5).  Reduction in idle carbon usually is reflected in an increase in the number of
onstream contactors. However,  as additional contactors and associated piping arrangements
are introduced to accommodate reductions in idle carbon beyond the optimum  noted, the
decrease in carbon investment is negated by the increase in contactor and piping costs.

2.6 An Additional Note on Carbon Regeneration

Since the relative capital cost of the regeneration portion  of the plant rises sharply for the
very small plant sizes (perhaps  less than 1  MGD), the cost of the entire process may tend to
become prohibitive. Two alternatives present themselves  here. Either regeneration can be
completely  eliminated and  the spent carbon discarded (a pilot  evaluation and economic
analysis could establish this to be feasible), or regeneration services could be purchased from
an outside  agency. The latter alternative might well be attractive  for larger plants too. The
carbon regeneration service need not be purchased from a commercial agency, but could be
obtained by having  several  adjacent plants join in a regional cooperative venture for the
purpose  of sharing a regeneration furnace. Obviously,  the  saving in  capital cost  for
regeneration equipment  at  the individual plants  must be  balanced  against the costs of
hauling spent and regenerated carbon to and  from  the regional facility.
                                         2-6

-------
                                         References

1. "Appraisal of Granular  Carbon Contacting: Phase Three: Engineering Design and Cost Estimate  of
   Granular Carbon Tertiary Waste Water Treatment Plant," Report No. TWRC-12, U. S. Department  of
   the Interior, 17-19, May  1969.
2. Mantell, C. L., "Carbon and Graphite Handbook," John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 206-207, 1969.

3. Gulp, R. L. and Gulp, G. L., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment,"  Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
   175-176,1971.

4. English, J. N. et  al., "Removal of Organics  from Wastewater by Activated  Carbon,"  Water-1970,
   Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, 67, 153, 1970.

5. "Appraisal of Granular Carbon Contacting: Phase two: Economic Effect of Design Variables," Report
   No. TWRC-11, U. S. Department of the Interior, 68, May 1969.
                                            2-7

-------
                                     CHAPTER 3

                             PROCESS CONFIGURATIONS

3.1 Introduction

Carbon treatment  of wastewater has been demonstrated for both municipal and industrial
applications using several different process configurations. The options that are available to
the design  engineer include a choice between upflow and downflow, pressurized flow and
gravity  flow,  packed beds and  expanded  beds, and series and  parallel  arrangements.
Countercurrent flow, the optimum system for adsorption, may be closely approximated by
a pulsed bed or by series arrangements in which contactors are  progressively moved up in
sequence as leading contactors are exhausted and removed from service.

The  selection of the configuration for the final plant design should be confirmed by pilot
plant testing under conditions closely simulating those of full scale (see Chapter 7).

3.2 Downflow

Downflow  carbon beds  accomplish  both adsorption and filtration  of wastewater. Plants
using this mode of operation will utilize hydraulic  loadings of  2 to  10 gpm/sq ft.  At the
lower flow rate, suspended  solids contained in the wastewater afeTTormaHy collected on the
surface of  the bed. At higher flow rates, some of the suspended  solids may penetrate  to.
some distance into the bed.

Provision must be made  to periodically backwash downflow beds to relieve the pressure
drop  associated with the  plugging by  the  suspended solids.  Continued operation of a
downflow bed for several days without backwash may compact or foul the bed sufficiently
to make it more  difficult  to expand  the bed during backwash  without the use of an
excessive quantity of backwash water, i.e., more than 5% of the product water.

In addition, biological growth taking place on the surface of carbon  granules tends  to clog
the bed. Partial removal of these growths and control of their activity can be maintained by
periodic backwashing, perhaps more frequently than once per day. Complete removal of the
biological organisms cannot be accomplished by backwashing.

Assurance that aerobic conditions exist is possible through maintaining dissolved oxygen in
the feed and in the backwash  water.  If anaerobic  conditions develop,  sulfides may be
generated in the column and may appear in the effluent.

If the suspended solids concentration in the influent to the carbon beds is sufficiently great,
the cost of backwashing must be weighed against the cost of providing a pretreatment step.

3.3 Upflow

Carbon beds operating with the wastewater passing upward through the carbon can assume
three different modes. At low hydraulic loadings, less than 2 gpm/sq  ft, the bed of  carbon
will remain substantially packed at the bottom of the column. At higher hydraulic loadings,
4—7  gpm/sq ft, the bed will become partially expanded. At much higher rates, the  carbon
will  be lifted  and packed  against the  top of  the column.  In the event that little or no
freeboard is available, the bed will operate as a packed bed at any  velocity.

                                        3-1

-------
When the upflow carbon column is operated as a packed bed, suspended solids present in
the wastewater will be  collected  on the bottom of the bed.  Unless  preliminary solids
removal processes are employed, backwashing of the solids from the bottom of the bed may
pose a considerable problem, so these systems are not recommended.

Operating as a partially expanded bed, the carbon will not act as a filter. Suspended solids
will pass into the effluent largely undiminished.

In the "pulsed bed" system, wastewater is passed upflow through the bed. Periodically, a
column is briefly removed from service, a portion of the carbon in the bottom of the bed is
withdrawn, and a fresh equal charge of carbon  is forced into the top of the bed. As noted
previously, this concept is one way of approximating true countercurrent operation.

3.4 Gravity and Pressurized Flow

The  main advantage of a gravity flow system, which may be operated either downflow or
upflow, is the elimination of  large pumps  and their associated operating costs, and the
reduction of costs for non-pressurized vessels. However, due to the limited available head, it
is  usually necessary to  remove suspended solids by pretreatment (e.g. through  chemical
clarification or  filtration) so  that  headless and thus  backwash  requirements are  not
excessive.

Operating a gravity flow system upflow as  a partially expanded bed (rather than packed
bed) is more attractive in that the pressure drop across the bed will remain constant. Thus
this  system  can  provide  sustained operation over  considerable  periods of  time. A
supplementary solids removal step still may be necessary as either pre- or post-treatment.

Pressurized flow offers the advantages of being able to operate a carbon bed at a higher flow
rate  and  over  a  greater  range  of pressure build up before  backwashing is necessary. This
permits the height of carbon contacting vessels  to be limited to  the carbon bed depth plus
50% for expansion during backwash.

In summary,  the pressurized  flow,  at additional  operating and investment costs, offers
guaranteed flexibility in overcoming increasing  pressure drops through packed beds. On the
other hand, the gravity  flow systems, although not fully  evaluated at  this time, offer
considerable cost savings.

3.5 Single or Multi-Stage

The  carbon contacting  beds may be  arranged in either single stage or multi-stage. The
inclusion of adequate piping and valving in the  design will permit switching from one mode
of operation to the  other if changes in the treatment objective are anticipated. The selection
of the optimum design  should be  based on  making maximum use of  the carbon  and
providing the least expensive system that will yield the desired degree of treatment.

The  series or multi-stage  system will provide a higher degree of treatment and maximum use
of carbon when greater  removal of organics is required, above 90%  removal of the  total
plant treatment system.  Two previous economic studies (1,2) recommend that a two-stage
series is the least expensive design in terms of total operating cost. If the design objective is
less stringent,  then a number of single stage  parallel contactors, staggered in their status of
operation or degree of  exhaustion, can  produce  an acceptable product  by blending of
individual effluents.
                                        3-2

-------
3.6 Carbon Regeneration Systems

The designer has few options available to him in the area of regeneration techniques and
devices, and little in the way of design work is  required. The most usual equipment is a
multiple hearth furnace, which is  adequate in most cases. For very small  plants, however,
capital cost may become prohibitive for thermal regeneration.Only two choices may be open to
the designer for the case of small plants: he may consider the possibility of using the carbon
only  once  and then discarding it rather  than  regenerating it, or he  may  consider the
construction of a furnace which can be shared with another plant in the immediate area. See
Section 5.2 for details on equipment and Appendix B for Furnace Specifications.

3.7 Carbon Transport Systems

3.7.1 Description

There are three conceptual transport systems for  conveying granular activated carbon from
the contacting beds to the regeneration furnace and returning it. In all instances, the carbon is
transported as a carbon slurry through pipelines in accordance with the design principles to
be discussed in Section  5.3, Carbon Transport. Carbon can be removed from contactors and
conveyed through a pipe using pumps directly or through pump-eductor systems, as shown
in Figures 3-1 and 3-2.

In Figure 3-1, the carbon is withdrawn from  the bottom of a flooded contacting vessel by
gravity.  Maintaining  the  carbon  in a  fully inundated condition  acts  as  a lubricant
contributing to the fluidity of the carbon when it  is withdrawn. This flow of carbon may be
controlled by use of a rotary valve or by some type of diaphragm valve. The carbon enters
the top of the eductor,  mixes with the water as it is  forced  into the flowing stream, and is
conveyed as a slurry to the drain bin.

The carbon after being drained  for approximately four hours will have a moisture content
on  the order of 40%—50%. It may be discharged  into a  dewatering screw or a simple screw
conveyor as shown. The conveyor, sometimes called  a  classifier, can serve two functions,
that of further dewatering the carbon (not lower  than the 40%) and that of controlling and
conveying the rate of carbon feed to the regeneration furnace.

After passing through the regeneration furnace, the carbon is discharged into a quench tank
and hydraulically transported to the regenerated  carbon storage tank. The carbon is stored
here  until  another contactor  is  emptied of spent  carbon, then it  is  withdrawn  and
transported to the waiting vessel.

Figure 3-2 is a similar system which utilizes a flooded  storage  tank for the spent carbon.
When the  spent  carbon is withdrawn from  the  storage  tank, it  must be passed over a
dewatering  screen or  be  discharged into the  dewatering  screw  conveyor  for  further
movement to the regeneration furnace.

Both the spent carbon storage tank and the regenerated carbon  storage tank are eliminated
in the system shown in  Figure 3-3.  Again the carbon must be dewatered by either a screen
or a dewatering screw before entering the furnace.  Upon the discharge from the furnace, the
regenerated carbon is transported directly to a spare contacting vessel. In this system, a total
of two  spare  contactors is actually required, one receiving regenerated carbon and  one
discharging spent carbon.

                                         3-3

-------
3.7.2 Comparison of System Requirements

In the first  two cases, spent carbon is literally  dumped from the contacting vessel into a
temporary storage tank. This requires that the carbon slurry transport pipelines be of large
diameter. In addition, the cost of one or more carbon storage tanks may be more than offset
by the cost savings in reducing the number of spare contacting vessels required.

This cost tradeoff would favor  carbon  storage tanks over spare contacting vessels  for
pressurized  systems, but  it may  be less  favorable towards storage  tanks in gravity flow
systems, where contactors are less  costly than in pressurized systems.

Whenever carbon is drained,  it loses the  aforementioned fluidity  characteristics and may
pose a potential problem in being readily removed from the elevated drain bin. The bridging
of the carbon across the outlet from the hoppered bin may be prevented by proper design of
the  outlet, thus assuring continuous flow to the screw  conveyor. In contrast, the flooded
storage tank will have no  such bridging problems. It will,  however, deliver a carbon to  the
regeneration furnace with a 5% to  10% higher moisture content.

Control of the carbon feed to the furnace in Figures 3-1 and 3-2 is effected at the exit from
the  spent carbon storage  tank  or drain bin. Control of the carbon in the system without
storage tanks,  shown in Figure  3-3, is maintained by a  rotary valve or a similar volumetric
control valve  at the  point of  discharge  from the  contacting vessel itself.  Consequently,
carbon transport from a  spent  carbon  bed and to a spare  carbon bed are  carried  on
simultaneously while regeneration is  taking place.  This means that  two spare vessels  are
necessary  in the system. This slower mass flow rate of carbon through the carbon slurry
pipelines permits the use of smaller size pipe for transporting the abrasive materials.
                                         3-4

-------
                              CONTACTOR
                                                     EXHAUST
                                                       GASES
                    EDUCTOR
                  SCREW  CONVEYOR
                                REGENERATION
                                   FURNACE
 REGENERATED
CARBON SLURRY
     TANK
  TO  CONTACTOR
QUENCH TANK
                                                       FUEL
            FIGURE 3-1-REGENERATION SYSTEM WITH DRAIN BIN

                             3-5

-------
                                                      EXHAUST
                                                       GASES
                                           DEWATERING
                                             SCREW
                                            CONVEYOR
EDUCTOR
 WATER

REGENERATION
  FURNACE
 REGENERATED
CARBON SLURRY
     TANK
  TO  CONTACTOR
          QUENCH TANK
                       FUEL
   FIGURE 3-2-REGENERATION SYSTEM WITH STORAGE TANK
                      3-6

-------
                                           EXHAUST
                                            GASES
              CONTACTOR
                             DEWATERING
                               SCREW
                              CONVEYOR
   EDUCTOR
REGENERATION
  FURNACE
            TO  CONTACTOR
                                QUENC.H TANK
                                            FUEL
FIGURE 3-3-REGENERATION SYSTEM WITHOUT STORAGE TANK
                     3-7

-------
                                         References

1.  "Appraisal of Granular Carbon Contacting: Phase Two: Economic Effect of Design Variables," Report
   No. TWRC-11, U. S. Department of the Interior, May 1969.

2.  Allen, J. B. et al., "Use of Granular  Regenerable Carbon for Treatment of Secondary Effluent-Engi-
   neering Design and  Economic  Evaluation," Unpublished  report from  Pittsburgh  Activated Carbon
   Company to USPHS, October 1,1964.
                                             3-8

-------
                                     CHAPTER 4

                            PROCESS DESIGN PARAMETERS

4.1 Carbon Properties

4.1.1 Raw Materials( 1,2)

The most important design parameters for the carbon adsorption process obviously relate to
the properties  of the  carbon itself. Before discussing these properties, it is necessary to
consider what activated carbon is and how it is manufactured. Many of the properties of
activated carbon are directly attributable to its origin and processing.

A wide variety  of materials can be converted into activated adsorbents. These raw materials
are all somewhat porous materials of carbonaceous origin. Examples include wood charcoal,
coal, peat, lignite, bagasse, sawdust,  cocoanut shells, bone, or petroleum residues. The better
grades of carbon originate from coal, lignite, nutshells, and petroleum residues. Cheap solid
waste  materials such as  pyrolyzed garbage have also been proposed for processing  into
activated adsorbents; however, these have not yet been tested very extensively. Cheaper raw
materials of course tend to produce cheaper adsorbents; however, the costs of activation and
aggregation into granules are such that the cost of granular  carbon probably cannot be
reduced significantly below its current level of 24-30 cents per pound. This does not apply
so strictly to powdered carbon, which now costs 8-10 cents per pound.

4.1.2 The Activation Process( 1,2)

The  bulk of  current  domestic production of activated  carbon is achieved by a  high
temperature steam activation process. The carbonaceous material fed to  the activation
process has already been charred.  The  steam activation process  is usually  carried  out at
temperatures of 750-950°C in an oxygen-depleted atmosphere. The reaction between steam
and carbon is described by the equation

                            C + H2O = H2 +CO-31 kcal.

The  reaction may be promoted by any of several dehydrating agents such as zinc chloride or
phosphoric acid. An alternate activation scheme used more in  Europe involves a lower
temperature  process  at  400-600°C. This "chemical"  activation procedure  utilizes  the
dehydrating agents without benefit of steam or other oxidizing gases. The choice of method
may be related  to  the  raw  material used. The production of an activated carbon of
consistent  quality  and  predictable  properties requires  a closely  controlled activation
procedure. The actual  activation procedures in commercial use are much more complicated
and are proprietary.

Once activated, the product is crushed or aggregated, graded, and washed with acid and  then
with water before being packaged. A variety of  mesh sizes are available commercially. A
photomicrograph of a carbon granule is shown in Figure 4-1.

The  somewhat  porous structure of  the raw material is converted into the highly developed
porous structure typical  of activated carbon by the selective burning of the carbonaceous
material. The resulting structure  consists of a submicroscopic network of irregular pores
within  a graphitic crystalline matrix(l,3,4). The pore sizes cover a wide range from the

                                         4-1

-------
FIGURE 4-1-PHOTOMICROGRAPH OF CARBON GRANULES
         (Photo courtesy of Calgon Corporation)
                     4-2

-------
finest capillaries (less than 10 angstroms) to macropores (well over 1000 angstroms).

The  highly adsorptive  character  of activated carbon is  a direct result  of this porous
structure, which  provides enormous surface area for adsorption. Adsorption of standard
substances such as nitrogen gas or iodine solution can be used to demonstrate the existence
of the porous structure, and also permit measurement of the pore diameters and surface
areas. Intrusion of mercury and helium  into the pores can be used  to measure  the pore
volume.  The pore structure will be considered further in connection with adsorption in
Section 4.2.

4.1.3 Carbon Properties Relating to Its Use in Column Operations

Table 4-1 lists a number of physical properties  of activated carbon which relate both to its
adsorptive character and to its use in  column operation. The data for these commercially
available carbons is  drawn  largely from  the manufacturers'  sales  brochures. The list of
carbons  is of course not all inclusive  and is merely  intended to illustrate some physical
properties and specifications.

Particle size is expressed by several different  parameters. It is measured by a  sieve analysis in
which  a known sample  of the granular carbon is passed through a succession of decreasing
sieve sizes. The amounts of carbon retained on each sieve are weighed and the cumulative
weight  passed  by a given  sieve  is plotted against  the mesh size  of that sieve  on a
semilogarithmic plot. Reading from such a plot, the sieve size which passes 10 percent of the
total sample weight  is the effective size. The 60 percent-passing sieve size divided by the
effective  size gives  the  uniformity coefficient.  The 50  percent-passing  sieve size is
approximately the mean particle diameter, although this parameter can be obtained in other
ways. The sieve size specifications which characterize the carbon are the U.S. Standard Sieve
Series mesh numbers, e.g., 8x30, 12x40. The percentages of the sieved  sample weight falling
outside the ranges 8x30 or 12x40 are also shown in the Table.

The  density of the carbon can be expressed  in several different ways. The apparent density
(see  the Table) is the weight of carbon per unit volume which can be packed into an empty
column.  This can also be given in terms of a wetted, backwashed, and drained column. The
real  density is  nothing  more than the specific  gravity of the  carbon  granule. The particle
density (also shown) is the weight of carbon per unit volume of granule, including pore
volume. The pore volume is also given.

Another physical parameter which pertains  to carbon performance in column operation is
the abrasion number, which is a measure of hardness (see Chapter 7 and the Glossary). The
ash content represents inorganic residue remaining after activation.

4.2 Adsorption

4.2.1 Carbon Properties Relating to Adsorption(2,3,4)

As noted above,  the surface areas available for adsorption  in the porous structure of the
activated  carbon  may be measured by several methods. The weights  of different standard
substances such as nitrogen gas, iodine, molasses, phenol, or methylene blue can be used to
measure  the surface  areas in certain fractions or all of the pores. Nitrogen adsorption by the
Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) method is a measure  of the total surface area of a carbon
granule.  Table  4-1  shows the enormous area of an activated  carbon granule: over 1000

                                        4-3
   441-505 O - 71 - 3

-------
                                                       TABLE 4-1

                            SPECIFICATIONS OF SEVERAL COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE CARBONS
Physical Properties
Surface Area, m^/g (BET)
Apparent Density, g/cc
Density, backwashed & drained, Ib/cu ft
Real Density, g/cc
Particle Density, g/cc
Effective Size
Uniformity Coefficient
Pore Volume, cc/g
Mean Particle Diameter, mm

Specifications
Sieve Size (U.S.Std.Series)
  Larger than No. 8-Max. %
  Larger than No. 12-Max. %
  Smaller than No. 30-Max. %
  Smaller than No. 40-Max. %
Iodine No.
Abrasion No., minimum
Ash, %
Moisture  as packed, Max. %
  *12x30 (no further details given)
  Definitions of these and other terms are given in appendix A.
Atlas

Darco
600-650
0.38
24
—
0.67
—
—
0.98
1.05
Calgon
Filtrasorb
300
950-1050
0.48
26
2.1
1.3-1.4
0.8-0.9
1.9 or less
0.85
1.5-1.7
Calgon
Filtrasorb
400
1000-1200
0.44
25
2.1
1.3-1.4
0.55-0.65
1 .9 or less
0.94
0.9-1.1
Westvaco:

8x10
850
—
30
—
1.4
0.90
1.8
—
—

12x40
850
—
30
—
1.4
0.65
1.6
—
—
Witco

517
1050
0.48
30
	
0.92
—
	
0.60
	
  5
650
900
 70
   5
1000
  75
 8.5
   2
   1

850
 70
  7
  2
   1
850
 70
  7
  2
                                                                     85
                                                                     0.5

-------
square meters per gram. The other standard  adsorbates are used to measure surface areas
associated  with pores  of given size. Iodine  numbers  are commonly used to measure
regeneration efficiency since they are easier to run than BET tests. Iodine is adsorbed within
relatively small pores and is thus a rough measure of total surface area. The iodine number
coincidentally approximates the square meters per gram number from the BET test.

The  vast majority of the surface  area of an  activated carbon granule is contained in the
internal porous structure. This is true for all but the very smallest particle sizes. The size of
the particle, therefore, has relatively little effect on the surface area.

The  distribution of pore sizes can also affect adsorption.  For example larger molecules can
only penetrate into the largest pores. Smaller molecules can penetrate into smaller pores.
Carbons with different pore size distributions can  perform quite differently in adsorption
tests depending on the size of the molecules to be adsorbed.

4.2.2 The Nature of Adsorption(2,5,6)

The  adsorption process is  the subject of extensive literature and a detailed  discussion of
it  is not necessary here. It  is  sufficient to  make a few remarks concerning the  nature
of the adsorption process and its application through activated carbon.

Adsorption is a process in which molecular or ionic species are accumulated on a surface and
are thereafter  bound to that surface  by forces  of molecular  attraction. The area  and
properties  of that  surface govern the  process  of  adsorption. For a given adsorbent, the
adsorptive  capacity is roughly proportional to the surface area available. The highly porous
structure of activated carbon permits it to adsorb relatively large quantities of material per
unit weight of carbon.

4.2.3 Adsorption Capacity

In an ideal situation, the adsorption capacity of activated carbon can be considered to be
exhausted  when removal of dissolved organics from the  liquid phase ceases. At this point,
the  adsorbed molecules  are  in equilibrium  with  those in solution.  In  practice such a
definition of the adsorption capacity on the basis of exhaustion is not so straightforward.

Adsorption of organics from municipal wastewater differs from adsorption from ideal
solutions in two major  respects. First, wastewater contains a broad spectrum of molecular
weights of dissolved  organics, so  gross organic removal  cannot be predicted  on  purely
theoretical grounds.  Second,  wastewater  is  a biological  fluid. Adsorbed  organics are
degraded through biological activity which occurs on  the carbon granule.  This process
effectively  increases  the  adsorption  capacity over  what would  be  expected  in  a
non-biological fluid. These non-ideal characteristics of adsorption from wastewater  can be
illustrated  by  reference  to  Figures  4-2 and 4-3. Figure 4-2 shows  a  typical COD
breakthrough curve in a carbon column in which the exhaustion of the column's adsorption
capacity is well defined. Figure 4-3 shows a similar breakthrough curve from the EPA Pilot
Plant at Pomona in which  the exhaustion point is difficult  to determine. It must be
concluded  that the proper definition of exhaustion  should be set arbitrarily by whatever
level of effluent quality is considered unacceptable.

The  actual measurement (and prediction) of adsorption capacity is also complicated by the
situation prevailing in  column operation. In  batch operations,  wastewater  adsorption

                                         4-5

-------
                          DISSOLVED   COD (mg/l)
ro 4>>
O O
1 1
i
O) 00 O fo * 01 00
o o o o o o o
1 1 1 1 1 1

C1
DO
m
ro
I
o
O
00
33
m
CD
m
o

o
m
T3
m
CO
o
m

-------
                                           DISSOLVED  COD (mg/l)
                                                ro
                                                O
Ol
o
c:
30
m
o
o
o

00
3D
m
                 CD
                 m
                 o
                 o
                 m
rs
c
30
<
m
V)
                     ro
                     01
                     01
                     o
                                                                                   50 3
                                                                                   m o

-------
isotherms can give well defined values for  capacity. However,  these values cannot be
extrapolated to column operations. For tertiary treatment applications, reported values of
adsorption capacity have covered the range 0.25-0.87 pounds of COD removed per pound of
carbon(7). However, there  is some evidence (not yet published) to suggest that secondary
treatment applications of activated carbon produce COD loadings well in excess of 1.0
pound per pound of carbon(8). The contribution of biological treatment is responsible for
these .apparent high adsorption capacities. For this reason, the term "removal capacity" is
probably preferable to adsorption capacity.

Carbon usually  loses some adsorptive capacity  upon regeneration. Combustion of the
adsorbed organics  is never  really complete. Some  ash accumulates in the carbon pores to
obscure them and  some carbon is burned up with the adsorbate, thereby decreasing carbon
surface area. The net losses have been measured by English, et al(9), for the Pomona pilot
plant  in  the  tertiary  treatment application.  In  a four-stage  system,  percent removal of
dissolved  COD  in the lead contactor declined  from 89 percent to  71 percent  in two
complete regeneration cycles, but thereafter remained virtually constant at 70 percent. This
included the effect of makeup carbon.  In a single stage system, the corresponding loss was
from 53 percent  to 47 percent.

4.3 Contact Time

The most important parameter affecting adsorption removal in columns is the contact time.
The minimum contact time required  for adsorption of wastewater organics  by  activated
carbon depends  on a variety of factors. These factors include: affinity of the  carbon for a
particular solute,  degree of ionization, competition among  solutes  for adsorption sites,
molecular sizes present in solution, surface area of the carbon,  and  distribution of pore sizes
in the carbon. The required contact time must in actual practice be determined empirically
in column tests.

In plotting organic removal versus contact time (synonymous  with depth of carbon in this
case)  for the results obtained from a column  test,  the curve will be seen to break at some
depth  of carbon and remain relatively flat thereafter. Most of the adsorption taking place in
the column occurs within this sharply defined zone, and  little further organic  removal may
be obtained by increasing the contact time beyond this point. Figures 4-1 and 4-2 show how
this zone changes with time in ideal and actual pilot column situations.

The contact time selected as a design value should be consistent with the precise degree of
organic removal required. It should be conservatively in  excess of the contact time at the
break  point on the curve, perhaps by a factor  of about 2. The  plant designs cited in Chapter
6 display a range of contact times from 15 to 40 minutes (empty bed).

4.4 Hydraulic Loading

Hydraulic loading is  the flow through the column per  unit cross-sectional  area (usually
gallons per minute per square  foot).  Hydraulic loading per se seems to have no effect on
adsorption in the  range 2 to 10 gpm/sq ft(7).  Of course, in given column operation, changes
in hydraulic loading which cause significant changes in contact time also affect the net COD
removal in the column (see also Section 2.1).

Hydraulic loading  is an important design parameter for reasons other than adsorption. The
buildup of headless in a downflow column is  directly related to hydraulic loading, as shown

                                         4-8

-------
               DOWNFLOW OPERATION -
                          TAP WATER
           2          4      6    8  10
      HYDRAULIC LOADING (gpm/sqft)
FIGURE 4-4-PRESSURE DROP VS HYDRAULIC LOADING

                  4-9

-------
in Figure 4-4. These data are drawn from manufacturers' brochures and represent operation
with tap water. The headless for a given hydraulic loading with a wastewater feed must be
determined by pilot testing.

Since headloss development is such an important consideration in the design of a  carbon
bed, hydraulic loading cannot be discussed in isolation from several other design factors. If
an excessive rate of headloss development (due to a high hydraulic loading) is anticipated,
an upflow bed should be given consideration. The choice  of gravity versus pressurized flow
may also be determined by the anticipated rate of headloss development. Higher hydraulic
loadings are possible  only in pressurized systems. Gravity  flow is considered to be feasible
only up to an hydraulic loading of about 4 gpm/sq ft.

4.5 Particle Size of Carbon

Particle size may have some indirect effect on adsorption capacity. The surface areas found
on  and in particles of various sizes may be slightly different, but this is not likely to be
significant for the range of particle sizes employed for granular carbon (4 to 50 mesh). The
distribution of pore sizes in various particle sizes of carbon may be different. The pore size
distribution has an effect on adsorption capacity and rate, since the penetration of adsorbate
molecules into the porous carbon structure is governed partially by the respective sizes of
molecule and  pore (see above Sections 4.1.2 and 4.2.1). The effect on adsorption  usually
attributed to carbon particle size may in fact be due to pore size distribution.

In selecting a  particle size for use in  pilot or full scale application,  the headloss incurred
through the bed is of primary importance. Therefore, the particle size cannot be discussed in
isolation from flow configuration (upflow versus downflow), hydraulic loading, and gravity
of pressurized  flow (see Chapter 3).
                                              References

1. Smisek, M. and  Cerny, S.,  "Active Carbon:  Manufacture, Properties, and Applications," Elsevier
   Publishing Co., 1970.

2. Hassler, J. W., "Activated Carbon," Chemical Publishing Co., 1963.

3. "Basic Concepts of Adsorption on Activated Carbon," Calgon Corporation.

4. "A Symposium on Activated Carbon," Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc., 1968.

5. DeBoer, J. H., "The Dynamic Character of Adsorption," Oxford University Press, 1968.

6. Mantell, C. L., "Adsorption," McGraw-Hill Book Co., 1945.

7. "Appraisal of Granular Carbon Contacting: Phase One: Evaluation of Literature," Report No. TWRC-11,
   U.S. Department of the Interior, May 1969.

8. Personal communication, W. Schwartz of EPA.

9. English, J.  N. et al., "Removal of Organics from Wastewater by Activated Carbon," (Water-1970),
   Chemical Engineering Symposium Series, 67, 147-153, 1970.

                                          4-10

-------
                                     CHAPTER 5

                                 EQUIPMENT DESIGN

5.1 Contactors

The size, number, shape and configuration of vessels to contain carbon are selected on the
basis of  physical  capacity, hydraulic loading,  contact  time,  feed characteristics, pre-
treatment, desired product quality, mode of operation and relative economics.

Economic  analysis has  shown that there is no apparent advantage of shop-fabricated over
field-erected  vessels.  A  maximum  diameter of  13 feet  is  imposed  by transportation
clearances  for shop fabricated vessels. The  apparent savings of larger diameter vessels which
require less inter-vessel  piping and valving, may be offset by the additional "idle"  carbon
required to fill a larger spare contacting vessel.

The desired  product quality will establish the  required  contact  time and  hence  the
approximate  total carbon volume which actively contacts  the wastewater. The hydraulic
loading selected will fix  the total cross-sectional area and total carbon bed depth.

The designer has the option of converting the total carbon bed depth into one or more bed
depths in  series and the overall cross-section of the carbon bed into several beds in parallel.

The height of each vessel must be sufficient to permit expansion  of the carbon bed during
backwash in a downflow bed, or to allow proper expansion of an upflow bed during service.
The vessel should be designed to permit up to 50% expansion during backwash  to assure
that accumulated suspended solids can be  disengaged from the surface of the carbon
particles.

The vessels should be arranged with inlets and outlets oriented  to accommodate internal
distributors and  external piping  systems.  Although conical bottoms  in  vessels  facilitate
removal of carbon by slurry discharge, flat or dish-shaped bottoms provide more efficient
distribution during service and backwash operation.

If nozzles  are used as the means of collecting the wastewater after it passes through the
carbon bed, they should be screened so  as to retain carbon in  the 60 to 80 mesh range.

When flat porous bottoms are used, an arrangement of funnels through the bottom may be
employed to  remove carbon from the vessel for regeneration. Filter bottom designs used in
rapid sand filters should  be considered for use in carbon contactors.

Special  screens and, on  occasion, dual screens have been utilized in  lieu of the porous or
perforated  filter bottom. These screens should be designed to physically support the carbon
during service operation, and to allow maximum  backwash velocity, thus enhancing  the
cleansing capability of the system.

Figures  5-1 through 5-4  depict   the contacting vessels  used or designed for the granular
carbon wastewater treatment plants at Pomona(l), Lake  Tahoe(2), Colorado Springs(3) and
Rocky River(4). Of primary interest is  the  design of the bed inlet and outlet to assure ease
of carbon removal and proper water distribution. These two objectives present conflicting
design requirements, for  the best design  for each cannot be achieved simultaneously.

                                         5-1

-------
The Pomona contactor (Fig. 5-1) with a 1.5 bed depth to diameter ratio (L/D) offers good
distribution of wastewater across the bed during service operation. The Neva-Clog-Screen at
the base retains the carbon in the bed and provides a perforated surface through which the
wastewater passes before entering  the  underdrain systems. During  backwash  the Neva-
Clog-Screen provides a distribution of the wastewater across the bottom of the bed.

This screen system, or a perforated plate, or any other bottom support system must also be
designed  to distribute the  backwash  water  at the  maximum  anticipated rate and  to
withstand the associated uplift force.  The maximum backwash velocity  at Pomona, 12
gpm/sq  ft, although adequate for expanding  16 x 40 mesh carbon, is not sufficient to
provide 50% expansion of 8 x 30 mesh carbon. Even if backwash pumps were sized to force
an upward flow of 20 gpm/sq ft through the carbon beds, the excessive pressure drop across
the screens or plates might force them to warp or to  be dislodged.  Special  consideration is
required  to assure that these types of bottom support systems can hydraulically handle
maximum flows in both directions and are adequately held in place.

Removal of the major part of the carbon from the carbon bed is facilitated by keeping the
bed flooded during withdrawal operations. The removal of the last stump or heel of carbon
in the  farthest  corner  of the bed from  the  withdrawal  port  may  be difficult. A
supplementary backwash (upflow) on the order of 3 to 6 gpm/sq ft or nozzles in the side of
the column just above the underdrain system may aid in flushing this last quantity of carbon
from the beds.

The  Tahoe design (Fig.  5-2) is applicable to either  upflow or downflow  operation. The
conical bottom offers the greatest ease  of removing spent carbon  from the bed at a possible
sacrifice of initial distribution of water across the bed during normal  operation.

The angle of repose of granular activated carbon immersed in water is sufficiently steep that
conical bottomed  vessels must be designed with minimum bottom slopes of 45  degrees.
Although  the carbon will flow  when completely inundated, the  use of shallower angles is
not recommended.

The  Colorado Springs  contactor (Fig. 5-3) and the Rocky River contactor (Fig. 5-4) both
offer a flat bottom support for the carbon. Funnel shaped ports through  the support are
provided for carbon removal. The effectiveness of this  type of system in withdrawing carbon
has not been proven in actual operation at this time.

The  actual bottom support system utilized is different for the two contactors. The Colorado
Springs  contactor  (Fig. 5-3) employs a perforated stainless steel plate into which Eimco's
Flexkleen nozzles are inserted for backwash control and distribution. In contrast,  the Rocky
River contactor (Fig. 5-4) employs a porous tile filter bottom covered with several inches of
graded gravel and sand.

Gravity  flow contactors are designed  similarly  to concrete rapid sand filters. A typical
gravity filter design is  shown in Figure 5-5. The  requirements  to be satisfied in carbon
contacting are  an adequate side wall  depth to provide for 50% bed expansion during
backwash and a means for drawing  off the spent carbon to be  regenerated. Carbon can be
removed from  the contactor through  a trough on top of the underdrain system or the
installation of funnels similar to those employed at Colorado Springs or Rocky River.

Distribution problems, i.e., channeling, at low flow velocities cannot  be determined at this

                                        5-2

-------
           n w
                    vjt-.uu.uiLJLji-ii-iLji-ii-iui-.U

                    nnnnnnnnnnni-innn
   WASH i	IT
   WATER b	1
u.
       S
                                      o     o     c<  r]
                -20 I" HOLES
                               6 FT
              LJ            SURFACE WASH —7
                           CARBON BED SURFACE


 BOLT. RING


-INFLUENT
•BACKWASH
-CARBON CHARGE
                                                            NEVA CLOG SCREEN
                                                            CARBON DISCHARGE
                                                            •EFFLUENT

                                                            BACKWASH
               FIGURE 5-1- PRESSURIZED CONTACTOR



                               5-3

-------
                       CARBON INFLOW
                                           REFERENCE  2
                                           SURFACE OF CARBON
                                            OUTLET SCREENS(B)
                                            PRESSURE VESSEL
                                       TANGENTIAL NOZZLES(4)
                                       INLET SCREENS (8)
                        CARBON OUTFLOW
FIGURE 5-2-PRESSURIZED CONTACTOR II
                 5-4

-------
                     FLEXKLEEN  DISTRIBUTOR
          t
STAINLESS

STEEL PLATE-
-CARBON INLET
^—CARBON BED SURFACE
           L.R. ELI
                                              f'g t *-
                                              LSEE
                                              INSERT
                                   -CARBON OUTLETS
                               20 FT.
                                                            REFERENCE  3
                                         a
               FIGURE 5-3-PRESSURIZED CONTACTOR III



                                 5-5

-------
        WASH
        WATER
   CARBON
INLET a OUTLET
                            Mi
                                4-12" NOZZLES
                                                JW:
                                                [fr*
                                                                  REFERENCE  4
                 i •
                 LJ                        SURFACE WASH —7
                 ^-                         —	~—'
          SURFACE WASH -


CARBON BEOTURFACF
                                                               -SAND
                                                               GRAVEL

                                                               -FILTER BLOCK
                                                                  WATER OUTLET
                    FIGURE 5-4-PRESSURIZED CONTACTOR IV

                                    5-6

-------


-------
time. The gravity contactors can be designed using existing sand filter technology, with the
additional requirement for carbon withdrawal noted above. The EPA Process Design Manual
for Suspended Solids Removal should be consulted regarding filtration technology.

A minimum  bed depth to diameter ratio (L/D) of 1  has been suggested to  assure good
distribution and adequate protection against back mixing. Deeper beds (L/D greater than 1)
are susceptible to higher pressure drops.

Corrosion in carbon treatment systems presents some special problems for the designer.
Activated carbon is a  highly reactive material,  especially in the  presence of  oxygen and
water. Contacting vessels  are relatively  easy  to  protect through the use of special coating
materials. Piping, pumps, and valves are more vulnerable, however, and thus deserve special
attention from the designer.

Carbon contacting vessels  have so far been constructed of materials that resist attack by the
wastewater to be treated. In the case of municipal wastes, the contactors could be fabricated
from carbon steel and coated with a lining to resist corrosion, or be formed of concrete.

The  selection and  method of  application of  the  corrosion protective  lining are both
important. The corrosion pits reported at Pomona and Lake Tahoe were more likely caused
by imperfect application of the coating material than by failure of the coating itself. Typical
coating materials range from a painted coal tar epoxy to laminated rubber linings. Some of
the newer polyethylene coatings are being tested for this application. See also Table 6-1.

5.2 Regeneration of Spent Granular Activated Carbon

To make granular  activated  carbon economically feasible for wastewater treatment,  the
spent carbon must be regenerated and reused. When a carbon column has been operated for
some time, the quality of its  product water deteriorates gradually  until it  passes  some
predetermined limit beyond  which it is no longer acceptable. The carbon must then  be
regenerated.  When  the lead contactor (assuming  a multi-stage  configuration)  is  taken
offstream,  the  usual practice is for the number two contactor to become the new lead
contactor. All additional contactors, if any more are used, move up one place in the series.
A spare contactor  containing virgin and/or regenerated  carbon  is inserted into  the last
position in series. See also  Section 5-9.

The  thermal  regeneration of carbon is presently  the only feasible  procedure for destroying
adsorbed organics. Thus maximum effort has been concentrated on optimization of thermal
regeneration techniques, using a reducing atmosphere of flue gas and steam.

A typical basic sequence for the thermal regeneration of carbon is as follows:
     a. The granular carbon is hydraulically  transported (pumped) in a water slurry to the
       regeneration station for dewatering.
     b. After dewatering, the carbon is fed to a  furnace (usually of the multi-hearth  type)
       and heated  to  1500°F —  1700°F in a controlled atmosphere which volatilizes and
       oxidizes  the adsorbed impurities.
     c. The hot regenerated carbon is quenched in water.

     d. The cooled regenerated carbon is again hydraulically transported to the adsorption
       equipment or to storage.

                                        5-8

-------
The thermal regeneration process itself involves three steps:

     a.  Drying

     b.  Baking (pyrolysis of adsorbates), and

     c.  Activating (oxidation of the residue from the adsorbate).

The regeneration process itself requires 30 minutes: the first 15  minutes is a drying period
during which  the water retained in the carbon pores is evaporated, a 5 minute period during
which the adsorbed material is pyrolyzed and the volatile portions thereof are driven off;
and a 10-minute period during which the adsorbed material is oxidized and  the granular
carbon  reactivated.

As a contactor  is removed from service for regeneration, the spent  carbon  is usually
hydraulically transported to a drain bin. The drained carbon is dried during the first step in
a furnace which heats the carbon up to 212°F (for this phase of the regeneration). During
baking, the temperature increases from 212°F to 1500°F, by which time adsorbed organics
are thoroughly carbonized. This is accompanied by evolution of gases and by the formation
of  a carbon  residue in the micropores  of  the  activated carbon. The objective of this
activating step is to oxidize the carbon residue with minimum resultant damage to the basic
pore structure, consequently effecting maximum restoration of the original properties of the
carbon. The activating gas temperature during this step is about  1700°F, while the carbon
temperatures range from 1500°F to 1650°F. Flue gas supplemented by varying amounts of
additional steam produces the desired atmosphere. Laboratory experiments indicate that the
most important phase of the regeneration process is that of activation, with the critical
parameters being carbon temperature, duration of activation, and steam or carbon dioxide
concentration in  the activating gas mixture.  Since most commercial installations use
direct-fired multiple hearth furnaces for regeneration, the combustion of natural gas with air
provides the required heat, while carbon dioxide, oxygen and steam, as part of the products
of  combustion,  are  the activating agents. Extra steam at approximately  one pound per
pound of product regenerated  is supplied. This requires some steam generating equipment
and a boiler feedwater treatment system.

For regeneration processes  utilizing multiple hearth furnaces,  the over-all carbon losses
usually  vary  from 5% to  10%  per regeneration cycle. As stated  before, the relatively high
cost of granular activated carbon (24^ to 30^ per pound) makes it economically necessary to
regenerate and reuse the carbon. If a 5% loss of carbon per regeneration cycle is assumed,
then most of the carbon originally in use will have been replaced after 20 cycles and the
bulk or aggregate properties of the mix will have approached a constant value.

Multiple hearth  furnaces  used for regenerating  carbon should  consider the  BSP recom-
mendation that  the hearth area contain  one square foot  per  100 Ibs of carbon to be
regenerated per 24 hours. A slight oversizing  of the furnace beyond this provides for future
expansion of a treatment plant at very low cost.

The operating cost of the furnace can be developed by assuming a fuel requirement of 3200
BTU and one pound  of steam per pound of carbon. The energy required to generate the
steam will be approximately 1250 BTU per pound.

The rate at which the carbon  in a single  contactor is exhausted determines the minimum
rate at which this same  carbon must be  regenerated (in order that it might be available for
use again as a spare contactor). The furnace must be oversized by a factor of two or more so

                                         5-9
  441-505 O - 71 - 4

-------
that the design regeneration rate exceeds the exhaustion rate by a safe margin.

The regeneration process may be monitored by reducing the apparent density of the carbon
back  to its  virgin  value.  Larger  apparent  densities  than the virgin  value  indicate an
incomplete regeneration of the carbon and smaller densities are indicative of burning of the
carbon.

Laboratory analyses can confirm the regeneration of the adsorptive capacity of the carbon
by  measuring the  effective surface area of the carbon. Two measurements that may be
correlated with  the surface area are the iodine  and molasses adsorption tests. The iodine
number is a measure of the total  surface area with pore sizes smaller than 1OA diameter. The
molasses number is a measure of the  pore sizes which are larger than 28A. Methods for
conducting and  evaluating these tests are contained in reports by Juhola & Tepper(5) and
Gulp and Culp(6).

5.3 Air Pollution Control during Activated Carbon Regeneration

The hot  gases  discharged from  the  regeneration  furnace  contain  both   fine  carbon
particulates and odorous materials visible as smoke. Since the wet spent carbon enters the
top of the furnace near the exit point for  the  exhaust gases, some  of the more volatile
adsorbate is  removed  from the carbon and  carried  into  the atmosphere without being
completely  oxidized.  Both this smoke and  the carbon particulates present air pollution
problems  if left  uncontrolled. Therefore,  it  is  imperative  that air pollution  control
equipment be included in the design of the carbon regeneration furnace.

Systems are  available and  in use which essentially include  an afterburner, for removal of
smoke and odors,  and a wet scrubber or bag filter, for removal of particulates. These are
designed as integral parts of the furnace. The furnace will thus  probably satisfy local air
quality standards, however, the local air pollution control agency should be consulted in any
case. It is  the task of that agency to judge whether or not their standards are met  and to
approve the final design of the apparatus.

5.4 Carbon Transport

In early plants, transport of carbon was by mechanical means such as conveyors. However,
recent installations have successfully utilized  hydraulic  systems  to pump  the granular
activated carbon in a water medium since movement of liquids in pipe lines  is inherently
easier  than  transport  of solids by mechanical means. The hydraulic transport of carbon is
accomplished by  pumping the mixture  at  a high enough velocity  to  create sufficient
turbulence in the  pipeline to prevent  the solid particles from settling and collecting along
the bottom of the pipe.

Investigations by  the  Pittsburgh Activated  Carbon Company (now  the  Calgon Corpora-
tion)(7) indicate that a minimum ratio of 2.3 pounds of water per pound of carbon, or 0.28
gallons of water per pound of carbon, and  a minimum linear velocity of 2.5 ft/sec are
required for transporting carbon-water slurries.  This velocity is sufficient to sustain slurry
transport of 12 x 40 mesh activated carbon at  a 20%-30% solids concentration. Since the
settling of the carbon out of the mixture is a function of particle size, particle density, and
slurry  concentration among other things, the 2.5 ft/sec velocity is only an approximation. It
is recommended that  a water-carbon ratio of 4 pounds of water per pound of carbon (0.5
gallons water per pound of carbon) be used for transport design.

                                        5-10

-------
 Linear velocities above the minimum value of about 2.5 ft/sec (preferably in the range of 3
 to 4 ft/sec)  are considered best for keeping carbon  in  suspension in both horizontal and
 vertical lines; operation at higher velocities is possible if pressure drop limitations are not
 critical, but  such  operation may result in higher attrition loss of the carbon. To minimize
 abrasive pipe wear, to control mechanical attrition of particles during transport, and to keep
 pressure drops at a reasonable level, the velocity of the slurry should not exceed 10 ft/sec.
 Within  these constraints of velocity  and slurry composition the pressure drop for slurry
 transport  of granular activated carbon approximates the pressure drop for plain water.

 Pilot plant tests(8) indicate that after an initial higher  rate, the rate of attrition for activated
 carbon  in moving water slurries is approximately constant for any given velocity, reaching
 an  approximate value  of  0.12% fines generated per exhaustion-regeneration  cycle. This
 continual deterioration  of the carbon with cyclic  operation has been  reported to be
 independent  of the velocity of the  slurry (within the  range recommended previously — 2.5
 to 10 ft/sec). Losses of carbon by attrition in hydraulic handling are not related to the type
 of pump (diaphragm or certrifugal) used.

 In most installations, the spent  carbon is transported in  excess water,  and  as much of this
 water as  possible  must be  removed  prior to  feeding  this  material  to the regeneration
 equipment.   Tests have  indicated  that dewatering of  the  spent  carbon  slurry  can be
 successfully  accomplished mechanically (screens,  classifiers, forced  air)  or by gravity.
 Slurries containing 3  to 4 pounds of water per pound of 12  x 40 mesh carbon have been
 dewatered to  50-60% moisture (wet basis) by  use  of vibrating screens. In commercial
 installations,  slurries have been dewatered to 45-55%  moisture content by gravity  drainage
 in a tank  if sufficient area and time are allowed. Normally 1 hour is sufficient to provide an
 economically justifiable reduction of the moisture content.

 5.5 Backwash

 The purpose of backwashing is  to reduce the resistance  to flow by disengaging solids that
 have been entrapped in the bed. The rate and frequency of backwash is dependent upon the
 hydraulic  loading, the nature and concentration of the suspended solids in the influent to a
 carbon column, the carbon particle  size, and the method of contacting (upflow, downflow).
 A contactor  operating at  a  hydraulic loading  of 7  gpm/sq ft was backwashed  daily to
 counteract excessive pressure drop,  but the same contactors were operated at 3.5 gpm/sq ft,
 with the same solids loading of 10 mg/1, required only backwashing every 2-1/2 days(9).

 Backwash frequency may be  determined by any  of several  criteria: buildup of headless,
 deterioration of effluent turbidity, or at regular predetermined intervals of time. It may be
 convenient to arbitrarily backwash beds at 1-day intervals, for example, without regard for
 headloss or turbidity. These other criteria may only be of interest during periods of shock
 solids loading when backwash frequency" exceeds  once per day.

Backwashing  normally requires  a bed  expansion of  30-50%. It is  recommended that a
backwash  flow rate of 15-20 gpm/sq ft be used with the granular carbons of either 8x30 mesh
or  12 x  40  mesh.  Figure 5-6 drawn from manufacturers' brochures  shows some bed
expansion obtainable for virgin carbon.

Effective removal of the solids accumulated on the surface of the carbon bed is improved by
the use of a surface wash utilizing rotating or stationary  nozzles for directing high  pressure
streams  of water at the surface of the bed. A surface wash is normally operated only during

                                        5-11

-------
                                                      PERCENT EXPANSION
to
    3J
    m

    CJl
    00
    m
    o
    m
    X
    V)

    o
    n
    00
    J>
    rs

    i
    >
    GO
    CD
    CO
     o

-------
 the first few minutes of a 10-15 minute backwash. When backwashing is supplemented by
 this scouring type of surface wash, the total amount of water to achieve a given degree of
 bed cleaning should be  reduced. As a rule, the total amount of backwash water required
 should not exceed 5% of the normal throughput. Additionally, the surface wash overcomes
 bed plugging that may not be alleviated by normal backwash velocities.

 The removal of solids trapped in a packed  upflow bed may require two  steps:  first, the
 bottom surface plugging may have  to be relieved by temporarily operating the filter in a
 downflow mode, and second,  the suspended solids entrapped in the middle of the bed may
 have  to be  flushed out by additional bed expansion.  Air scour, the introduction of an air
 stream in conjunction with the water backwash, may be necessary to assure proper cleaning
 of the beds.

 The wash water used should be relatively free of suspended solids; if possible, it should be
 the carbon  product water. A second  choice for backwash water would be  the  carbon
 influent, which may be a particularly attractive source if this water is of good quality.

 Backwash water may be effectively disposed  of by  recirculating  it into  the primary
 sedimentation basin or elsewhere near the inlet of the wastewater treatment  plant. A typical
 backwash operation would consist  of backwashing each contactor, or at least the lead
 contactor in a series,  on a daily basis. It should be possible to backwash contactors other
 than  the first one in series less frequently  than  the first one. Backwashing might  require
 about 15  to 45 minutes, depending upon the character of the carbon feed and the hydraulic
 loading on the carbon column.

 5.6 Piping

 Carbon  is an abrasive  material and  when hydraulically transported will tend  to wear the
 inside of pipes, particularly in locations where high head loss and excessively turbulent flow
 are encountered, such as at elbows.  Long radius elbows  should  be  used for  all bends to
 reduce wear at these points. Experience with unlined straight pipes, however, has indicated
 negligible damage to the inside surfaces of the pipes after being in service for several years.

 In designing the complete hydraulic  system, it is recommended that maximum  use be made
 of manifolding  to  incrase the overall  efficiency and  flexibility of the installation. The
 advantages due  to  a  carefully designed manifold system result in  a more compact  and
 economical  system  with lower initial investment for capital equipment, reduction in spare
 equipment,  and in  operating and maintenance  costs.  The  reliability of the installation is
 improved and the downtime  is reduced. The flexibility inherent in manifolding arrange-
 ments with  necessary valves, pumps, controls, etc. should enable  an operator to overcome
 most  emergencies by switching to alternate pipe lines. The piping system should be designed
 with an eye towards easy flushing after each slurry transport operation. This requires the use
 of sufficient cleanouts, flushing connections and drains.

 Steel  pipes have been  used satisfactorily in  applications where the slurry transport is  not
 continuous.  Steel is also  advisable when the piping is readily accessible to effect economic
 repair or replacement.  More expensive materials or linings such as rubber, saran, polyvinyl
 chloride  and stainless  steel may  be justified only under special conditions,  e.g.,  in  the
industrial sector where  corrosive liquids may be encountered.

Valves used  in wastewater disposal systems may be classified in several categories, each of

                                        5-13

-------
which may be further subdivided according to various design options.

                   Diaphragm (straight way)
                   Globe

                   Rotary (ball, butterfly, cone, plug)
                   Slide, (gate valve, shear gate)
                   Sphere check
                   Swing check

In  selecting  a valve for installation in a  slurry  transport line,  there  are  four major
considerations: the  purpose  of the valve,  its effectiveness in accomplishing functional
requirements, the resistance of the valve to the abrasive effects  of slurry transport, and the
cost.

The globe valve and slide valve, normally used to effect positive shut off of flow in a pipe
line are not applicable because they require a positive seating.

The passage  of an abrasive slurry through  these valve  configurations in the open position
may wear  the  seating or perhaps leave carbon granules lodged in the seating grooves, thus
preventing  positive shutoff.

Preferred valves to assure positive  off and on operations are the rotary type such as the ball,
cone, and  plug valves. These valves should offer  no restriction to slurry transport when in
the open position. The diaphragm valve, certain variations of which offer limited blockage
of  the open passage, has  a movable element of flexible rubber, leather or some  special
composition, which will be worn over a period of use and will require replacement.

Both swing type and spherical check valves are suitable for back flow prevention in slurry
pumping. Although the seating face against which the closing device rests is susceptible to
abrasive wear  and  the  flow is restricted by  the configuration of the valve, there is no
acceptable  substitute that can achieve the same purpose.

Regulation of slurry flow can best be accomplished by either a  diaphragm valve or a rotary
valve such as  the butterfly valve. These valves should have as their  only function  flow
regulation and would not be expected to  provide positive flow shutoff. The useful life of the
wearing surface or seating face of valves can be extended by the use  of rubber lining and
stainless steel.

If the  carbon slurry  piping system is one to  two  inches  in size, the cost of periodically
replacing a common valve may be far less than installing a high-priced, specially-lined valve.

5.7 Pumps

The motive force to convey slurries through pipelines can be provided by pumps alone or a
combination of pumps  and  eductors.  For  the range of slurry  concentrations used in
existing facilities,  either centrifugal pumps or by a combination of centrifugal pumps and
eductors have  proven satisfactory. If carbon is to be transported at higher slurry concen-
trations, consideration should  be  given  to  using diaphragm  slurry  pumps or double-acting
positive displacement pumps of the simplex, duplex and triplex variety.
                                         5-14

-------
For the pumping of a 25% granular carbon slurry, centrifugal pumps should have extra large
suction inlets, a non-clogging type of impeller, and an extra large packing box with seal to
protect the shaft from wear. Preferred materials  of construction include 316 stainless steel,
silicon iron or rubber lining; this is true especially for those components in contact with the
abrasive slurry. Field experience  indicates, however, that there is a tendency to pull the
rubber linings out.

The eductor serves the two-fold purpose of mixing carbon and water and of accelerating
the transport fluid. It must, of course, have a pump associated with it to assure pressure and
flow.  In  such an application, the pump  may  be selected as though it  were intended for
pumping clean water.

5.8 Control System

Automatic operation of carbon-contacting systems is accomplished by standard equipment
which is well developed and reliable. Although automatic control  is  quite feasible,  it is
frequently not required because of the extended lengths of time between operations of the
equipment;  valves serving  separate  carbon  vessels  are  usually operated  only during
withdrawal and replacement of carbon for regeneration, except for occasional flow reversals.
Since this operation occurs about once every one to two months,  it is best to operate the
valve  manually, with  careful  observation  and attendance.  In  downflow arrangements in
which the carbon beds act as filters in addition  to providing adsorption sites, the control and
operation of these systems can become somewhat complex and subject to failures resulting
in delays and even complete plant shutdown.  Basically a surface-type filter,  the  downflow
carbon contactor is vulnerable  to all  of the  problems of this type of filter. Any severe
pretreatment upset resulting in a sudden  increase in suspended  solid  may completely blind
or clog the surface of the bed, requiring backwashing to restore service.

5.9 A Typical Plant Operation

So  far, we have discussed all of the component parts of a carbon treatment plant and several
possible flow configurations. However, there are some  important aspects of a carbon plant
which cannot be adequately described in the above format. The arrangement of the carbon
contactors in a workable system requires a considerable desigfi effort in the area of internal
piping, valves,  pumps, and intermediate tanks.  These elements are  vital in providing the
flexibility which  characterizes  an  efficient  and  economical  carbon  treatment  system.
Therefore, in this section we shall illustrate one  particular integrated plant design complete
with piping, valves, pumps, etc., and attempt to demonstrate how plant flexibility may be
obtained.

Figure 5-7 illustrates one reasonable  design for a plant with 2-stage contactors. This design
in fact provides 3 parallel 2-stage systems in  an arrangement  intended to provide almost
uninterrupted operation by rotation  of those 3 systems.  Each of the 3 parallel systems can
be shifted from the service (treatment) mode  to the backwash  mode and back again,  or to
the regeneration mode and back again. At any given time, two 2-stage systems are in service,
although  one of these can be taken out  of service to be backwashed, and one is  being
regenerated. In Figure 5-7, contactors A  and B are in service, C and D are momentarily out
of service so that C can be backwashed, and E and F are in the regeneration mode. E is being
emptied of spent carbon and F is being filled with regenerated carbon. E has just been taken
out of service to be regenerated, while F will be ready to replace either A or C when one of
them is exhausted.

                                        5-15

-------
                                 Process Water
I/I
                                                                                                                              1.  Tank A is operating as
                                                                                                                                 Primary Adsorber.

                                                                                                                              2.  Tank B is operating as
                                                                                                                                 Secondary Adsorber.

                                                                                                                              3.  Tank C is operating on
                                                                                                                                 Backwash.

                                                                                                                              4.  Tank D is Idle.

                                                                                                                              5.  Tank E is operating on a
                                                                                                                                 Cycle to Remove Carbon.

                                                                                                                              6.  Tank F is operating on a
                                                                                                                                 Cycle to Refill with
                                                                                                                                 Activated Carbon.
                                                          FIGURE 5-7-PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

-------
If an influent surge should develop, blinding A and C with solids, then the plant would be
temporarily shut down until either A or C had been backwashed. In the event of a surge in
organic loading, then A and C might be prematurely exhausted, and could be replaced by B
and D respectively.

All  of these  contactor rearrangements are possible through appropriate manipulation of
valves. The process water header at the top of the diagram can serve any of the 6 contactors.
In the situation shown, only the valve atop contactor A is open.  The product water header
can transfer the effluent of any one contactor to the inlet of any other contactor. A is
shown feeding B. Any  combination of contactors can be backwashed through the backwash
header. C is shown being backwashed. Spent carbon is shown being drained from E through
the small slurrying tank located directly beneath (in the diagram)  each contactor. The spent
carbon is then  transported to a dewatering screen and then to  the regeneration  furnace.
Regenerated carbon is  drawn  from the  furnace into the quench tank, and then transported
in slurry  form  through its own header.  F is shown receiving regenerated carbon in  this
fashion.

Obviously this configuration in Figure 5-7 represents only one possible arrangement for the
6-vessel system. Instead of 3 parallel 2-stage contactors, any number of the 6 vessels could
be operated in series or in parallel as circumstances required. The spent carbon dewatering
system is somewhat idealized by comparison with Figures 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3.

Most  of the valving  operations  suggested  here (referring to  Figure 5-7) need  not be
automated for the simple reason that they are not performed frequently enough to warrant
it. Manual operation is  sufficient in most instances, although care must be taken to open and
close the proper valves  in proper sequence.
                                        5-17

-------
                                           References

1. English, J. N., et al.,  "Removal of Organics from Wastewater by  Activated Carbon," Water-1970,
   Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series, 67, 1970.

2. Smith, C. E. and Chapman, R. L., "Recovery of Coagulant, Nitrogen Removal, and Carbon Regeneration
   in Waste Water Reclamation," South Tahoe PUD, June 1967.

3. Plans and Specifications, Activated Carbon Facilities for Colorado Springs, Colorado, Grant No. 17080
   DJE (EPA), A. B. Chafet Consulting Engineers.

4. Engineering Report, Rocky  River Wastewater Treatment Plant, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Vol. 2, Willard
   Schade and Associates, 1969.

5. Juhola, A. J.  and Tepper, F., "Regeneration of Spent Granular Activated Carbon," U. S. Department of
   the Interior, Report No. TWRC-7, 1969.

6. Culp, R. L. and Culp,  G. L., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment," Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
   1971.

7. Gilmore, D. W., "Hydraulic  Transportation of Granular Activated Carbon," Technical Session  on Bone
   Char, 167-181, 1959.

8. Ibid., 172-174

9. Letter of December 11, 1970 from W. Lee, Project Engineer, Pomona Activated Carbon Pilot Plant to C.
   D. Wood with enclosures on performance of side-by-side comparison of 8x30 mesh and 12x40 mesh
   packed carbon beds.
                                             5-18

-------
                                     CHAPTERS
                      PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANTS
6.1 General
The basic  design parameters used  in the design of carbon treatment plants may vary in
practice over only a relatively narrow range. Determination of the values of these parameters
for a particular wastewater must be  accomplished by testing as described in Chapter 7.

Table  6-1  summarizes  the design parameters from some of the new carbon plants being
designed as well as  from older plants. Many of the figures are drawn from preliminary
engineering reports and must therefore be regarded as tentative and subject to change. The
ranges over which some of these parameters vary are:
                                 Design Parameters
   Carbon Requirements: (tertiary plants)
                       (secondary plants)
   Hydraulic Loading
   Contact Time (empty bed)
   Backwash Rate
   Vessel Configuration

6.2 Physical Chemical Treatment Plants Being Built
250-350 Ibs of Carbon per MG
500-1800 Ibs of Carbon per MG
2-10gpm/sqft
15—40 minutes
15-20gpm/sqft
One and two stage
Most design engineers considering the application of carbon as part of a physical-chemical
treatment scheme cite its main attraction to be its ability to produce an effluent very low in
dissolved organics. This ability makes it rather easy to meet treatment  objectives of 85%
BOD removal or more, either through  upgrading an existing biological plant or through
building an entirely new PCT plant.  Table 6-2 is a list of some of those plants  which are
incorporating physical-chemical treatment. Some of the plants  cited above are worthy of
further comment.

Rocky River, Ohio(l)

Originally a primary treatment plant, effluent quality standards intended to protect Lake
Erie demanded  an improved  treatment  performance by  the  Rocky  River plant.  The
treatment  objective was set at  BOD5=15  mg/1.  Restrictive  land  area  forbade  the
construction of a conventional biological secondary plant, so a PCT plant  was designed. The
primary facility  will be converted into  part of the PCT plant, so the influent to the  PCT
plant will be raw wastewater. The treatment sequence is  planned to be: 1. gross solids
removal;  2.  chemical  clarification via ferric  chloride and  polymer; 3.  downflow carbon
adsorption; 4.  chlorination. No filtration step is provided prior to the carbon treatment, a
notable point.

The design (average) flow is 10 MGD, projected for 1980. The peak flow is projected as 20
MGD. Average raw wastewater characteristics (1967) include: suspended  solids: 140 mg/1;
BODS: 110 mg/1; COD:240 mg/1; total phosphorus: 21 mg/1. The  FeCl3  feeder capacity is
planned to be 30 mg/1 Fe.

 The 8 single-stage carbon columns are pressurized downflow systems. One column can be
backwashed using the effluent volume  from the other 7 columns.
                                        6-1

-------
ON
to
Carbon Requirements
Plant Size
Hydraulic Loading
Contact Time
Bed Depth

Contactor Size
Carbon Size
Carbon Inventory
Backwash Rate
Surface Wash

Air Scour
Vessel Type
Regeneration Rate
Furnace*
Corrosion Protection

After Burner
Wet Scrubber
                                                                Table 6-1

                                                DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS OF SOME PCT PLANTS

                                                  (A) Secondary Plants, replacing biological plants
    Rocky River,
        Ohio

500 Ibs/MG
10MGD
4.3 gpm/sq ft
26 minutes
15ft

16ftdiax25.3ft
8 x 30 mesh
736,870 Ibs
15-20 gpm/sq ft
stainless steel, rotating spray

none
pressure-downflow
500 Ibs/hr
72OD8
rubber lining

yes
no
    Owosso,
   Michigan

600 Ibs/MG
6 MOD
6.2 gpm/sq ft
36 minutes
30ft

12ftdia
12 x 40 mesh
246,480 Ibs
N/A
N/A

N/A
pressure-upflow
4161bs/hr
54 ID 6
     Garland,
      Texas

18 00 Ibs/MG
30MGD
2.4 gpm/sq ft
30 minutes
10ft

20 x 47.5 ft

2,600,000 Ibs
N/A
N/A

N/A
gravity-upflow
                                                                                     Concrete and stainless steel

                                                                                     no
                                                                                     yes
  Niagara Falls,
   New York

750 Ibs/MG
60MGD
1.5 gpm/sq ft
40 minutes
8ft

40 x 20 x  18 ft
gravity-downflow


concrete

yes
no
                                              *72 OD 8 means 72" outer diameter and an 8-hearth furnace

-------
                                                            Table 6-1 (continued)

                                                 DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS OF SOME PCT PLANTS

                                                    (B) Tertiary Plants, upgrading biological plants
                                         Colorado Springs,
                                             Colorado
                                                         Pomona,
                                                        California
                                                   South Lake Tahoe,
                                                       California
a\
OJ
Carbon Requirements
Plant Size
Hydraulic Loading
Contact Time
Bed Depth

Contactor Size
Carbon Size
Carbon Inventory
Backwash Rate
Surface Wash

Air Scour
Vessel Type
Regeneration Rate
Furnace*
Corrosion Protection

After Burner
Wet Scrubber
250 Ibs/MG
3 MOD
5 gpm/ sq ft
30 minutes
20ft

20 ft dia x 20 ft
8 x 30 mesh
250,000 Ibs
20 gpm/sq ft
                                          pressure-downflow
                                          75 Ibs/hr
                                          30 ID 6
                                          yes
350 Ibs/MG
0.3 MGD
7 gpm/ sq ft
40 minutes
38ft

6 ft dia x 16ft
12 x 40 mesh

12 gpm/sq ft
                         pressure-downflow
                         110/hr
                         30 ID 6
                         coal tar epoxy

                         yes
                         yes
250 Ibs/MG
7.5 MGD
6.2 gpm/sq ft
17 minutes
14ft

12 ft dia x 14 ft
8 x 30 mesh
500,000 Ibs
N/A
N/A

N/A
pressure-upflow
250 Ibs/hr
54 ID 6
coal tar epoxy

available
yes
                                         * 30 ID 6 means 30" inner diameter and a 6-hearth furnace

-------
                                        Table 6-2

                   PHYSICAL-CHEMICAL TREATMENT PLANTS BEING BUILT
        SITE



Rocky River, Ohio

Cleveland, Ohio

Fitchburg, Mass.

Cortland, N.Y.

Niagara Falls, N.Y.

Garland, Texas

Owosso, Michigan

Piscataway, Md.

Colorado Springs, Colo, (a)
       CONSULTANTS



Willard Schade & Assoc.

Engineering-Science, Inc.

Camp Dresser & McKee

Stearns & Wheler

Camp Dresser & McKee

Forrest & Cotton, Inc.

Ayres, Lewis, Norris & May, Inc.

Roy F. Weston

Arthur B. Chafet & Assoc.
  PLANT
CAPACITY
  (MGD)
    10

    10(b)

    15

    10

    60

    30(b)

      6

     5

     3
 STATUS


Bids Taken

Design

Design

Planned

Design

Design

Design

Construction

Operational
                (a) Tertiary treatment following trickling filter.
                (b) First of several modules: ultimate plant sizes are projected to be—
                              Cleveland 80 MGD
                              Garland   90 MGD
                                           6-4

-------
Owosso, Michigan(2)

A new plant is being built to accommodate several adjacent towns in the Owosso area. The
existing primary plant must be upgraded  as well as  expanded, particularly in the area of
phosphorus and nitrogen removal. The treatment objectives now will require a BOD5  of 7
mg/1 during low river stages, and 85% removal of phosphorus in order to safeguard the
Shiawassee River. The proposed treatment sequence is: 1.  gross solids removal; 2.  chemical
clarification via lime  and  alum; 3.  pressurized  deep bed  filtration;  4.  upflow carbon
adsorption;  5. breakpoint  chlorination of  ammonia (projected); 6. removal  of  excess
chlorine and an organic polishing in downflow carbon columns.

The design (average) flow is 6 MGD, with  a projected peak flow of 12 MGD.  Average raw
wastewater characteristics include: suspended solids: 180 mg/1; BOD5: 90 mg/1; COD: 300
mg/1.

The carbon columns  will  include  6 parallel trains  of  2-stage contactors,  and will  be
pressurized upflow systems.

Garland, Texas(3)

The expansion of the Duck Creek plant in Garland (suburban Dallas) will incorporate PCT
largely  because of the  influx of industrial wastes into the  municipal waste  stream. The
treatment sequence will feature:  1.  gross solids removal; 2. filtration; 3.  gravity expanded
bed upflow carbon adsorption; 4.  chlorination. Initially, the existing trickling filter plant
will be operated in  parallel with the PCT plant.

The PCT design flow  will initially be 22.5  MGD. The total plant (including trickling filter)
will be 30 MGD. This is an example of a modular approach to plant design and construction.
Ultimately the plant capacity (entirely PCT) will go up to 90 MGD. Average raw wastewater
characteristics  include:  suspended  solids:  230 mg/1; BOD5:  260 mg/1; COD:  540  mg/1;
filtered COD: 240 mg/1.

The carbon contactors will  be  10 rectangular concrete-walled single-stage beds operating
upflow under gravity.  The projected  carbon requirement here is 1800 Ibs/MG, a conservative
figure which presumes little or no biological treatment on the carbon.

Niagara Falls, New  York(4)

Maintaining the quality of the Niagara River, which discharges into Lake Ontario, was the
main reason for construction of a PCT plant at Niagara Falls. The high industrial waste load
at Niagara Falls would  not be readily  amenable to biological treatment. The process
sequence  includes:  1. gross  solids  removal; 2. chemical  clarification; 3.  sedimentation;
4. gravity downflow carbon adsorption; 5.  chlorination.

The design (average)  flow  will be 60 MGD. Raw  wastewater  characteristics include:
suspended solids: 280 mg/1; BOD5: 50 mg/1; COD:  150 mg/1.

The carbon portion of the plant will be  comprised  of 32 single-stage gravity downflow
contactors.
                                        6-5

-------
Colorado Springs, Colorado(S)

The existing trickling filter plant is grossly overloaded (by a factor of 2-3) due to a rapid
increase in population  and development, and has been upgraded by addition of a tertiary
stage. The process train is: 1.  trickling filter; 2.  chemical clarification via lime; 3. filtration;
4. downflow carbon adsorption. In  fact, the raw wastewater entering the plant is so strong
that  the secondary plant produces what would normally be thought of as raw wastewater
quality. Therefore, although the PCT plant is technically a tertiary stage, it is doing the job
of a secondary plant. The tertiary plant recently became operational in December of 1970.
It is at present treating only a portion of the total flow (3 MGD out of about 40 MGD).

The intent of the tertiary plant was not only to upgrade effluent quality in order to meet
state standards, but also to supply cooling water for the municipal power plant.

In 1971, the  trickling filter effluent has averaged: BODS :130 mg/1; COD: 320 mg/1. Under
this loading,  the carbon  effluent has  been running:  BODS: 29 mg/1; COD: 44 mg/1. The
tertiary plant is  therefore  putting out  secondary  quality water under heavy  influent
loadings.

Pomona, California(6)

This  is a pilot plant operated by EPA since 1965. It  is a 0.3 MGD tertiary treatment plant
receiving effluent directly from a good activated sludge plant, without any  intermediate
clarification or  filtration step. Average removals by  the carbon beds since 1965  include:
suspended  solids: 93%; COD: 77%; dissolved COD: 73%; color: 89%. Effluent quality has
averaged: suspended solids: 0.6 mg/1; BODS: 1  mg/1; COD: 10 mg/1; dissolved COD: 8 mg/1;
color:  3 units. Considerable research on carbon regeneration has also been done. The data
has been widely published.

The pressurized downflow carbon columns are shown in Figure 6-1. Figure 6-2 shows the
regeneration furnace in the right center foreground, the carbon drain bin and vibrator to the
right, and the carbon quench tank set partially into the ground to the left of the furnace.

South Lake Tahoe, California(7)

A 7.5 MGD tertiary treatment plant now receives the lime-clarified, filtered discharge from
an activated sludge plant. The carbon  system is comprised of 6  parallel upflow single-stage
contactors. The plant has in the past been operated as both a partially expanded bed and as
a packed bed. Spent carbon is removed from the bottom of the bed and fresh carbon is
charged at the  top. Figure 6-3 shows  some piping detail at the top of one of the carbon
contactors. The small vessel at the top of the picture contains the carbon to be charged into
the contactor. This was originally a 2.5 MGD  plant, but was later expanded to 7.5 MGD.
The performance of this plant has been widely published by Culp(8).

Wilmington, California(9)

The Watson refinery of the Atlantic  Richfield Co. has an operating gravity downflow carbon
adsorption plant to treat  the refinery wastewater prior  to discharge into the Dominguez
Channel. During and after periods of rainfall, no plant effluent could be discharged into the
city  sanitary  sewer system because  the plant's stormwater and process water flows were
collected in a common system. Therefore, the combined flows were impounded prior to

                                        6-6

-------
treatment and  then  discharged into the Channel. The stricter effluent quality  standards
imposed  required that an improved treatment system also be installed. The variations in
flow due to the  combined collection system  mitigated  against the construction of a
biological plant.  A  PCT plant including  activated carbon  has been  operational  since
December 1970. The pretreatment steps consist of a variety of processes intended to remove
oil from the waste stream, and included flocculation and air flotation.

The design flow is 4.2 MGD and is uniform due  to the preceding impoundment basin. The
plant is expected to reduce 250 mg/1 of COD to no more than 30 mg/1, and suspended solids
to virtually nil. The hydraulic  loading is 1.7 gpm/sq ft with a contact time of 1 hour. The
concrete  gravity contactors are 12 x 12 x 26 ft deep, each containing 13 ft of carbon. There
are 12 parallel single-stage contactors. Backwashing is once per day.
                                         6-7
   441-505 O - 71 - 5

-------
o\
oo
                                        FIGURE 6-1-POMONA CARBON CONTACTORS

-------
IK*, -^ "$•'•* ' v' ->'-' •
I  l^Vj*  ' • " >
fc  s,    3  ™       F  "i  .'. ,.fo" «>v -> ^tT^^iC-
j?  '*   *-v           > :«r>,*v*5«v'"wv^
                    FIGURE 6-2-POMONA REGENERATION SYSTEM


                                       6-9

-------


       ^%'
FIGURE 6-3-LAKE TAHOE CARBON CONTACTOR
  FIGURE6-4-ARCO GRAVITY FLOW SYSTEM
          (Photo courtesy ofARCO)

                6-10

-------
                                          References

1. Engineering Report, Rocky River Wastewater Treatment Plant, Cuyahoga County, Ohio, Vol. 2, Willard
   F. Schade and Associates, 1969.
2. Final Report, Physical-Chemical Pilot Plant, Owosso, Michigan, Ayres, Lewis, Norris and May, 1970.
3 . Engineering Design Report, Waste Water Treatment Facilities Duck Creek Plant Expansion, Garland,
   Texas, Forrest and Cotton, Inc., January, 1971.
4. Preliminary Engineering Report, Improvements to Wastewater Collection and Disposal Facilities, Niagara
   Falls, New York, Camp Dresser and McKee.
5. Progress Reports,  Research and Development Grant No. 17080 DJE  (EPA),  "Tertiary Treatment of
   Sewage Plant Effluent and Reuse," Colorado Springs, Colorado.
6. English, J.  N,, et al., "Removal  of  Organics from Wastewaters by Activated Carbon," Water-1970,
   Chemical Engineering Progress Symposium Series, 67, 1970.
7. Smith,  C. E. and Chapman, R. L., "Recovery of Coagulant, Nitrogen Removal, and Carbon Regeneration
   in Waste Water Reclamation," South Tahoe PUD, June 1967.
8. Gulp, R. L. and Gulp, G. L.,  "Advanced Wastewater Treatment," Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
   1971.
9. Mehta,  P.  L., 'The  Application of Activated Carbon in Tertiary Treatment of Refinery Effluent,"
   Preprint No. 32-71, American Petroleum Institute's Division of Refining,  San Francisco, Calif., May 13,
   1971.
                                              6-11

-------
                                      CHAPTER 7

        EVALUATION AND SELECTION OF CARBONS FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT

 7.1 Introduction

 The selection of a suitable activated carbon is an integral part of the design of a carbon
 treatment  plant.  As  with  the  design of  any  type of  plant, whether  biological  or
 physical-chemical, a careful laboratory and pilot scale  testing program must be initiated to
 help establish an optimum design. However, preliminary testing is probably more important
 for the case of physical-chemical treatment schemes than for biological designs, since in the
 former case  there  is much  less  published  experience to  serve as a guide  for  the design
 engineer.  One of the chief advantages of physical-chemical treatment is its versatility in
 dealing with  a  variety of waste  streams under changing  conditions of flow and organic
 loading. In order to take full advantage of this  versatility, a careful and  well-conceived
 preliminary testing program is a necessity.

 This chapter emphasizes the  testing and selection of the carbon to be used  for wastewater
 treatment. However, it is necessary to consider also the character of the wastewater and the
 degree of pretreatment necessary before a particular waste can be applied to  the carbon. All
 of these aspects shall be considered individually first, and then will be integrated into a
 discussion of pilot testing programs.

 7.2 Wastewater Characterization

 In order to gain some idea about the carbon  adsorbability of the dissolved organics in a
 wastewater,  these  organics  must first be  characterized  in at least  very  general terms.
 Although industrial  or other unusual components in  a municipal waste stream should be
 investigated where necessary, it is usually  sufficient to consider only the gross organics and
 solids in the wastewater. The most common analytical handbook is, of course, "Standard
 Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater," (13th edition, 1970).

 7.2.1 Dissolved Organic Parameters

 Dissolved organics are operationally defined as those which pass a 0.45-micron membrane
 filter. It is frequently important to isolate the dissolved fraction of the total organics, since
 carbon columns function as filters and biological contactors as well as adsorbers. However,
 in low turbidity solutions,  as for  example in well-clarified waters, little or no filtration may
 be necessary prior to analysis.

 The chemical oxygen demand (COD)  is the usual routing organic analysis. Total organic
 carbon  (TOC) (which can be done  quite rapidly)  would be preferred except  for  the
 expensive instrumentation  required. Biochemical  oxygen  demand (BOD)  is in general a
 parameter  of lesser interest from the carbon-testing point  of view,  but  since effluent
 standards usually include  a BOD requirement, BOD does warrant some attention.  In
 industrial or other specialized  wastes,  specific organic compounds may be identified as
 principal constituents of the wastewater and these should be singled out for investigation.

Another organic parameter of interest in some situations is color. Color could be indicative
 of either a specific waste constituent or merely be a general index. Ultraviolet  absorbance
may also be  used as  an  index of dissolved  organics in a  relatively clean water (< 5  JTU
turbidity).
                                         7-1

-------
7.2.2 Other Parameters

Some non-organic fractions are also pertinent for wastewater characterization. The filtration
function of a carbon column is naturally affected by influent solids. Since solids frequently
slough off of a carbon during operation, the influent and effluent from any  carbon process
should be characterized specifically  for suspended solids and turbidity.  Materials such as
activated sludge, bacterial slimes, chemical precipitates (from a preclarification step) should
be noted. These various kinds of solids all may affect headless buildup in the carbon and
thereby increase  backwash  frequency.  It should  be recognized  that some  solids may be
sticky  and tenacious and hence difficult to remove from the carbon, while others are more
nearly inert and  easy to deal  with. Microbial  parameters such as viruses, bacteria,  and
perhaps algae may warrant attention. The biological contribution to carbon  treatment may
be affected by toxic elements, as would be true in any biological system. The pH of the feed
stream may directly affect adsorption, however, only a few compounds have been studied
for pH effects on their adsorption by activated carbon. The economics of pH adjustment to
enchance carbon treatment of wastewater have not been investigated, but the pH effect may
be important in industrial waste treatment.

7.3 Pretreatment Requirements

Once the wastewater has been roughly  characterized as described above, the pretreatment
requirements for carbon  adsorption can be established. When  carbon is being used  as a
tertiary process, the secondary effluent  being  treated may require no more than a filtration
step. If the activated sludge or trickling filter  process is well operated and not overloaded,
filtration  may  not  be necessary. When carbon  is being  used as a secondary process,
clarification and  filtration are frequently necessary to prevent excessive headloss develop-
ment in the carbon columns. Although expanded up flow carbon columns do not suffer from
excessive  headloss,  it  is advisable to give them a prefiltered feed  anyway. These upflow
carbon columns do not remove a great fraction of influent solids and prefiltration would be
necessary to ensure  a product water of acceptable clarity.

7.4 Adsorption Isotherm Tests

The isotherm test is a good preliminary laboratory test to aid in determining whether carbon
treatment can be  applied to a particular wastewater. However, it should not be used by itself
to  establish design criteria for  a plant. It  is also useful in selecting a particular carbon,
although even in this task other selection criteria should be applied.

7.4.1 Selection of Candidate Adsorbents

Although there are a  fair number of manufacturers of granular activated carbon, many of
their carbons  are not  necessarily suited for municipal wastewater  treatment.  In addition,
some wastewater carbons have  an advantage  over others in adsorption  capacity, physical
durability, operating characteristics, or cost. All candidates should be fairly tested by  several
criteria, since process cost depends upon much more than adsorbent  cost. Product quality is,
of course, a factor which may supersede cost considerations in some  cases.

7.4.2 Preparation of Candidate Adsorbents

The isotherm  test  applies to either granular or  powdered  adsorbents,  however, the test
works satisfactorily only on  a powdered sample. Granular carbon must be pulverized until

                                          7-2

-------
 all particles pass a 325-mesh screen and a  representative sample must be taken  of the
 powder.

 7.4.3 Design of the Isotherm Test

 An adsorption isotherm is  a batch adsorption test  performed in the laboratory under
 standardized conditions. It will be valid only  for the temperature at which it is run, which
 should correspond  to the  temperature normally  encountered in the wastewater. The
 isotherm test actually consists of a series of individual batch tests which differ only in one
 respect, e.g.,  carbon  dosage. Different carbons may also be compared by running their
 respective series of batch tests at the same time, or in succession using the same batch of
 feedwater. Each individual batch best is run in a shaker or beaker with an attached mixer.
 Organics are  measured  before  and after  contacting  the feedwater with the carbon.
 Interpretation of the test results is discussed below.

 The wastewater used for the isotherm test should be the same feed as that to be treated in
 the full-scale plant.  If preliminary chemical clarification is planned, then the isotherm feed
' should be clarified with the same coagulant at  the same pH, and then readjusted to whatever
 pH is deemed suitable  for plant operation and discharge.

 Selection of carbon dosages may be somewhat arbitrary at first. It is usually necessary to
 run several tests in succession to identify  the range  of dosages which will give the best
 isotherm results. The  final isotherm plot must consist of adsorption data collected  at one
 time on the  same  batch of wastewater. Either TOC  or COD is  an acceptable  organic
 parameter by which to evaluate the results of an isotherm test.

 The procedure for  the isotherm test need  not be described in  detail here since it may be
 found in many places  in the literature. The references listed at  the end of the chapter may
 be consulted  for procedures on isotherm  testing,  determination of iodine and molasses
 numbers, and evaluation of several other physical parameters of activated carbon.

 7.4.4 Interpretation

 The adsorption data may be evaluated by using a logarithmic plot of: organics removed per
 unit dose of adsorbent versus residual organic concentration. The following example should
 serve to describe the procedure:


     Carbon dosage  (M)       Residual COD (Cf)
            (g/1)                   (mg/1)              X = C0-Cf               x/M
             0                      130(=C0)
           0.25                     86                   44                  176
           0-50                     73                   57                   114
           J-00                     69                   61                    61
           2.50                     45                   85                    34
           5.00                     33                   97                     19

     plot log X/M versus log Cf
                                         7-3

-------
The plot is shown in Figure 7-1. The isotherm plot should be linear, but frequently deviates
from  this ideal. Straight lines may be  drawn  through many data sets  without trouble.
Individual  deviant points may be discarded as a  matter of judgment. Non-linear or
completely scattered sets may require a least-squares fitted line; however, it could be argued
that  any data set  which truly requires a least-squares line is probably worth redoing. The
success of isotherm testing rests with strict attention to procedural detail.

Once a straight line of fair precision has  been drawn, it is extrapolated towards the right to
the Co  intercept.  The  resulting ordinate, here 450 mg COD/g  carbon, is a measure of
adsorption capacity. The slope  of  the isotherm line  may also be used to characterize the
adsorption operation being tested. Steeper  slopes indicate good  adsorption  of organics
present  in solution at higher concentrations but not at lower concentrations.  Slight slopes
indicate  comparable adsorption over  the  entire range of  organic concentrations. Higher
slopes generally indicate that greater adsorption efficiency in column operations can be
expected.

Iodine and molasses numbers are also measures of adsorption capacity, as has been noted
previously. These numbers are determined  by batch adsorption tests on standard solutions.
Literature on both isotherms and  iodine and molasses numbers, as well as other carbon
testing procedures, is given at the end of the chapter.

7.5 Other Criteria

Isotherm testing may not resolve the issue of which carbon to use, although it may eliminate
many candidates.  Therefore, some further non-adsorptive selection  criteria may prove
useful. It is important to note the physical characteristics of the carbon; the manufacturers'
specifications may or may not  be  adequate measures of these characteristics. These may
include: (a) density (lighter carbon may  be lost during backwashing); (b) fines, either in the
original batch, or produced by abrasion  of the  carbon during handling,  operation, and
backwashing  (fines are  ultimately  carbon lost,  and may  also contribute to buildup of
headloss); (c) regenerability (carbon losses  during regeneration, degree of regeneration, ash
production and buildup). Carbon size (12x40 and 8x30 mesh are standard sizes) may be a
significant factor only with respect to headloss buildup. Cost of the adsorbent,  as noted
previously, is only one factor in determining process cost, and need not be  decisive unless all
other factors are  equivalent.  Many of  these factors cannot be  tested  directly, and the
experience of others must be relied upon.

7.6 Pilot Plant Testing

The  tests described above  should  suffice in most cases  to select the best carbon for a
particular wastewater treatment application. However, in  order  to precisely define design
criteria  for a given carbon  plant, it is still necessary  to conduct pilot testing. Important
design parameters  have  been discussed in previous chapters,  so it is sufficient here to discuss
only those factors which can be determined by pilot scale testing.

7.6.1 Conduct of Pilot Operations

Full-scale plant  conditions and  features  must be simulated. The scale  of  the pilot study is
somewhat arbitrary, but some lower limits can be set. Carbon columns probably should be
no smaller than 4-inch inside diameter so  as to avoid short-circuiting of the flow.
                                         7-4

-------
                              ro
                              o
                                    X/M (mg COD adsorbed per gram  of carbon)


                                   8       S     §    8
ro
O
O
O
O
O
O
00
O
O
o
O
O
     CD
     C
     30
~J
I
L/l
     V)
     o

     1
     o
          o
          ^»
          H
          =o
          m
          £
          o
I

H  s
o
§8
              5?
              8
                                             T
                                                        I

-------
Packing of carbon columns is frequently  a messy business. It is essential to deaerate the
pores of the carbon to obtain proper packing density and to eliminate anomalous adsorptive
effects.  This  can be done in several ways: slurrying in boiling (and thus deaerated) water,
accompanied by stirring to expel entrapped air; or, saturation of the dry carbon with CO2
gas. In the slurrying method, the wetted deaerated carbon is then transferred to a contactor
partially filled  with water,  keeping the water level above the carbon level. In the CO2
method, the carbon is packed dry into the contactor, which is then saturated with CO2 gas
to displace the air, and finally wetted and flushed with cold water (the entrapped CO2 being
dissolved in the water and flushed out). The latter method is obviously the easiest if CO2 is
available. Frequently, it is sufficient to allow the carbon to remain submerged overnight,  as
is done  in full-scale plants.  Once the carbon  columns are wetted  and packed, they must be
backwashed to expel the carbon fines.

7.6.2 Monitoring

Monitoring of the pilot columns should consider the following questions, (a) The degree  of
organic  removal  is possible over  a range of contact times. TOC or COD  analyses are
sufficient, but some BOD data may be instructive. Samples should be collected at several
different carbon  depths to determine optimum  contact times. Influent samples should be
composited if flow  variations warrant  this,  but carbon effluents may require only grab
sampling.  A rough mass  balance is  advisable to  define the organic removal capability, (b)
The  adsorptive capacity of the carbon. The isotherm test results  cannot be extrapolated  to
pilot operation.  Since biological treatment seems to be an  important factor, the length  of
the pilot study may tend to become extended. Some recent pilot studies with considerable
biological treatment contributions have run for 5000-7000 bed volumes with little or no loss
in organic removal capability, so judgment is important here. Obviously a "premature" halt
to pilot  studies will give a  conservatively  low  estimate of  carbon  capacity  and a
conservatively high  estimate for frequency of  regeneration and carbon inventory, (c)
Aerobic versus anaerobic biological  treatment.  Injection of air or oxygen can help settle this
question;  the principal deciding factor may be odor (e.g. sulfides). Sulfides have not been
discussed  in  detail in this  manual because no specific recommendations can be  made  to
combat them. Despite this inattention, they must be reckoned with in considering carbon
treatment performance. In general,  they may be counteracted by elimination of anaerobic
conditions in the  contactor. Several methods  have been suggested to control  sulfides,
although  none  has  been  tested extensively. These include  oxygen injection into the
feedwater or the upstream portion of the contactor, chlorination of the feedwater to inhibit
biological growth, and frequent backwashing of the contactors affected. At present no firm
recommendation can be made beside suggesting that pilot plant operations should evaluate
the extent of the sulfide problem  and  ways of countering it. (d) The effect of solids on
carbon  performance. Various kinds of solids should be distinguished where appropriate, e.g.,
residual coagulant, activated sludge  fragments,  microbial growths, (e) The rate of buildup  of
headloss.  This  is the usual criterion for  determining  backwash frequency.  The need for
surface  wash or air scour during backwash should also be assessed. If headloss development
appears excessive, expanded upflow columns may be in order; if this is the case, these units
may require prefiltration and/or postfiltration.

One aspect which cannot be piloted  is the  regeneration step. No small furnaces exist for
such purposes other than  laboratory  models,  which may not give results suitable for
extrapolation to larger scale.

The  selection of  an hydraulic loading may be somewhat arbitrary. Whenever possible, pilot

                                        7-6

-------
columns with  different hydraulic loadings  should be run in parallel, however, experience
indicates that no difference in treatment performance may be noticed within the range 2-10
gpm/sq ft. The selection  of a design hydraulic loading may largely depend on operational
factors such as headless development, maximum permissible expansion of an upflow bed, or
the choice of gravity versus pressure flow.

7.6.3 Interpretation of Pilot Data

The series of questions raised in the monitoring section  above has already covered  many
aspects of interpretation, some  of  which  are  self-explanatory.  However, it may  be
convenient to discuss some modes of data presentation. For example, COD removal over the
long term  is indicative of  carbon treatment performance in general. Mass of COD removed
per unit weight of carbon,  and carbon dose in pounds per million gallons are measures which
may be compared to published data and used to calculate carbon requirements, regeneration
frequency, and process cost (see Chapter 6).

The following literature  may be helpful  in  understanding isotherms  and other carbon
evaluation methods.

1. Gulp, R. L. and Gulp, G. L., "Advanced Wastewater Treatment," 1971: pp. 136-145 and pp. 248-255.

2. "A Symposium on Activated Carbon," Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc., 1968.

3. "The Laboratory Evaluation of Granular Activated Carbons  for Liquid Phase  Applications," Calgon
   Corporation.

4. Helbig, W. A., "Adsorption from Solution by Activated Carbon," chapter from Colloid Chemistry:
   Theoretical and Applied, volume 6, ed. J. Alexander, pp. 814-839.

5. Fornwalt, H. J. and Hutchins, R. A., "Purifying Liquids with Activated Carbon," Chemical Engineering,
   April 11,  1966 and May 9, 1966.
6. Hassler, J. W., "Activated Carbon," 1963, pp. 314-340.

7. Gleysteen, L.  F. and Nickles, H. B., "Hardness and Abrasion  Values of Granular Activated Carbon in
   Relation to Regeneration Losses," Atlas Chemical Industries, Inc., 1961.

8. Smisek, M. and  Cerny, S.  "Active Carbon: Manufacture, Properties,  and Applications,"  1970, pp.
   307-326.
                                          7-7

-------
                                     CHAPTER 8

                             PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS

Physical-chemical treatment plants are rather complex since they involve a great variety of
different unit operations, some of which may be relatively sophisticated. Carbon adsorption
systems  themselves  include  several different  unit  processes,  some of which are quite
unknown in conventional  wastewater treatment plants. For this reason, the quality of
operator training in carbon plants must necessarily be somewhat higher than in conventional
plants.

In order to  realize the fullest capability of the  carbon adsorption system, operators should
be  given  specialized  training in the practical  aspects  of  the  plant operation, including
on-the-job  training  under the  guidance of  professional performance.  An  additional
requirement for most efficient plant control  is the institution of a formal operational
procedures manual to help the  plant personnel operate the plant at peak efficiency at all
times. The very existence of an advanced waste  treatment plant implies that the community
being served has required that a consistently high quality effluent be produced at all times.
Thus the casual attention  frequently paid to conventional plants cannot be  tolerated at
carbon treatment plants.

Since a carbon adsorption system is usually part  of a PCT plant or biological plant (as a
tertiary stage of treatment), the carbon plant's personnel requirements cannot be considered
in isolation  from  those of the larger plant.  All plant personnel  will necessarily have
responsibilities covering a variety of unit processes. Since not many carbon plants have been
operated at  full scale  to date, there is not much available experience on which to base the
planning of  personnel requirements. The tertiary plant  at South Lake Tahoe represents the
bulk of our experience in judging personnel requirements.

In this  chapter, we shall  confine ourselves  to listing  the  principal  tasks involved in  the
operation of a carbon plant, and then give  a reasonable estimate of the number of personnel
required.

The  operation  of  a carbon adsorption system may be broken down into the following
specific tasks:

   1. Carbon contacting

     a. monitoring of flow  into the system, in order to  recognize surges in flow, solids, or
       organics, and thereby anticipate operating difficulties caused by these situations;

     b. monitoring of effluent quality to  assure that treatment performance standards are
       being realized;

     c. routine maintenance to pumps, valves, piping, monitoring instruments and sampling
       systems.

  2. Backwashing (in downflow columns)

     .. monitoring of headless or effluent  turbidity where these criteria have been selected
       to determine backwash frequency;

                                         8-1
a

-------
     b. valving operations to backwash the columns.

  3. Carbon dewatering and transport

     a. removal of the contactor containing spent carbon from service and its replacement
       with a fresh contactor (in multi-stage systems, each contactor in the series must be
       also moved up in sequence and the fresh contactor placed at the end of the series);

     b. removal of the spent carbon from the contactor;

     c. dewatering of the carbon via a drain bin, screw conveyor, etc. (this may be largely
       unattended except for monitoring of the free flow of the carbon and the degree of
       dewatering obtained prior to entry into the furnace);

     d. maintenance of pumps, valves, dewatering devices.

  4. Carbon regeneration

     a. scheduling of furnace  operation to  correspond with the exhaustion  rate of the
       activated carbon;

     b. setting and monitoring of furnace conditions necessary for proper regeneration, such
       as temperature, fuel requirements, flow rate and moisture content of the incoming
       carbon, etc.;

     c. monitoring of exhaust gas system to insure proper air pollution control and to check
       on furnace operation;

     d. monitoring of the characteristics of the regenerated carbon to guard against either
       incomplete regeneration or excessive bumoff of the activated carbon;

     e. maintenance of the  furnace and its auxiliary equipment;

     f. monitoring of transport of the  regenerated carbon through the quenching operation
       to either a storage bin or a spare contactor;

     g. determining the amount of makeup carbon necessary by measuring the difference in
       carbon volume before and after regeneration;

     h. backwashing  of  the   regenerated   carbon  to  eliminate  fines  created  during
       regeneration and contributed by makeup carbon.

A reasonable estimate of labor  required for operation, maintenance, and laboratory services
based on the above list of tasks in a 10 MOD plant is as follows:


Operation:                one man per 8-hour shift (3 man-days per day)
Maintenance:              two men on one 8-hour shift (2 man-days per day)

Laboratory Services:        one man on one 8-hour shift (1  man-day per day)
Total:                     6 man-days per day

                                        8-2

-------
                                     CHAPTER 9

                            PLAN & SPECIFICATION REVIEW
                                    CHECK SHEET

The processes outlined in this design manual have been developed for application to projects
where improved effluent quality is needed or required. In some cases, these processes have
had limited use in full-scale design of wastewater treatment facilities. Design engineers and
reviewing authorities may not be completely familiar with the parameters to be considered
in the preparation of plans  and specifications for a given project. The following plan and
specification  review check sheet has been prepared to serve as a guide to the engineer in the
design of proposed facilities  which use the process or processes outlined in this manual. It
will also be used by the Environmental Protection Agency, and may be used by State and
local authorities in their review of projects for approval.

As with the case of any check sheet, its purpose is to fully consider all possible parameters
for an individual process. For a given project all or part of the check sheet may be applicable
and should be used with this  fact in mind.
                    PLAN & SPECIFICATION REVIEW CHECK LIST

                                    GENERAL

Applicant	Project No..

Design Engineer	Address	
Reviewing Engineer	Review Date	Approval Date-

Type of Waste        Domestic      Industrial (Type)	Other	

Volume of Flow             Present	Design	
Organic Loading             Present	Design.
Turbidity Loading           Present	Design_

Suspended Solids Loading     Present	Design.
                                  PRE-TREATMENT

Screening	
Comminutor-
Grit Removal-
Flow Measurement.
                                        9-1
  441-505 O - 71 - 6

-------
Primary Sedimentation-
    No. of Tanks	               Volume_
    Detention Time	Present	Design-
    Surface Settling Rate	Present	Design-
    Overflow Rate	Present	Design-
Chemical Clarification — Number of Units
         Chemicals                Dosage             Mixing Time
     1	
    2.
T
Flocculation Time
Clarification Time
Rise Rate
Overflow Rate
Biological Treatment
Type

Present
Present
Present
Present


Design
Design
Design
Design
. Modification
    Alternate Modes of Operation-
    Number of Units	
    Retention Time	
                              ACTIVATED CARBON TREATMENT
Type of Carbon	Powdered	Granular	
Carbon Capacity	Ibs Carbon/lb Organic Load	
Carbon Dosage	Ibs Carbon/MG of Water
Diurnal Fluctuation in Flow	in Organic Load	
Granular Systems
	Up Flow	Down Flow	Other
Number of Units	in Parallel	in Series-
                                      9-2

-------
Unit Dimensions:      Bed Depth-




Hydraulic Loading	
                JWidth.
         .Shape_
Contact Time Per Unit.




Distribution System	
                .Total Contact Time.
Collection System (Under Drains)-




Free Board	
Backwash Rate-
Pressure System-




Gravity System-
                Bed Expansion.




                _No. of Pumps_
                Available Head.
Powdered Systems



Number of Units	
Dimensions: Diameter.




Flocculation Time	




Rise Rate	
. in Parallel _




	SWD.
_in Series-
             _Clarification Time
_Freeboard-
             _ Overflow Rate_
Carbon Slurry Concentration



     1st Stage Unit	
              2nd Stage Unit-
Hydraulic Transport of Carbon




     Pipe size and Material	




     Slurry Concentration	
             .Velocity.
              Types of Valves.
     Types of Pumping Devices	




Regeneration




     Type of Furnace — Multiple Hearth, fluidized bed, etc.




     Furnace Dimensions	Fuel Requirements.
    Carbon Regeneration Rate-
              Carbon feed control rationale.
Sedimentation-
        POST TREATMENT




Filtration	
Chlorinatioru
                                       9-3

-------
                                           References
 1. Joyce,  R. S., and  Sukenik,  V.  A.,  "Feasibility  of  Granular,  Activated-Carbon for Wastewater
    Renovation," U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, PHS Publ. No. 999-WP-12, 1964.
 2. Dostal, K. A., et al., "Carbon Bed Design Criteria Study at Nitro, W. Va.," JAWWA, 57, 5, 663-74, May
    1965.
 3. Hager, D.  G., and Flentje, M. E., "Removal of Organic Contaminants by Granular Carbon Filtration,"
    JAWWA, 57, 11, 1440-50, November 1965.
 4. Joyce, R. S., and Sukenik, V. A., "Feasibility of Granular, Activated Carbon for Wastewater Renovation.
    2.," U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, PHS Publ. No. 999-WP-28, 1965.
 5. Joyce, R.  S., et al., "Treatment of Municipal Wastewater by Packed Activated Carbon Beds," JWPCF,
    38, 813-23, May 1966.
 6. Dostal, K. A., et al., "Development of Optimization Models for Carbon Bed Design," JAWWA, 58, 9,
    1170-86, September 1966.
 7. Gulp, G., and Slechta, A., "Plant-Scale Reactivation and Reuse of Carbon in Wastewater," Water & Sew.
    Works, 113,425-31, November 1966.
 8. Harris, G., "Liquid Purification  with Granular Activated Carbon," Chemical & Process Engr., 47, 8,
    45-49, 1966.
 9. Allen, J. B., et al., "Process Design Calculations for Adsorption from Liquids in Fixed Beds of Granular
    Activated Carbon," JWPCF, 39,217-29, February 1967.
10. Bishop, D. F., et al., "Studies on Activated Carbon Treatment," JWPCF, 39, 2, 118-203, February 1967.
11. Parkhurst, J.  D., et al., "Pomona Activated Carbon Pilot Plant," JWPCF,  39, 10, Pt. 2, 70-81, October
    1967.
12. Hansen, S. P., and Burgess, F. J., "Carbon Treatment of Kraft Condensate Wastes," TAPPI, 51, 6, 241-6,
    June 1968.
13. Hager, D. G., "Adsorption and Filtration with Granular Activated Carbon," Water & Wastes Engineering,
    6, 39-43, August 1969.
14. O'Farrell,  T. P.,  et al., "Advanced Waste Treatment at Washington, D. C.," Water-1969, Chemical
    Engineering Progress Symposium Series, 65, 251, 1969.
15. Stander, G. J., and  Van Vuuren,  L.  R. J., "The Reclamation of Potable Water  from  Wastewater,"
    JWPCF, 41, 3, 355-67, March 1969.
16. Zuckerman, M. W., and Molof, A. H., "High Quality Reuse Water by Chemical-Physical Wastewater
    Treatment," JWPCF, 42,3, 437-56, March 1970.
17. Weber, W. J., Jr., "Discussion of Zuckerman & Molof," JWPCF, 42,3,456-63, March 1970.
18. Hager, D. G., and Reilly, P. B., "Clarification-Adsorption in the Treatment  of Municipal and Industrial
    Wastewater," JWPCF, 42, 5, 794-800, May 1970.
19. Witco Chemical Corporation, New York, "Granular Activated Carbon for Pollution Control," Technical
    Bulletin No. 4-9.
20. Weber, W. J., Jr. "Direct Physiocochemical Treatment (Design Workshop Outline)," 1970.
21. Cookson, J. T., Jr., "Removal of Submicron Particles in Packed Beds," Env. Sci.  & Tech., 4,  128-134,
    February 1970.

-------
                                      References (continued)

22. Progress Reports, Lebanon Pilot Plant, January-September, 1970.

23. Progress Report,  "Removal of Powdered Carbon by Cross-Flow Filtration," Contract 14-12-832, Oak
    Ridge National Laboratory, July 1970.
24. Progress Reports, Joint FWQA-DC Pilot Plant, January-September, 1970.

25. Progress Reports, "Physical-Chemical Treatment  of Municipal Waste,"  Contract  14-12-585, Eimco
    Corporation, July, 1969 -September, 1970.
26. Schwartz, W. A.,  "Granular Activated Carbon Treatment of Primary Sewage,"  Rough Draft of Internal
    FWQA Report, February 1970.
27. Kreissl, J.  F., et al.,  "Advanced Waste Treatment and  Alaska's North Slope," Unpublished Report,
    August 1970.

28. Final Report, "Ultrafiltrative Dewatering of Spent Activated Carbon,"  Contract 14-12-528, Amicon
    Corporation, March 1970.
29. Final Report, "Filtration in Deep Beds of Granular Activated Carbon,"  Grant 17020 DZO, Syracuse
    University.
30. Final Report, "Study of Powdered Carbons for Waste  Water  Treatment and Methods for Their
    Application," Contract 14-12-75, West Virginia Pulp and Paper Company, September 1969.
31. Final Report, "Advanced Waste Treatment Using Powdered  Activated Carbon in Recirculating Slurry
    Contactor-Clarifiers," Contract 14-12400, July 1970.

32. Final Report, "Granular Carbon Treatment  of Raw Sewage," Contract 14-12-459,  FMC Corporation,
    May 1970.

33. Masse, A. N., "Removal of Organics by Activated Carbon," Unpublished FWQA Report, August 1968.

34. Evans, David R. & Wilson, Jerry C., "Actual Capital & Operating Costs for Advanced Waste Treatment"
    (at South Tahoe Water Reclamation Plant), given at WPCF conference, Boston, Oct. 8, 1970.
35. Wetvaco brochure - "Activated Carbon & Waste Water"

36. Kugelman, I. J. and Cohen, J. M., "Chemical-Physical Processes," Advanced Waste Treatment and Water
    Reuse Symposium, Cleveland, Ohio, March 30-3 1, 1971.

-------
                                    APPENDIX A

                                     GLOSSARY

Abrasion Number — The abrasion number of granular carbon is measured by contacting a
carbon sample with steel balls in a pan on a Ro-Tap machine. The abrasion number is the
ratio of the final mean particle diameter to the original mean particle diameter (determined
by screen analyses) times 100.

Adsorbate — Those materials, e.g., color bodies, taste and odor compounds, or other solutes,
which are adsorbed on an activated carbon or other adsorbent.

Adsorbent — A material, such as activated carbon, upon which adsorption takes place.

Adsorption  Isotherms — A measurement of the adsorptive capacity of an adsorbent as a
function of the concentration, or pressure, of the adsorbate at a given temperature. It is the
constant temperature relationship between amount adsorbed per unit weight of adsorbent
and the equilibrium concentration, or partial pressure.

Apparent Density — The weight per unit  volume of a homogeneous activated carbon. To
assure uniform packing of a granular carbon during measurement, a vibrating trough is used
to fill the measuring device. See also bed density.

Ash — The  mineral constituents of activated  carbon. It is normally expressed on  a weight
percent basis after a given amount of sample is reduced  to ash.

Average (Mean)  Particle Diameter — This is  a  weighted-average diameter of a granular
carbon. A sieve analysis is run and the average particle diameter calculated by multiplying
the weight  of the fraction retained on each sieve by the  sieve's mesh  size, adding the
products, and dividing by the total weight of the sample. The average size of each fraction is
taken as the size midway between the sieve opening through which the fraction has passed
and the sieve opening on which the fraction was retained.

Bed Density, Backwashed and Drained — The weight per unit volume on a dry vasis of a bed
of activated carbon that has been backwashed and drained. This value is usually lower than
the corresponding apparent density due to the classification according to size of the carbon
granules during backwashing.

Bed Depth (Height) — The total  depth of carbon which is parallel to the flow of the stream
and through which the stream must pass.

Bed Diameter — The diameter of a cylindrical carbon column, measured perpendicular to
the stream flow.

Breakthrough Curve — A plot  showing the relationship between the cumulative volume of
liquid passed through a carbon column and the effluent concentration of the component
being removed.

Contact Time — The time required for the liquid to pass through a carbon column assuming
that all the liquid passes through at the same velocity. It is equal to the volume of the empty
bed divided by the hydraulic loading.

                                        A-l

-------
Countercurrent Operation — Any contacting process, e.g., adsorption, where the flows of
influent  wastewater and  solid  adsorbent  proceed in opposite  directions. The highest
concentration of dissolved organics  contacts the most nearly exhausted portion of the
adsorbent, while the virgin adsorbent contacts  only the lowest concentration of organics.
The purpose  of such a  system is to take fullest  advantage of the adsorptive capacity of the
nearly exhausted adsorbent. See under Moving Bed.

Effective Size — The sieve size which will permit 10 percent of the carbon sample to pass
but will retain the  remaining 90 percent. It is  usually determined by  interpolation on a
cumulative particle size distribution curve.

Fixed Bed —  An adsorption process in which liquid being treated is allowed to pass through
a confined bed of carbon until the carbon becomes exhausted before the unit is removed
from  service  and completely recharged with fresh carbon.  The  carbon  remains fixed in
position during the adsorption process.

Freeboard —  The elevation of the top of the contactor or wash trough in the case of gravity
systems above the surface of the carbon.

Hardness Number — This is the Chemical Warfare Service (CWS) test. The hardness number
is a measure  of the  resistance of a granular carbon to the degradation action of steel balls in
a pan in a Ro-Tap machine. It is calculated by using the weight of granular carbon retained
on a particular sieve after the carbon has been in  contact with  steel balls.

Hydraulic Loading  —  The quantity of  flow passing  through a  column or packed bed
expressed in  the units  of  volume per unit  time per unit area; e.g., gpm/sq  ft (superficial
velocity).

Iodine Number — The  iodine number is the milligrams of iodine adsorbed by one gram of
carbon at an equilibrium  concentration of 0.02N iodine. It is measured by contacting a
single sample of carbon with an iodine solution and extrapolating to 0.02N by an assumed
isotherm slope.  Iodine number can  be correlated  with  ability to adsorb low molecular
weight substances and  with the total area of pores having openings less than 10 angstroms
in diameter.

Losses on Regeneration — The loss of original carbon during regeneration due to the burning
off or mechanical abrasion of the carbon. Losses are usually  5-10% (includes all losses)  for
coal-based carbons.

Make-up Carbon —  Fresh granular activated carbon which must be added to  an adsorption
system after  a regeneration cycle or when  deemed  necessary to keep the total amount of
carbon constant. This  is to replace carbon  lost during regeneration and elsewhere during
handling.

Methylene Blue Number — The methylene blue  number is the milligrams of methylene blue
adsorbed by  one gram  of carbon in equilibrium with a solution of methylene blue having a
concentration of 1.0 mg per liter.

Molasses Number  — The  molasses  number is  calculated from the ratio of  the  optical
densities of the filtrate of a molasses solution treated with a standard activated carbon and
one treated with the activated carbon in question. The molasses number can be correlated

                                        A-2

-------
with the capacity to absorb many high molecular weight substances and with the total area
of the pores having openings greater than 10 angstroms in diameter.

Moving (Pulsed) Bed — A moving bed incorporates an effective countercurrent operation
within a single column. This is accomplished by the removal of spent carbon from one end
of the carbon  bed  and the addition  of  carbon at  the other end. The  flow of liquid and
carbon  are  in  opposite directions; usually the carbon moves downward and the liquid.
upward.

Particle Density, Wetted in Water — The  density of carbon in water assuming all pores to be
filled with water. The value can be calculated by  use of the real density of the  activated
carbon and the pore volume.

Particle Size Range — Usually, this term refers to the sizes  of the two screens in the U.S.
Sieve Series (occasionally in the Tyler Series) between which the bulk of a  carbon sample
falls. For example, 8 x 30 means most of the carbon passes a No. 8 screen but is retained  on
a No. 30 screen.

Particle Size Distribution — The particle size distribution in a given sample  is obtained  by
mechanically shaking a weighed amount of material through a series of test sieves. It is a
statement of the weights retained on each of the series of sieves.

Physical-Chemical Treatment (PCT) Plant —  A treatment sequence in which physical and
chemical processes are used to the exclusion of explicit biological processes. This does not
exclude incidental biological treatment obtained on filter media or adsorptive surfaces.  In
this sense, a PCT scheme is a substitute for conventional biological treatment and  produces
an equivalent product quality. A PCT scheme following an existing biological plant may  by
contrast be called simply a tertiary plant,  although it is also PCT in a general sense.

Pore Size Distribution — A measure  of  the pore diameters which gives activated carbons
their unique adsorptive properties. Cumulative distributions give the  relationship between
pore  size, diameter or radius, and volume  in pores  smaller  (or larger) than that size.
Derivative distributions indicate the amount of volume in pores between certain close sizes.
Pore size distributions in the small pores are calculated from nitrogen  adsorption isotherms
while distributions in the macropores are measured with the mercury porosimeter.

Pore Volume — The sum of the macropores and micropores in a carbon, or, i.e.,  the total
pore volume. This is expressed  as volume per unit weight of carbon.

Real Density - The density  of the  carbon  granule itself.  This is determined by helium
displacement. It is usually close to that for graphite. In the  metric system it is the same as
specific gravity.

Surface Area of Adsorbent — This is the surface area per unit weight of carbon. The surface
area  of  activated  carbon granules  is usually determined by  the  nitrogen adsorption
isotherm by  the  Brunauer, Emmett  and Teller Method  (BET  Method). Surface area is
usually  expressed in  square meters per  gram  of carbon. Typical values for commercial
carbons are given in Table 4-1.

Total Organic Carbon (TOO - The TOC is a measure of the amount of organic material in a
water sample expressed in mg carbon per liter of solution.

                                        A-3

-------
Uniformity Coefficient — This is obtained by dividing the sieve size which will pass 60% of a
sample by that which  will pass  10% of the sample. These values are usually  obtained by
interpolation on a cumulative particle size distribution plot.

Voids In Packed  Beds — The volume between the carbon particles in a packed bed  or
column expressed as a percentage of the total bed (carbon) volume.
                                        A-4

-------
                                    APPENDIX B

                   CARBON REGENERATION FURNACE SPECIFICATIONS

 I. GENERAL

   A. Scope

     1. This specification covers the design and construction of a multiple hearth furnace
        having  the  primary function of regenerating spent  activated  carbon.  Insofar as
        possible, the furnace with its accessories shall be designed for convenient access and
        for east in maintenance and parts replacement.  (Figure B-l.)

     2. All machinery and other places of physical hazard shall be properly and permanently
        guarded to meet in  full all provisions of Safety Standards imposed by Federal, State
        and Local regulations and codes.

II. DESIGN DATA

   A. Spent Activated Carbon Characteristics

     1. Feed Rate

     2. In the Wet State (Drained)

     3. Precent Moisture, In Feed
     4. Precent Moisture, Permissible in
       Regenerated Product

     5. Density (Apparent-Spent)

     6. Particle Size

     7. Specific Heat of Granules

     8. Temperature of Slurry at Feed

     9. Drying Temperature

    10. Baking Temperature
80 Ib to 110 Ib/sq ft/day

Abrasive

Wet Basis 40-50% by weight


0%

0.60-63 gm/cc

8 x 30 mesh

0.22BTUlb/°F

Ambient

60°-212° F

212°-1500°F
    11. Temperature of Granules at Discharge   1500° —1650°F

    12. Activating Gas Temperature            1700°-1800°F

   B. Site Description

     1. The location factors which could influence the design, operation and satisfactory
       operation of the equipment include the location (mounting) elevation above mean
       sea level, maximum and minimum local summer and winter air temperatures.
                                        B-l

-------
            DRAFT FAN
  DUST	
COLLECTOR
                                                          REFERENCE   I
                             GAS OUTLET
    QUENCH TANK
                                                     -AIR LOCK FEEDER
                                                r
                                         l\\\ \\VSA\\J
                                           k\\\\\\\\\^
                                          K\\\\\\\\\\]
                                            K\\\\\\\\\\\
                                                1	T
                                          k\\\\\\\\\\l
                                         rv\\\\\vv\v
                                             FURNACE
                                              DRIVE
                                                              COMBUSTION_
                                                              AIR BLOWER/
                  FIGURE B-1-REGENERATIOIM FURNACE

                                  B-2

-------
III. DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS

    A. General

      1. Furnace shall  be able  to accommodate shutdowns due  to  power failure. This
        necessitates that the furnace shall be (a) able to start up again fully loaded, and (b)
        able to withstand the latent heat so that warpage will not occur.

      2. Plant Operating Schedule - 365 days/year.

      3. Furnace Utilization - Continuous

      4. Feed Cycle - Idle time  may vary from two to four hours during change over from
        one pressurized contactor to another.

      5. Heating Fuel - Natural Gas @ 1000 BTU/cu ft
                       or Manufacturers Gas
                       or Propane Gas

      6. Actual Firing Rate Required (Design) - By Vendor

      7. Material Retention Time - By Vendor

 IV. EQUIPMENT

    A. General

      1. The multiple hearth furnace shall be direct gas fired vertical refractory-lined cylinder
        with a series of horizontal hearths positioned one above the other and rotating
        central shaft with rabble arms for each hearth. Inlet to be at the top and discharge
        from the  bottom of the furnace. The combustion space shall be of sufficient volume
        to insure  a heat release rate which  shall be reasonable  and commensurate with
        accepted  practices  for refractory furnaces. Means of control of the combustion air
        shall be provided so that accurate regulation  for its use in selective oxidation of the
        impurities and contaminates contained in the carbon may  be accomplished. Simple
        draft  and  means to maintain  the  draft shall  be  provided  to  insure  complete
        combustion of impurities and fuel introduced into the burning zone. Temperature in
        the combustion zone shall be maintained from sixteen hundred degrees F minimum
        to, but not exceed, nineteen hundred degrees during periods of abnormal operation.

        All materials used in the fabrication and construction of the furnace and auxiliary
        equipment shall be new and of the best quality for the purpose intended and shall
        meet  in  full the applicable specifications  of the American  Society  for Testing
        Materials, as listed below:

           Structural Steel                                              A 36-70a
           High Tensile Bolt                                            A 325-66b
           Gray Iron Castings (Class to suit service)                        A 48-64
           Malleable Iron Castings                                       A 47-66T
           Wrought Iron                                                A 207-66
           Refractories for Incinerators Type A (Type as suited to service)   C 106-67
           Refractories Mortar                                          C 178-47
                                          B-3

-------
  High temperature resisting Chromium-Nickel-Iron Alloy castings shall conform to
  ASTM  Standard Specifications for Chromium-Nickel-Iron Alloy Castings (25-12
  Class) for high temperature service, Designation A-447-50 (Type 11).

  All  fireclay  brick  shall conform  to  the specified dimensions  as to size within
  permissible deviation of not to exceed plus or minus 2 percent on dimensions of
  four inches or over, or not to exceed plus or minus 3 percent on dimensions under
  four inches and shall meet all requirements of ASTM Designation C64-61, Col. 6.

2. The steel shell, top cover and bottom plate shall be steel plate conforming to ASTM
  Designation A 36-70a. All welds shall be continuous. Field connections shall be with
  high  tensile  bolts.  The structural steel  supporting structure  shall be of welded
  construction, and designed to rigidly support the furnace and central shaft.

3. The furnace shall be lined with sufficient first quality firebrick refractory, insulating
  refractory and mineral wool to produce a furnace surface temperature of not more
  than 150° F.

  The  firebrick  and  hearth  tile shall  conform  to ASTM C 64-61, Col. 6.  The
  refractories shall be bonded with high  temperature air setting cement conforming to
  ASTM Designation C 178-47.

4. The central shaft and rabble arms shall be made of 25/12 stainless steel conforming
  to ASTM Designation A 297-65. The shaft shall be hollow and designed for natural
  draft cooling.

  The central shaft shall be supported by a heavy duty bearing support and rotate on a
  thrust bearing. A dust  cover shall  be  provided  to protect the  bearing and suitable
  lubrication fittings and  lubrication  included.  The central shaft shall be guided at the
  top  by  a heavy cast iron guide bearing  which can be adjusted  in any  horizontal
  direction. The design shall permit free vertical movement of the central shaft from
  expansion. Lubrication fittings shall be provided for the top bearing.

  The central shaft shall be suitably sealed  at the  furnace top and bottom to prevent
  air leakage out of the furnace.

5. Rabble arm shall be cast as a solid piece with teeth cast onto the arm.  The four arms
  per  hearth shall be cast on the central shaft and lock into place with a pin on the
  shaft.

6. Lute caps of 25/12 stainless steel, ASTM Designation A 297-65, shall be provided to
  prevent leakage  of carbon and short-circuiting of gases on "Out" hearths.

7. The  central  shaft shall be driven through a cast beveled  gear and pinion of high
  strength cast iron. The  pinion shall be mounted on the output shaft of a heavy duty
  gear reducer which shall be driven  in turn by a  variable speed drive with an electric
  motor. The complete furnace drive and shaft shall be mounted on a fabricated steel
  base.

8. Each hearth shall be provided with one refractory-lined cast iron door and frame of
                                    B-4

-------
       not less than 1  1/4 sq ft in area. The doors, frame, and adjustable observation ports
       shall have machined faces and be provided  with asbestos gaskets and quick-opening
       latching device to prevent leakage.

     9. A  flanged  feed  inlet  shall be provided on the top of the  furnace and a flanged
       product outlet  shall be provided on the bottom. Thermocouple openings shall be
       provided on all hearths as required for temperature recording and controlling.

    10. The furnace shall be equipped with inlet nozzles for steam injection, complete with
       valves, piping and fittings.

V. AUXILIARY EQUIPMENT

  A. Burner System

     1. The furnace shall be provided with sealed gas burners for natural or bottled gas. The
       furnace burner system shall be capable of regenerating granular activated carbon at a
       rate of (to be specified in the design).

     2. Each  burner shall be  easily  adjustable to  provide  a constant air-gas ratio over its
       complete  firing  range. It shall be  possible to set  the air-gas ratio such that the
       products of combustion from each burner can be accurately maintained at any point
       between 0 and 5% oxygen on a volume percent  basis.

     3. A combustion air blower shall be provided complete with filter and direct-connected
       electric motor.

     4. At least one control valve with operator shall be  provided  on each hearth  that is
       fired  such  that the  temperature  on each  fired hearth  can be  closely  and
       independently maintained at any desired temperature up to 1850°F.

     5. A  complete pilot burner system shall be  provided with  one pilot for  each main
       burner.  The pilot burner system shall be designed to operate continuously and be
       complete with electric ignition, regulators and valves.

     6. All necessary equipment shall be provided to make a flame safeguard system meeting
       F.I.A. requirements for this type of process furnace. This equipment shall include
       alarms,  relays,  push-buttons, etc.,  that will be  mounted away from  the burner
       system  in addition to  the valves, switches, etc., that must  be assembled with the
       burner system on the furnace.

     7. All piping and  tubing to  interconnect the  burner  system and flame safety system
       close to the furnace shall be supplied. All miscellaneous accessories such  as pressure
       regulators, etc., required  to make the burner system operationally complete shall be
       supplied.

     8. Two extra burner tiles shall be provided as spare parts.

  B. Instrumentation

     1. Temperatures shall be recorded on each of  the hearths, on the cooling air exhaust,
       and exhaust gas off-take. Chromel-alumel thermocouples with protection tubes and
       lead wire shall be provided.
                                         B-5

-------
  2. One control instrument shall be provided for each fired hearth which is capable of
     controlling the  temperature to plus or minus 10 Fahrenheit degrees from the set
     point under the specified operating conditions. Chromel-alumel thermocouples with
     protection tubes and lead wire shall be provided and suitably installed.

  3. Alarm  horn with  silencing relays shall be  provided to signal burner shutdown,
     over-temperature, fuel pressure loss,  combustion  air pressure loss, power loss and
     furnace shaft stop.

  4. Motor starters shall be provided with push buttons and running lights for all motors.

  5. A weatherproof cubicle shall be provided with all above equipment mounted, piped
     and wired. It shall also mount the start and stop buttons and indicating lights for the
     furnace burners, a main circuit breaker and fused circuits for each starter and device.
     Necessary ultra  violet sensing  flame safety relays, with faulty burner indicator, shall
     be provided.

  6. Two extra thermocouple assemblies with protection tubes and one each for the fol-
     lowing shall be provided as spare parts; U.  V. scanner, solenoid  valve coils, pilot
     assembly, atmospheric governor, three spark plugs, and one set spares for flame relay.

  7. A portable indicating instrument  shall be provided to measure the oxygen level of
     the gases in the furnace atmosphere.

C. Exhaust Gas System

  1. All connecting ductwork shall be  fabricated  of 316 stainless steel. Expansion joints
     shall be provided and clean out shall be available upstream from the scrubber.

  2. A wet scrubber shall be  provided  in 316 stainless steel which will effectively reduce
     the  dust loading to meet  local air  pollution regulations. The  scrubber shall be
     equipped  with  necessary connections for  the  plant  water supply  line and the
     scrubber effluent line to the plant sewer. Scrubber discharge temperature shall not
     exceed 100°F.

  3. A centrifugal type  induced  draft fan shall be provided with motor and V-belt  drive.
     The fan shall be constructed of  316 stainless steel  and/or cast iron and shall be
     equipped with a condensate drain.

  4. A stack of suitable height  shall be provided of 316 stainless steel. The stack shall
     have a rain cover and be adequately supported complete with roof jack.

  5. A manually operated damper shall be provided in the exhaust gas system that can
     conveniently be operated from the platform.

  6. A manometer shall be conveniently mounted where the damper is operated. It shall
     be connected to the top  hearth of the furnace by  tubing so the furnace pressure can
     be observed while the damper is being adjusted.

  7. The exhaust gas system  shall  be insulated with suitable insulation held in place with
     aluminum sheeting, for personnel  protection wherever the metal temperature will be
     over 175°F.
                                      B-6

-------
       8. The entire  exhaust gas  system shall be suitably supported  where necessary  with
          structural steel.

       9. Ladders and/or platforms shall be provided for access to the scrubber, draft fan and
          afterburner it not available or reachable from the building floor.

     D. Dust Collector System

       A complete dust collector system shall be provided with a hood over the quench tank
       and separate sealed 50 gallon drum.

     E. Afterburner System

       A refractory-lined afterburner shall  be installed between  the carbon regeneration
       furnace gas outlet and inlet to the scrubber precooler to destroy any noxious vapors.
       The  afterburner shall be complete with excess  air burner,  electrically  ignited pilot,
       blower, automatic temperature  controller, ultra-violet  scanner and necessary safety
       relays, control relays, buttons and  lights mounted  in  the  local  furnace  instrument
       panel.

 VI. INITIAL OPERATION

     The furnace supplier will be required  to have a qualified engineer available to start and
     adjust the equipment and instruct the plant personnel on its operation and  maintenance.
     This engineer will remain in the plant for a minimum of 10 days or until such time as the
     equipment  is in satisfactory  on-stream operation and meeting  the  performance
     requirements.

VII. INSTRUCTION MANUALS

     The furnace  supplier shall  furnish 3 copies  of a manual giving detailed operating and
     maintenance instructions prior to the initial operation of the equipment.
                                          B-7
   441-505 O - 71 - 1

-------
                                           Reference




1.  B-S-P Bulletin No. 250, Multiple Hearth Furnaces, Bartlett-Snow-Pacific, Inc.

-------
                              ACKNOWLEDGMENT

This manual was prepared by SWINDELL-DRESSLER COMPANY under the sponsorship of
the Environmental  Protection Agency. The  technical guidance and assistance of the
Environmental Protection Agency staff during the preparation of the manual is gratefully
acknowledged.

-------
~~I ["Accession Number
w
5
2

Subject Field & Croup
05D
SELECTED WATER 1
INPUT TRAf>
Organization
      Environmental  Protection Agency
      PROCESS DESIGN MANUAL FOR CARBON ADSORPTION
10 \Aafho^B^

 The Swindell-Dressier Company
 221c
                                     16 I Prolect De*i#i*ttoa
                                    -   17020 GNR
                                     21 j
                                    Noto
                                      Available  from Environmental Protection Agency,
                                      Regional Offices, Technology Transfer
Citation
 23 I Descriptors (Starred First)
	  *Wastewater treatment, *Treatment  facilities,  *Activated carbon, Adsorption,
      Biodegradation, Dewatering, Filtration,  Tertiary treatment
 25
Identifiers (Starred First)
 *Carbon  regeneration,  *Design parameters, Cost estimates, Operation  requirements,
 Organic  removal,  Physical-chemical treatment
 07 Abstract
     Activated carbon adsorbs  a  great  variety of dissolved organic materials  found  in
     wastewater, including many  which  are resistant to biodegradation in conventional
     biological wastewater treatment  plants.   Carbon's great efficiency in organic  removal
     has promoted its use for  upgrading conventional plant performance.  Successful  use  of
     carbon in tertiary  treatment  has  led to  proposals that it be used for secondary
     treatment as well,  i.e.,  as a replacement for biological treatment.  In  the  latter
     instance, activated carbon  would  be used as one portion of a larger physical-chemical
     treatment plant.

     This manual examines major  design parameters and unit operations  (including
     pretreatment) which are important in carbon adsorption systems.  Existing  carbon
     plant designs are evaluated.   Costs are  evaluated for the various unit operations.
     Various  plant configurations  are  discussed.  Carbon regeneration  (a prerequisite
     for economic feasibility) is  discussed and the necessary equipment is described.
     Other aspects discussed include:   air pollution control devices for the  regener-
     ation furnace,  personnel  requirements, isotherm and pilot testing, carbon
     dewatering, biodegradation  of organics in carbon columns.

                                            (Schwartz/Taft Water Research Center)
            A.  Schwart2
                           Institution
                               Robert A. Taft Water  RQ?ftfl.rch Cp.ntp.r
  WR 102 (REV. JULY 1959)
  WRSI C
                         SEND. W!TH COPY OF DOCUMENT, TO: WAT ER_ RESOURCEN
                                                   WASHINGTON. D. C. 20240
                                                            U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1971 O - 441-505

-------
U.S. Environment r Action Agency
Region 5, Library     2J)
77 West Jackson     vard, 12th Floor
Chicago, IL  60604-3590        Mf

-------