SEPA
             United States
             Environmental Protection
             Agency
             Water Engineering Research
             Laboratory
             Cincinnati OH 45268
             Technology Transfer
             EPA/625/8-85/010
Summary Report

Fine Pore
(Fine Bubble)
Aeration Systems
                           ,3  * ">

-------
Technology Transfer                   EPA/625/8-85/010
Summary Report

Fine Pore (Fine Bubble)
Aeration  Systems
October 1985
This report was developed by the
Water Engineering Research Laboratory
Cincinnati OH 45268


-------
Contents                                                                                          Page
                                    Introduction and Overview	 1
                                    Description of Devices	2
                                     Types of Fine Pore Diffusion	2
                                       Ceramic Materials	 2
                                       Plastic Materials	3
                                       Flexible Sheaths	3
                                     Types of Fine Pore Diffusers	3
                                       Plate Diffusers	3
                                       Tube Diffusers	3
                                       Dome Diffusers	5
                                       Disc Diffusers	6
                                     Diffuser Layout	7
                                       Plate Diffusers	7
                                       Tube Diffusers	7
                                       Disc and Dome Diffusers	8
                                     Characteristics of Fine Pore Media 	8
                                       Permeability	 8
                                       Uniformity	9
                                       Dynamic Wet Pressure	9
                                       Strength	9
                                       Other Characteristics	10
                                    Performance Characteristics	11
                                     Background	11
                                     Clean Water Peformance	11
                                     Process Water Performance 	14
                                       Test Methods	15
                                       Factors Affecting Performance	16
                                       Process Water Data Base	16
                                    Operation and Maintenance Considerations	27
                                     Impact of System Design and Installation on O&M	27
                                       Process Design	27
                                       Aeration Basin Design	28
                                       Air Supply System Design	28
                                       Materials Selection and Specification	28
                                       System Installation	29
                                     Impact of Fouling Phenomena on O&M	29
                                       Background	29
                                       Air Side	29
                                       Liquor Side	29
                                       Ex-Situ	29
                                       In-Situ	29
                                       Fouling Processes	30
                                       Fouling Observations	30
                                       Process Monitoring	32
                                       Preventive Maintenance	.-	 34
                                       Diffuser Cleaning	34
                                       Cost Tradeoff Analysis	35
                                   Retrofit Considerations	37
                                     System Design Factors	37
                                       Wastewater Characteristics	37
                                       Existing Facilities	37
                                         Aeration Tanks	37
                                         Air Supply and Distribution	38
                                         Air Filtration	38
                                       Diffuser Selection	38
                                     Economic Analyses	38
                                       General	38
                                       Determining System Cost	40
                                       Determining Annual Savings	40
                                       Determining Additional O&M Costs	40
                                       Determining Economics Viability	40
                                       Example Evaluation	40
                                   Ongoing Studies	43

                                   References	46

-------
Introduction and
Overview
Aerobic biological processes continue
to be one of the more popular
methods employed to treat municipal
and industrial wastewaters. The
supply of oxygen to the biomass in
activated sludge systems and aerated
lagoons represents the single largest
energy consumer in wastewater
treatment facilities. Recent studies
indicate that from 50 to 90 percent of
the net power demand for a
treatment plant lies within the
aeration system.1 A general survey of
data made available in 1982 on
municipal and industrial wastewater
treatment installations suggests that
on the North American Continent
there  are approximately 1.3 million
kw (1.75 million hp) of aeration
equipment in place at an installed
value  of 0.6 to 0.8 billion dollars.2
Operating costs for these systems
may be expected to be about 0.6
billion dollars/yr.

Originally, oxygen was diffused into
wastewater through perforated pipes
located at the bottom of the aeration
tank. The development of the porous
plate was considered an important
advance in the diffused aeration
process because of the higher oxygen
transfer efficiency offered by this  fine
pore device.3 Porous diffuser plates
were  used as early as 1916 and
became the most popular method of
aeration in the 1930s and 1940s.4'5 It
was clear shortly after the
development of porous diffusers that
clogging could be a problem. Early
work on clogging led to the use of
coarser media6 and eventually to
large  orifice devices.7 The use of
mechanical aeration devices was
another answer to the clogging
problem, although these devices
were  normally applied to small
treatment facilities and industrial
waste applications.7

The energy crisis of the early 1970s
rekindled interest and awareness
within the sanitary engineering
community relative to the efficiency
of oxygen transfer systems. As a
result, the fine pore diffusion of air
has gained renewed popularity as a
very competitive system. Yet,
considerable concern has been
registered regarding the performance
and maintenance of fine pore
diffusion systems owing to their
susceptibility to clogging. Diffuser
clogging, if severe, may lead to
deterioration of aeration efficiency
and corresponding escalation  of
power costs. Furthermore,
troublesome maintenance of
diffusers may consume considerable
amounts of operator time and plant
operating budget.

The purpose of this summary report
is to provide current information on
the performance, operation and
maintenance, and retrofitting of fine
pore aeration systems in municipal
wastewater treatment service. It is
not intended to be a design manual,
but rather to provide a general
conceptual framework for practicing
engineers to assist them in the
selection, specification, design, and
control of fine pore aeration systems.


"Fine bubble" diffused aeration  is
elusive and difficult to define. The
term "fine pore" is used hereafter
instead of "fine bubble" to more
nearly reflect the porous
characteristics of the diffusers
themselves. Typically, fine pore
diffusers will produce a headless due
to surface tension in clean water of
greater than about 5 cm (2 in.) water
gauge. For the purposes of this
report, fine pore diffusers are defined
as including the following diffusion
devices:

 • Porous ceramic plates, discs,
   domes, and tubes
 • Porous plastic plates, discs, and
   tubes
 • Flexible sheath tubes

This summary report is divided into
five major sections: Description  of
Devices; Performance
Characteristics;  Operation and
Maintenance Considerations; Retrofit
Considerations;  and Ongoing
Activities. It will be followed in
approximately 2 years with a
comprehensive design information
manual on fine pore diffused aeration
based on studies being conducted
here and abroad to fill gaps in the
current state-of-the-art.

-------
Description of Devices
 Since the introduction of the
 activated sludge process in the early
 1900s, a number of different types of
 diffused aeration devices have been
 designed and developed to introduce
 air into liquids. These have ranged
 from individual orifices (holes or
 slots) drilled in a section of pipe to
 more elaborate devices made up of
 small diameter particles fused
 together. Today, although the same
 types of generic devices exist,
 diffusers are commonly classified as
 either fine or coarse bubble.

 The demarcation  between fine and
 coarse bubbles is not well
 differentiated. Coarse bubble
 diffusers will typically produce a
 bubble diameter of 10 to 20 mm in
 clean water. So-called fine bubble
 (fine pore) diffusers, when new, will
 produce bubbles with a diameter of 2
 to 4 mm in clean water.8'10 Some
 references also describe a medium
 bubble diffuser,11 which can be
 assumed to produce a bubble
 diameter somewhere in between.

 Types of Fine Pore
 Diffusion Media

 A number of porous materials
 capable of serving as effective
 aeration devices are marketed today.
 In general, a wide range of products
 that were initially developed to filter
 air have also been found to act as
 satisfactory air diffusion devices.
 Because of cost and specific
 characteristics, only a few of these
 materials are actually being used in
 the wastewater treatment field.

 Ceramic Materials

 The oldest and still the most common
 type of porous material on the market
 is the ceramic type.  It consists of
 rounded or irregular-shaped mineral
 particles bonded together to produce
 a network of interconnecting
 passageways through which
 compressed air flows. As the air
 emerges from the surface pores, pore
 size, surface tension, and air flow
 rate interact to produce a
 characteristic bubble size.12

 Ceramic diffusers manufactured
 from glass- or resin-bonded silica or
 alumina  are available. The two most
 popular materials are glass-fused
 silica and glass-fused alumina.

The silica material is produced from
 naturally occurring sand particles.
After screening to obtain the desired
 uniform particle size, an amorphous
 glass binder is added. The aggregate
 and binder mix is then pressed in a
 mold to produce the desired shape.
 After pressing,  the material is fired at
 approximately 980°C (1800°F). At
 this temperature, the binder material
 encapsulates the sand particles.
 When the mix is cooled, a glass bond
 is formed by the binder material at
 the contact points between the
 individual particles.

 The alumina material is made from
 aluminum oxide. The actual grains
 are produced by melting bauxite ore
 at approximately 2050°C (3720°F) to
 form  large pigs. The pigs are then
 crushed and the resulting particles
 screened to select the desired size.
 For the alumina, an elaborate binder
 resembling porcelain is used. After
 pressing, the grit and binder mix  is
 fired  at 1425°C (2600°F), which
 upon cooling creates the glass bond
 at the contact points. The final
 product is typically 80 to 90 percent
 aluminum oxide.

 A few minor differences exist
 between the two types of material.
 Because of the crushing process, the
 alumina grains are more angular and
 jagged in shape than the silica
 particles. Silica is a mined material
 with a limited particle size range, and
 the pore size that can be produced
 with it is limited by naturally
 occurring grain sizes.

 In general, for wastewater treatment
 applications, the performance of both
 silica and alumina is expected to  be
 approximately the same. It has been
 claimed that the silica material,
 because of its shape, may be more
 resistant to fouling and more easily
 cleaned.10 This claim has not been
 well demonstrated based on
 controlled experiments.

Today, the majority of ceramic
diffusers being  marketed are
manufactured from aluminum oxide.
The alumina material is harder and
possibly somewhat stronger than
silica, but this probably is not the  sole
reason for its widespread use. Just
as important may be the fact that
essentially all ceramic media are
manufactured by large companies
whose major product line is abrasive
materials (aluminum  oxide grinding
wheels). Because the air diffusion
market is relatively small in
comparison, it is difficult to justify the
use of different  raw materials for the
manufacture of air diffusion
equipment.

-------
 Plastic Materials

 A more recent development in the
 fine pore diffuser field is the use of
 porous plastic materials. As with the
 ceramics, a material is created
 consisting of a number of
 interconnecting channels or pores
 through which compressed air can
 pass. Advantages of the plastic
 material over aluminum oxide are its
 lighter weight (which makes it
 especially well suited to lift-out
 applications), lower cost, better
 durability, and, depending on the
 actual material, greater resistance to
 breakage. Disadvantages include its
 reduced strength and susceptibility to
 creep.

 Porous plastics are made from a
 number of thermoplastic polymers
 including polyethylene,
 polypropylene, polyvinylidene
 fluoride, ethylene-vinyl acetate,
 styrene-acrylonitrile, and
 polytetrafluoroethylene.13 Probably
 the two most common types of
 plastic materials in use are high
 density polyethylene (PE) and
 styrene-acrylonitrile (SAN). PE is
 used because it is relatively easy to
 process when compared with other
 thermoplastics. Shrinkage is low,  a
 uniform quality product can be
 obtained, and small pore sizes can be
 produced. The actual material is
 manufactured by a proprietary
 process, and,  thus, little information
 is available on it. One manufacturer14
 did indicate that the PE media
 contains no binders or additives, is
 non-polar, and is made from a
 straight homo-polymer (not a blend).

 A European manufacturer produces a
 double-layer PE  material.15 It consists
 of a grainy, open-pore structure
 covered with a thin film layer. The
 manufacturer claims that the double
 layer results in a filtering effect that
 decreases the required maintenance.
 Presumably the lower maintenance
 would result from a reduction in air-
 side fouling of the diffuser. If the air
 supply is properly filtered, air-side
 fouling will likely not be a problem so
 the savings in maintenance costs
 would be  minimal. The thin outer
 layer is, however, potentially
 beneficial in helping  to produce a
 small diameter bubble uniformly over
 the diffuser surface. The
 corresponding increased tendency for
 external fouling to occur, if any, is
 unknown.

The major advantages of the PE
 media compared with the other
plastic alternatives are that it is
lighter in weight (approximately 560
kg/m3(35 Ib/cu ft)), essentially inert,
and will not break, even under
freezing conditions. In addition to the
disadvantages previously mentioned,
the PE material is also a relatively
new product (at least as an air
diffusion device) and all of the long-
term effects may not be known.

The second most common type of
thermoplastic material is SAN
copolymer. The raw material is a
mixture of four different molecules.
Physically, the media is made up of
very small resin spheres that are
fused together under pressure. The
SAN media has a density only slightly
greater than PE. The presence of the
styrene, however, makes the material
brittle, and the media can break if
dropped, even at room temperature.
A major advantage of the SAN
material is that is has been in use for
approximately 15 years without
known deleterious effects.

Flexible Sheaths

Flexible diffusers have been in use
for approximately 40 years. They
initially were referred to as "sock"
diffusers and were made from
materials such as plastic, synthetic
fabric cord, or woven cloth. Because
of the woven type sheaths, a metallic
or plastic core material was
necessary for structural support.
Although sock diffusers were capable
of achieving relatively high oxygen
transfer rates, fouling problems were
often severe. Today, there is
essentially no market for the early
sock design.

Within the  last several years, a new
type of flexible diffuser has been
introduced. It consists of a thin
flexible sheath made from soft plastic
or rubber. Air passages are created
by punching minute slots in the
sheath material.  When the air is
turned on, the sheath expands. Each
slot acts as a variable aperture
opening; the higher the air flow rate
the greater the opening. The sheath
material is supported by a tubular
frame.

This new generation of flexible
diffusers has been in operation at a
number of facilities for the last
several years. The new sheath
material has reduced the severe
fouling problems associated with the
earlier woven fabric design. The
 manufacturer estimates sheath life to
 be about 5 years.16

 Types of Fine Pore Diffusers

 Today, there are four general shapes
 of fine pore diffusers on the market:
 plates, tubes, domes, and discs. Each
 will be discussed in detail in the
 subsections that follow.

 Plate Diffusers

 The original fine pore diffuser design
 was a flat rectangular plate. Plates
 are typically 30 cm (12 in.) square
 and 2.5 to 3.8 cm (1 to 1.5 in.) thick.
 They are manufactured from either
 glass-bonded silica or glass-bonded
 aluminum oxide. The plates are
 installed in the tank by grouting them
 into recesses in the floor, cementing
 them into prefabricated holders, or
 clamping them into metal holders. Of
 the three, the metal holders are the
 least attractive because corrosion of
 the holders tends to foul the
 underside of the diffusers. A
 chamber underneath the plates acts
 as an air plenum. The number of
 plates fixed over a common plenum
 is not standard and can vary from
 only a few to 500 or more. In current
 U.S. designs, individual control
 orifices are not provided on each
 plate.

 Fine pore plates were used almost
 exclusively as the method of air
 diffusion in the early activated sludge
 plants through the 1920s. Today,
 other than in some of the original
 plants, fine pore plates are not often
 specified and installed. Some
 possible explanations for their
 decline in popularity include 1)
 problems obtaining uniform air
 distribution with a number of plates
 attached to the same plenum, 2) the
 inconvenience of removing plates
 when they are grouted in place, and
 3) the difficulty in adding diffusers to
 meet future increases in plant
 loading.

 Tube Diffusers

 Like the plates, fine pore tubes have
 been used in wastewater treatment
for a number of years. The early
tubes, Saran wound or made from
aluminum oxide, have been followed
by the introduction of SAN
copolymer, porous PE, and, most
recently, the new generation of
flexible media.

-------
 All the tube diffusers on the market
 are of the same general shape.
 Typically, the media portion is 50 to
 60 cm (20 to 24 in.) long and has an
 O.D. of 6.4 to 7.6 cm (2.5 to 3.0 in.).
 The thickness of the media is
 variable. Flexible sheaths are very
 thin, commonly in the range of 0.5 to
 1.3 mm (0.02 to 0.05 in.). The PE
 media is usually supplied with a
 thickness of 6.4 mm (V* in.), the SAN
 media at approximately 15.2 mm (0.6
 in.), and fused ceramic material in
 the range of 9.5 to 12.7 mm (% to 1/2
 in.).

 The holder designs for the ceramic
 and porous plastic media are very
 similar. Most consist of two end caps
 held together by a connecting rod
 through the center. The rod is
 threaded into the feed end of the
 holder, the media and outer end cap
 installed, and a hex nut placed on the
 threaded rod to secure the assembly.
 In another version, the feed end cap
 and inner support  are one piece with
 the assembly held together by a bolt
 installed through the outer end cap
 and threaded into the support frame.
 For both designs, gaskets are placed
 between the media and the end caps
 to provide an air-tight seal. In some
 cases, a gasket or O-ring is also used
 in conjunction with the retaining bolt
 or hex nut. Typical porous plastic
 tube diffuser assemblies are shown
 in Figure 1.

 For the flexible sheath diffusers, the
 end caps and support frame are one
 piece.  The sheath is installed over
 the support frame  and clamped on
 both ends. In this design, no gaskets
 are required. A typical flexible sheath
 diffuser assembly is illustrated  in
 Figure 2.

 To prevent corrosion, all components
 of the various tube assemblies are
 either  stainless steel or durable
 plastic. The gaskets are usually of a
 soft rubber material.

 Tube diffusers are  designed to
 operate in the air flow range of 1 to 5
 L/s (2  to 10 scfm). Because of their
 inherent shape, it is sometimes
 difficult to obtain air discharge
 around the entire circumference of
 the tube. The air distribution pattern
 will vary with different types of
 diffusers. In general, however, the
 extent  of inoperative area will be a
function of the air flow rate and the
 headloss across the media.  Because
dead areas can provide sites for slime
growth and other foulant
             End Cap
                                                     %-in. Threaded Nipple
   Attachment Bolt
Polyethylene
   Media
 One Piece Endcap
and Center Support
                                   ENVIREX
                      (used with permission of Rexnord, Inc.)
    Control Orifice
                                 Acrylonitrile Styrene —j
                                      Copolymer     /
                        Gasket and Washer


                                      End Cap
                                                                      Nut
                                                    7
   34-'m. Threaded Nipple
                Threaded Connecting Rod
                                    FMC
Figure  1.

Typical  Porous Plastic Tube Diffusers
    Diffuser Header Pipe
                       Stainless Steel Clamp
                                              Flexible Sheath
                              24.5 in. Including Threaded Nipple
                                   WYSS
                      (used with permission of Parkson Corp.)
Figure 2.

Typical Flexible Sheath Tube Diffuser

-------
development, it would be beneficial
prior to selecting a particular tube
design to observe its performance on
a laboratory- or pilot-scale basis.

Most tube assemblies are fitted with
a control orifice inserted in the inlet
nipple to aid in air distribution.
Typically, the orifice is approximately
13 mm (0.5 in.) in diameter, although
different sizes can be used for
various design flow rates. Also, some
assemblies  include check valves to
prevent the backflow of liquid into
the air piping.

Dome Diffusers

The fine  pore dome diffuser was
developed in Europe  in the 1950s
and introduced in the U.S. market in
the early 1970s.17 Long considered
the standard in England and some
parts of Europe, domes are now
installed in a number of U.S. plants.

The dome diffuser is  essentially a
circular disc with a downward-turned
edge. Currently, these diffusers are
18 cm (7 in.) in diameter and 3.8 cm
(1.5 in.) high. The media is
approximately 1 5 mm (0.6 in.) thick
on the edges and 19  mm (% in.) on
the top or flat surface. Domes
presently are being made only of
aluminum oxide.

The dome diffuser is  mounted on
either a PVC or mild steel saddle-type
base plate. The PVC saddles are
solvent welded to the air distribution
piping at the factory.  This minimizes
adhesive problems that could occur
in the center of the dome. The bolt
can be made from a number of
materials, including brass and
stainless steel. Care must be taken
when installing the dome to prevent
over-tightening of the center bolt.
Applying too much force can lead to
immediate diffuser breakage and/or
future air leakage due to bolt
stretching if a nonmetallic bolt is
used.  A soft rubber gasket (neoprene)
is placed between the diffuser and
the base plate. A washer and  gasket
are also used between the bolt head
and the top of the diffuser.
Schematics of two dome diffusers
are shown in Figure 3.

The slope of the headloss vs. air flow
rate curve for a ceramic diffuser is
very flat.  It has been reported  that a
variation from the average of .±10
percent in the specific permeability of
a diffuser can result in a 200-percent
change in air flow rate for the same
headloss under wet operating
             Pipe Strap
       Adjustable Pipe Support
                                            ,— Retainer Bolt and Washer


                                                       Dome Diffuser

                                                       Base Plate


                                                       Control Orifice


                                                       4-in. PVC Pipe
                                              Anchor Bolt
                             GRAY ENGINEERING
                  Control Orifice-

                  Pipe Strap
                                             Retainer Bolt and Washer
                    Base Plate
                                                       Gasket
                                             Adjustable Pipe Support
                                  NORTON
Figure 3.

Typical Ceramic Dome Diffusers

conditions.18 To better distribute the
air throughout the system, control
orifices are placed in each diffuser
assembly to create additional
headloss and balance the air flow.
The fastening bolt is hollowed out
and a small hole drilled in the side,  or
the orifice is drilled  in the base of the
saddle. The size of the orifice is
typically 5 mm (0.2 in.).
Dome diffusers are usually designed
to operate at an air flow rate of 0.5
L/s (1 scfm) with a range of 0.25 to 1
L/s (0.5 to 2 scfm). In designing a
system, careful consideration should
be given to the desired air flow
range. Testing has shown that
oxygen transfer efficiency (OTE) is
dependent on air flow rate per
diffuser, increasing as the air flow
rate decreases (refer to the next
major section, Performance
Characterisitcs).  This performance
characteristic may tempt  engineers
to design dome systems to operate at
air flows of 0.2 to 0.25 L/s (0.4 to 0.5

-------
 scfm)/diffuser. Although favorable in
 terms of oxygen transfer, this
 practice can lead to operational
 problems. At low air flow rates,
 uniform air distribution across the
 entire diffuser surface may be
 difficult to obtain. Also, at 0.25 L/s
 (0.5 scfm), the headloss across the
 control orifice will be less than 25
 mm (1 in.) water gauge. At this low
 rate, a different size orifice will be
 needed to balance air flow
 throughout the system. In any case, if
 either the entire surface or portions
 of individual diffusers are not
 discharging air, foulant deposition
 can begin, which could then lead to
 premature fouling of the entire
 system.

 The upper limit for air flow rate for a
 dome diffuser is usually considered
 to be 1  L/s (2 scfm). Operation above
 this level is possible, but is not very
 economical (refer to the next major
 section. Performance
 Characteristics). Increasing the air
 flow rate above the recommended
 upper limit results in a continuing
 decrease in OTE and may require a
 larger control orifice.

 Disc Diffusers

 Disc diffusers are a relatively recent
 development. Discs are flat, or
 relatively so, and are differentiated
 from dome diffusers in that they do
 not include a downward-turned
 peripheral edge. While the dome
 design is relatively standard,
 currently available disc diffusers
 differ in size, shape, method of
 attachment, and type of material.
 Schematics of two disc diffusers are
 presented in Figure 4.

 Disc diffusers are available in
 diameters that range from
 approximately 18 to 24 cm (7 to 9.5
 in.) and thicknesses of 13 to 19 mm
 (Vz to Vt in.). With the exception of
 one design, all discs consist of two
 flat parallel surfaces. For the one
 exception, a raised ring slopes
 slightly downward toward both the
 outer edge and center of the disc. Not
 only is the center not quite as thick
 as the remainder of the disc, but it
 also has a lower permeability. The
 nonuniform profile is claimed to aid
 in producing uniform air flow across
the entire disc surface.19 Two of the
discs also include a step on the outer
edge that is impervious to air flow.
This is done to reduce the area of the
           Aluminum Oxide Disc
                    O-Rina \ Contoured Surface
     Compressed Edge

            Control Orifice
                                                           Threaded
                                                           Retainer Ring
                Base Plate Solvent
                Welded to Pipe
                                               4-in. PVC Pipe
                                  SANITAIRE
                                         Polyethylene Disc
              Gasket
               Control Orifice and
               Check Valve
                                                           Threaded
                                                           Retainer Ring
                                                       Base Plate

                                                 Mechanical Wedge Section
                                                 for Attaching Base
                                   NOKIA
 Figure  4.

 Typical  Disc Diffusers


 vertical edge20 and is also of benefit
 in attaching the media to the holder.
 Although the majority of disc
 diffusers are made from aluminum
 oxide, a porous PE disc is also
 available.

 Like the dome diffusers, the disc is
 mounted on a  plastic (usually PVC)
 saddle-type base plate. Two basic
 methods are used to secure the
 media to the holder: a center bolt or a
 peripheral clamping ring. The center
 bolt method is similar to that used
 with the domes. A soft flat rubber
 gasket is placed between the diffuser
 and base plate. The bolt assembly
 itself includes  a washer and a gasket.
 The more common method of
 attaching the disc to the holder is to
 use a screw-on retainer ring. With
 the threaded collar, a number of
 different gasket arrangements  are
 used. They include a flatgasket
 placed below the disc, a U-shaped
 gasket that covers a small portion of
the top and bottom and the entire
edge of  the disc, and an 0-ring
gasket placed between the top  of the
disc and the retainer ring. The base
plate typically includes small raised
ribs to aid in obtaining an air tight
seal between the gasket and the base
plate.

In general, the retainer ring method
of attaching the diffuser to the holder
has two potential advantages over a
center bolt. It has been reported that
as diffusers become fouled, excessive
amounts of air are discharged from
the edges and the area around the
center bolt washer.17 Although not
specifically documented under
controlled conditions, this
nonuniform air flow could reduce the
OTE of the system. The retainer ring
will tend to minimize these problems.
The second advantage is that
breakage of diffusers from over-
tightening the bolt or air leakage
problems from stretching a
nonmetallic bolt  can be eliminated.

-------
There are two methods of attaching
disc diffusers to the air piping. The
first is to solvent weld the base plate
to the PVC header prior to shipment
to the job site. To avoid future
additional costs associated with
replacing sections of pipe, the
original design should include all the
base plates that may be needed to
meet future design requirements for
the system. During the early life of
the plant, not all the diffusers are
installed and plugs are simply
inserted in the unused base plates.

The second disc diffuser attachment
method uses mechanical means of
attachment. The mechanical
attachment can be either a bayonet-
type holder that is forced into a
saddle on the pipe or a wedge section
that is placed around the pipe and
clamps the holder to the pipe. With
the exception of one manufacturer
that employs the wedge clamp
method of attachment and ships
units preassembled, the pipe arrives
at the job site with only the holes
drilled. The latter technique makes
shipping the pipe somewhat easier
(less bulky) and can reduce damage
that may occur during shipment or
installation. With these types of
designs, holes for additional diffusers
can be prednlled and plugged or
drilled at a later date.

Disc diffuser assemblies also  include
individual control orifices in each
assembly. Designs employing the bolt
method of attachment usually use a
hollow bolt with an orifice drilled in
its side. The other designs use either
an orifice drilled in the bottom of the
diffuser holder or a threaded inlet in
the base where a small plug
containing the desired orifice  can be
inserted. The diameter of the orifice
is similar to that used with the dome
diffusers.

Disc diffusers have a design air flow
range of 0.25 to 1.5 L/s (0.5 to 3
scfm)/diffuser. The  most  economical
operating range will, however, be
somewhat dependent on  diffuser
size. The 18-cm (7-in.) diameter discs
are usually operated in the range of
0.25 to 1 L/s (0.5 to 2 scfm), similar
to the dome diffusers. For the larger
discs, with diameters of 22 to 24 cm
(8.5 to 9.5 in.), typical lower and
upper limits are 0.3  to 0.45 L/s (0.6
to 0.9 scfm) and 1.25 to 1.5 L/s (2.5
to 3 scfm), respectively. Prolonged
operation at flow rates less than 0.3
L/s (0.6 scfm)  is not desirable with a
large disc because insufficient air is
available to ensure good distribution
across the entire surface of the
media. In those applications where
operation above 1 L/s (2 scfm) is
desirable, the control orifice should
be sized accordingly so that the
headloss produced does not
adversely affect the economics of the
system.
Clean water testing has shown that
OTE is related to diffuser size.19'21'22
A fewer number of large-diameter
discs than small diameter-discs are
required to achieve equivalent
oxygen transfer. If the same air flow
rate is applied to equal numbers of
large- and small-diameter discs, the
rsulting lower flux rate on the larger
units will yield a slightly higher OTE.
There is,  however, no generally
accepted ratio for comparing various
size diffusers. One 23-cm (9-in.)
diameter disc has been found to be
approximately equivalent to 1.1 to
1.4 18-cm (7-in.) diameter discs
when comparing media of  a given
pore size. The actual  ratio is related
to air flow rate and diffuser
submergence.

Diffuser Layout

Plate Diffusers

Fine pore plates are most often
grouted into the basin floor.
Downcomer pipes deliver the air to
open concrete channels below the
plates. The channels  act as
distribution manifolds.

Plate diffusers can be installed in
either a total floor coverage or spiral
roll pattern. Total floor arrangements
may include closely spaced rows
running either the width (transverse)
or length (longitudinal) of the basin or
incorporated into a ridge and furrow
design. Spiral roll arrangements
include rows of plates typically
located along one or both walls of
long narrow tanks. The total floor
layout will produce a  higher OTE,
whereas the spiral roll pattern will
produce more effective bulk mixing of
mixed liquor.

Tube Diffusers

Most tube diffuser assemblies
include a 19-mm (%-in) threaded
nipple (stainless steel or plastic) for
attachment to the air piping system.
This design makes the tubes
especially well suited for retrofit
and/or upgrade applications since
many coarse bubble diffuser systems
use the identical method of
attachment.
The air headers to which the tubes
are mounted are usually fabricated
from PVC, stainless steel, or
fiberglass reinforced plastic. Carbon
steel is sometimes used but is less
desirable because corrosion inside
the pipe can lead to fouling of the
media. In most cases, the wall
thickness of the pipe is not sufficient
to structurally support the diffuser.
Thus, threaded adapters or saddles
are either glued, welded, or
mechanically attached to the pipe at
the points where the tubes are to be
connected. The actual diameter of air
headers will vary depending on the
number of diffusers to be  installed
and the design air flow rate.

The depth of tube submergence in
the basin will vary. In new
installations, the tubes are usually
placed as close to the floor as
possible, typically within 30 cm (1 ft).
In retrofit applications, the discharge
pressure of the existing blowers will
control the submergence. The tubes
will either be installed at the same
elevation as the original system or
possibly at a somewhat greater
distance off the floor to compensate
for any increase  in headloss through
the fine pore media as opposed to the
coarse bubble device it is  replacing.
The air headers may be secured to
the basin floor with adjustable
height, stainless steel pipe supports.

Tube diffusers are most often
installed along one or both long sides
of the aeration basin (single or dual
spiral roll pattern, respectively). In
some cases, the  headers are
mounted on mechanical lifts. Using
this concept, the air headers and
diffusers can be removed  for
inspection and cleaning without
dewatering the basin. On  the header
itself, the tubes can be installed
along either one side (narrow band)
or both sides (wide band) of the pipe.

Tubes can also be installed in either
a cross roll or total floor coverage
pattern. In the cross roll design, the
headers are placed across the tank
width and the spacing between
diffusers, 0.3 to 0.9 m (1 to 3 ft), is
small in comparison to the spacing
between headers, 3 to 9 m (10 to 30
ft). In the total floor coverage pattern,
the distance between headers and
the spacing between diffusers on the

-------
headers approach the same value. In
general, total floor coverage will
provide the highest OTE. The spiral
roll configurations will provide better
bulk mixing throughout the tank than
either total floor coverage or cross
roll. One potential disadvantage of
the cross roll and total floor coverage
designs is that the location and
amount of piping required usually
makes the use of mechanical liftouts
impractical.

Disc and Dome Diffusers

Although their shape and operating
characteristics may differ, the typical
air piping and diffuser layout is
identical for both disc and dome
diffuser systems. The air distribution
manifold should preferably be made
of PVC, the compounds of which are
described in ASTM D-1784 or D-
3915, cell classifications 12454B and
124524, respectively (the latter is a
stress-rated compound and hence a
better choice). It is also
recommended that the PVC be UV
stabilized with 2-percent minimum
Ti02, or equivalent. The
specifications, dimensions, and
properties of the pipe itself conform
to either ASTM D-2241 or D-3034.

The piping network is usually a
nominal 10 cm (4 in.) in diameter,
with the actual O.D. ranging from
10.7 to 11.4 cm (4.2 to 4.5 in.). The
wall thickness is also variable,
typically ranging from approximately
3.0 to 3.6 mm (0.12 to 0.14 in.).
Sections of pipe are connected with
gasketed, mechanical expansion
joints to allow for expansion and
contraction of the PVC over a
temperature range of approximately
37°C (100°F). Pipe supports, usually
made from PVC, are provided to
secure the system to the tank floor.
The support consists of a cradle or
saddle and a holddown strap. The
strap is either secured with a bolt or
snaps into place. The pipe supports
are adjustable so variations in the
tank floor elevation can be
compensated for. The pipe support is
attached to the basin floor with a
single stainless steel bolt and a
concrete anchor. The PVC strap and
pipe support have in the past
experienced some breakage
problems. To eliminate these
problems, or in cases where the
diffusers are to be mounted a
significant distance above the tank
floor, e.g., 0.6 m (2 ft), stainless steel
pipe supports can be used.
 Discs and domes are generally
 installed in a total floor coverage or
 grid pattern. In some cases where
 oxygen demand is low and mixing
 may control the design (near the end
 of long narrow tanks), the diffusers
 can be placed in tightly spaced rows
 along the side or middle of the basin
 to create a single spiral roll or center
 roll mixing pattern, respectively. The
 diffusers are  usually mounted as
 close to the tank floor as possible,
 within 23 cm (9 in.) of the highest
 point of the floor being typical. As
 mentioned in the discussion of tube
 diffusers, the submergence in some
 retrofit applications may be
 controlled by the available blower
 discharge pressure.

 Characteristics of Fine Pore
 Media

 The following parameters have been
 used to characterize fine pore
 media:20'23'24

   permeability
   uniformity
   dynamic wet pressure
   strength
   chemical stability
   resistance to heat
   density (weight)

 These  characteristics, discussed
 below  primarily in conjunction with
 porous ceramic materials, are also
 applicable in most cases to porous
 plastic materials. The flexible sheath,
 however, is a very different  type of
 material. Some of the above
 characteristics are important in
 designing a flexible sheath diffuser
 system, while others, e.g., strength
 and density, are irrelevant.

Permeability

 Permeability is a measure of a porous
 medium's frictional resistance to
flow. It is an empirical rating that
relates flux rate to pressure loss and
pore size and/or pore volume. The
permeability test procedure  was
developed by the ceramic
 manufacturing industry as a simple
 method of characterizing diffuser
units. Permeability is usually defined
as the amount of air at standard
conditions that will pass through
0.09 m2 (1 sq ft) of dry porous media
under a differential pressure
equivalent to 5 cm (2 in.) water
gauge when tested at room
temperature. The flow value obtained
(scfm) under these conditions is
referred to as the permeability (perm)
rating.

Permeability measurement does not
provide a true basis for comparison of
media performance because the
same permeability rating could be
obtained from a diffuser with a few
relatively large pores or a multitude
of small pores.5 Also, two diffusers
with exactly the same pore structure
would have different ratings if of
different thickness.

Currently, permeability is included in
specifications for porous diffusers. As
best can be determined, however, the
ceramic industry has not
"standardized" this test procedure.
The early specifications were
developed for 30-cm x 30-cm (12-in.
x 12-in.) plates  2.5 cm (1 in.) and 3.8
cm (1.5 in.) thick. Today,
specifications are needed for
products of various shapes, densities,
and wall thicknesses, often of ill-
defined effective area. Attempts have
been made to apply the principles of
the test through a parameter known
as specific permeability.25 In its
determination, an applied air flow
rate is measured through a diffuser
mounted on a fixture similar to the
fixture used in service at a pressure
differential of 5 cm (2 in.) water
gauge. From this measurement and
the geometry of the diffusers,
estimates are then made as to what
the air flow (scfm) would have been
at 5 cm (2 in.) water gauge
differential had the dimensions of the
test diffuser been 30 cm x 30 cm x
2.5 cm (12 in. x 12 in. x 1 in.).

The specific permeability procedure
has served to improve the utility of
this test, but does not overcome the
following remaining deficiencies:

• Clamping and sealing details are
   not well enough defined to provide
  acceptable precision.
• Effective diffusion area cannot
   always be  easily defined.
• Correction factors to account for
  pressure, temperature, and
   humidity of the air have not been
  developed.

-------
Uniformity

Uniformity of individual diffusers and
the entire aeration system is of
extreme importance if high OTE is to
be attained.  On an individual basis,
the diffuser  must be capable of
delivering uniform air distribution
across the entire surface of its media.
If dead spots exist, chemical or
biological foulants may form and
eventually lead to premature fouling
of the diffuser. Also, if small areas of
extremely high  air flux rate are
present, larger bubbles may form and
OTE will increase.

A porous diffuser specification
should include a requirement for
testing to assure that the media will
distribute air uniformly. The common
practice is to select random samples
from each batch during the
manufacturing run. The diffusers are
placed in water for a fixed period to
ensure that  they are saturated, then
tested in a shallow basin at a
predetermined air flow rate. In most
cases, a visual observation is the
basis for the test. This type of
qualitative method is unacceptably
arbitrary. Two individuals are likely to
have very different definitions for
what constitutes uniform air flow. In
other cases, a high air flow from
around the diffuser periphery may
tend to mask the center of the
diffuser, which  may be completely
dead. The diffusers tested  for
uniformity are usually the  same ones
used for permeability testing. A pass-
fail criteria is established for
acceptance or rejection of  the batch.

A better approach to measuring
uniformity is to  use a quantitative
technique. One such procedure
actually measures the rate of air
release from different areas of the
diffuser.28 With the diffuser
submerged in 5 to 20 cm (2 to 8 in.)
of water and at  an air flow rate of
approximately 10 L/s/m2(2 scfm/sq
ft), the rate of air release is
determined by measuring the
displacement of water from an
inverted cylinder. Based on the air
volume, time, and area  of the
collection cylinder, a flux rate is
determined,  A comparison of the flux
rates from various points on the
diffuser surface will provide a true
indication of media uniformity.
Although procedures have been
presented, no guidelines have yet
been developed in regard to the
variations between points that could
be allowed before the diffuser would
be rejected as nonuniform.
Development of such guidelines
should be undertaken.

In addition to uniformity among
individual diffusers, air flow
characteristics for individual grids
must also be uniform. Nonuniformity
of air flow in individual grids is not
likely to be a problem if an adequate
piping distribution system and
suitably sized individual control
orifices are provided.

Uniformity tests are conducted on
only a relatively small number of
diffusers. Even if all the random
samples pass, it is still possible that
some nonrepresentative diffusers
may be installed in the tank. As a last
check,  the diffusers can be operated
in the aeration tank and submerged
under only a few centimeters  of
water.  If a visual observation
indicates any abnormal diffusers,
they can be replaced prior to putting
the basin into service if spares have
been furnished.

Dynamic Wet Pressure

Dynamic wet pressure (DWP)  is an
important consideration in evaluating
and selecting a porous media. DWP
is defined as the operating headless
across diffuser media submerged in
water at a specified air flow rate  per
diffuser.26 As a general rule, the
smaller the bubble size, the higher
the DWP. While smaller bubbles  may
increase OTE, the additional power
required to overcome the higher
headloss may negate any potential
savings.

The porous media currently in use
have a DWP of 5 to 36 cm (2 to 14
in.) of water when operated within
typical or specified air flow ranges.
The specific value depends on the air
flow rate, type of material, diffuser
thickness, and surface properties. For
ceramic and porous plastic materials,
the headloss vs. air flow rate curve is
linear over the typical operating
range and the slope is relatively flat.
DWP for these materials can vary
from 5 to 30 cm (2  to 12 in.) over the
same range. A fourfold increase in
air flow rate of 0.25 to 1 L/s (0.5 to 2
scfm) per unit for some diffusion
elements will result in only a 2.5- to
5-cm (1 - to 2-in.) increase in
headloss across the media itself. For
the flexible sheath material, the
small holes act as an orifice.
Consequently, the headloss vs. air
flow rate curve is steeper than for the
ceramic and porous plastic media.27
Over the typical air flow operating
range of 1 to 3 L/s (2 to 6 scfm) per
unit, the DWP for flexible diffusers
may increase from 13 to 36 cm (5 to
14 in.).

For the ceramic and plastic materials,
the majority of the DWP is associated
with the pressure required to form
bubbles against the force of surface
tension. Only a small fraction of the
DWP is required to overcome
frictional resistance.26 Thus, the
thickness of the material is only a
minor contributor to DWP.

DWP may be measured in the
laboratory or the field.26 It is
important that porous diffusers be
allowed to soak for several hours
(plastic materials may require much
longer) prior to testing to ensure that
they are completely saturated. Since
the actual headloss will be a function
of the degree of water saturation in
the diffusers, a slightly different
curve will be obtained if the air flow
is started at a low rate and is
increased or vice versa. Standard
practice is to purge the media at the
upper flow value for a predetermined
time interval (5 to 10 min), then
record subsequent headloss values
as the flow rate is decreased.

Because of the relationship between
standard and actual air flow rates
(scfm vs. acfm), the headloss in the
field will be a function of diffuser
submergence. If a field measurement
of DWP is made, different media
must be compared based on acfm.

Strength

Diffusion media must be strong
enough to withstand 1) the static
head of the water above the diffusers
(in cases where the air supply is shut
off), 2) the forces applied when
attaching media to diffuser holders,
and 3) stresses and shocks of
reasonable handling and shipping.

-------
 Slightly different techniques have
 been developed to evaluate the
 strength of diffuser material. For
 discs and domes, this usually
 involves supporting the diffuser in a
 fashion similar to the final assembly,
 then applying a load to an area 2,5
 cm (1 in.) in diameter area in the
 center of the diffuser. Using this
 method, developed primarily for the
 dome diffuser, acceptable
 compressive loads for the ceramic
 material range from 270 to 455 kg
 (600 to 1000 Ib). Diffusers that use a
 peripheral clamping method do not
 require the same strength as those
 that employ the center bolt method of
 attachment.

 Other Characteristics

 Other characteristics of porous media
 are their chemical stability, heat
 resistance, and density. All the
 materials discussed (ceramic, plastic,
 and flexible) are resistant to the
 normal concentrations of chemicals
 used or encountered in wastewater
 treatment. This includes periodic
 exposure to strong acid solutions
 such as hydrochloric and  formic acids
 used in cleaning fouled diffusers. For
 applications where unusual
 concentrations of certain  chemicals
 are to be encountered, it is suggested
 that the media manufacturer be
 consulted and/or a testing program
 undertaken.

 The maximum allowable operating
 temperatures for the various plastic
 materials used in the manufacture of
 diffusers have not been well defined.
 In addition to the specific  compounds
 employed, other factors should be
 considered: anticipated maximum
 stress, environmental exposure,
 allowable deformation (including
 creep), and tolerance to changes in
 characteristics while in service.
 Further definitive work in  this area is
 needed. In general, however, the
 maximum allowable operating
 temperature for plastics will fall in
 the range of 38  to 93°C (100 to
 200°F).

 On the other hand, ceramic materials
 can safely tolerate temperatures up
 to 815°C (1500°F). The maximum
allowable operating temperature for
ceramics, therefore, is not a concern
in wastewater treatment
applications.

Density is of importance mainly in
situations where the diffusers are to
be lifted out of the tank. The ceramic
material has a density that ranges
from approximately 1600  kg/m3(100
Ib/cu ft) for silica to 2325 kg/m3
(145 Ib/cu  ft) for aluminum oxide.20
The porous plastic material in
contrast has a typical density of only
560 to 640 kg/m3 (35 to 40 Ib/cu
ft).13
10

-------
Performance
Characteristics
The purpose of this section is to
provide the reader with information
and reference sources regarding
clean water and process water
performance of the aeration devices
described in the preceding section. In
some cases, performance
characteristics of devices  not
described in the preceding section
are included here for comparative
purposes.

Background

In the late 1 960s and early 1970s,
consulting engineers began
specifying that clean water
performance tests be conducted by
the aeration equipment suppliers  as
a means  of verifying aerator
performance. Various engineers
developed their own testing criteria.

In April 1978, a Workshop Toward
An Oxygen Transfer Standard28
cosponsored by the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) and the American Society of
Civil Engineers (ASCE) was held in
an effort  to obtain consensus
standards for the evaluation of
aeration  devices in both clean and
process waters. The outcome of the
workshop was the formation of an
Oxygen Transfer Standards
Committee under ASCE.

Between 1978 and 1984, this
Committee developed and adopted an
ASCE Standard for the Measurement
of Oxygen Transfer in Clean Water29
and evaluated several process water
test methods.30 Progress with respect
to the development of standardized
test methods for the evaluation of
aeration  devices in clean water has
been substantial. Due to the wide
variety of experience in clean water
testing and the desirability of
incorporating that experience into the
Standard, several years passed prior
to its publication in July 1984.

Clean Water Performance

The following discussion summarizes
clean water performance  data on  fine
pore diffusion devices. Some but not
all of the data were generated using
the current ASCE recommended
clean water standard.29 Thus, the
oxygen transfer results summarized
in this subsection  reflect the
utilization of the current nonlinear
least squares method of analysis as
well as a prior procedure  using the
linear least squares log deficit
analysis.29 The latter method
permitted data truncation. Both
methods produce comparable results
under ideal testing conditions. Every
effort has been made to screen the
data reported herein and to omit data
of questionable validity.

The results of clean water oxygen
transfer tests are reported in a
standardized form as either standard
oxygen transfer efficiency (SOTE),
standard oxygen transfer rate (SOTR),
or standard aeration efficiency (SAE)
as shown in Table 1. The standard
conditions for reporting clean water
tests are also delineated in Table 1.
All data reported in this section are
given as standard transfer values
unless otherwise noted.
Examination of Table 1 indicates that
one of the critical parameters
required for the calculation of oxygen
transfer rates is the equilibrium DO
saturation concentration, CS. For
submerged aeration applications, CS
is significantly greater than the
surface saturation value, CI,
tabulated in most standarad tables.30
It is, therefore, necessary to either
calculate30 CS or measure29 it during
clean water tests. The value of CS is
primarily dependent on diffuser
submergence, diffuser type, tank
geometry, and gas flow rate. One of
the more comprehensive evaluations
of CS in clean water tests was
reported by Yunt et al.31 Typical
results for a variety of diffuser types
at selected submergences are
presented in Figure 5.

The performance of diffusers under
clean water test conditions is
dependent on a number of factors in
addition to those standardized in the
calculations of SOTE, SOTR, and
SAE. Among the important factors
are:

• diffuser type (material, shape, and
  size),
• diffuser placement and density
  (area served per diffuser),
• gas flow rate per diffuser, and
• diffuser submergence and tank
  geometry.

Typical SOTEs for fine pore diffused
air systems are presented in Table 2.
These data are reported for a diffuser
submergence of 4.6-m (15-ft). The
effect of diffuser type, placement,
and air flow rate per diffuser are
clearly delineated from this summary
                                                                                                            11

-------
 Table  1.

 Standard Equations for Clean Water Oxygen Transfer Tests29


 Standard Conditions:

     DO         = 0.0 mg/L      a - 1.0
     Temperature  = 20°C         /J = 1.0
     Pressure     = 1.00 atm

 Standard Oxygen Transfer Rate (SOTR) - mass/time

     SOTR = KtaaoC^V

 Standard Oxygen Transfer Efficiency (SOTE)

     SOTE =  Mass Transferred  x 100
              Mass Supplies

          =  SOTR
 Standard Aeration Efficiency (SAE) - mass/time, power
      SAE =
              SOTR
              Power Input (specified as delivered, brake, wire, or total wire)

  Ki.a = apparent volumetric mass transfer coefficient in ctean water, time"'

 KLa2o = KLa @ 20°C, time"1

    V = volume of water, length3

   YR = mole fraction of oxygen delivered

   A  = density of oxygen at actual temperature and pressure, mass/length3

   q, = volumetric air flow rate, lengthVtime

 C°°2o ~ equilibrium DO saturation concentration attained at infinite time for given diffusion
       device at 20°C and 1 atm, mass/length3
of eight different clean water studies.
In general, it can be observed that
ceramic domes and discs
demonstrate slightly higher clean
water transfer efficiences than
typical porous plastic tubes or flexible
sheath tubes in a grid placement.
Both tubes and discs/domes are
significantly superior to all coarse
bubble placements. Within a given
diffuser type, spreading the diffusers
more uniformly along the tank
bottom area (moving  from single
spiral roll to dual spiral roll to grid)
tends to improve clean water
performance.39 The effects of tank
and diffuser geometry on diffuser
performance have been reported by
numerous investigators. One of the
early, notable studies by Bewtra and
Nicholas32 in a 1.2-m (4-ft) wide x
7.3-m (24-ft) long test tank using
coarse bubble spargers and fine pore
Saran tubes demonstrated similar
effects of geometry.
Figure 6, derived from the data
contained in the Table 2 references,
demonstrates the effect of air flow
rate per diffuser on SOTE. SOTEs for
domes and discs in a grid placement
decrease significantly with increased
air flow. A somewhat smaller effect
is evident for porous plastic media
and flexible tubes, while coarse
bubble patterns are relatively
unaffected by gas flow rate with
some indication of increasing SOTE
at the higher gas flows. Very similar
patterns were reported in 1964 by
Bewtra and Nicholas32 for coarse
bubble spargers and fine pore tubes.

The effects of water depth on oxygen
transfer performance for several
types of diffusers are illustrated in
Figures 7 and 8. Although these data
are for one specific test tank and air
flow rate,31 they are representative of
the typical effects of depth on
performance. In general, SOTE
values will  increase with increasing
depth since mean oxygen partial
 pressure is higher (thereby resulting
 in a greater driving force) and
 opportunity is present for longer
 bubble residence time in the aeration
 tank. The SAE, however, remains
 relatively constant (or may decrease)
 for fine pore diffusers as depth
 increases since power requirements
 to drive the same volume of air
 through diffusers at the greater
 depths will increase. In contrast, the
 coarse bubble diffusers exhibit a
 gradually increasing SAE with
 increasing depth, while not reaching
 the overall efficiencies demonstrated
 by the fine pore systems.

 The clean water SOTE performance
 data in Table 3 are for PE plastic
 tubes. The data are typical of fine
 pore diffusers,  exhibiting increasing
 OTE with increasing diffuser density
 (moving from single spiral roll to dual
 spiral roll to grid). Popel35 observed
 that increased diffuser density in
 grids decreases upward flow
 velocities and, therefore, increases
 the retention time of bubbles. He
 reported on one field test of a
 countercurrent aeration system with
 a rotating bridge. The aeration
 channel  had a width of 11 m (36 ft)
 and a depth of 3.2 m (10.5 ft). SOTEs
 of 5.6 to 6.9 percent/m (1.7 to 2.1
 percent/ft) of submergence were
 reported at air flow  rates of 1.5 to 3
 L/s (3 to 6  scfm)/diffuser.

Typical performance of a  flexible
 sheath diffuser37 is  summarized in
Table 4. This diffuser also exhibits  a
decreasing transfer efficiency with
 increasing  air flow rate. The effect of
diffuser placement is also evident.
The increase for quarter-point
placement  vs. single spiral roll
placement  in a  rectangular basin is
greater than for the mid-width
placement. Bewtra and Nicholas32
found that a dual spiral roll
placement was more efficient than a
 mid-width placement  in a rectangular
tank.

The clean water SOTEs of disc/dome
grid systems are illustrated in Table
5. This type of system has produced
the highest transfer efficiencies
reported for fine pore devices. The
density of placement is greater than
in the tube grid systems, and the air
flow rates per diffuser are lower.
Huibregtse et al.21 reported a slightly
increased transfer efficiency with a
24-cm (9.4-in.)  diameter disc vs. an
18-cm (7-in.) diameter dome. The
12

-------
               12.0
               11,5
               11.0
           O>
           i.   10.5
               10.0
                9.5
Tank: 20 ft x 20 ft
Power: ~1 hp delivered/1,000 cu ft for tubes
         and coarse bubble diffusers
       ~0.5 hp delivered/1,000 cu ft for ceramic domes
                                       1                   1
                                      10                  15

                                                 Diffuser Submergence (ft)
                                 20
                                  I
                                 25
 Figure 5.

 Effect of Diffuser Submergence on C^20 for Three Diffuser Types
Table 2.

Clean Water Oxygen Transfer Efficiency Comparison for Selected Diffusers
Diffuser
Type & Placement
Ceramic Discs-Grid
Ceramic Domes-Grid
Porous Plastic Tubes
Air Flow Rate
(scfm/diffuser)
0.6-2.9
0.5-2.5
SOTE (%)
at 1 5-ft
Submergence
25-36
27-39
Reference
21
21,31,33,34
  Grid                       2.4-4.0
  Dual spiral roll              3.0-9.7
  Single spiral roll             2.0-12.0

Flexible Sheath Tubes

  Grid                         1-4
  Quarter points                2-6
  Single spiral roll               2-6

Coarse Bubble Diffusers

  Dual spiral roll              3.3-9.9
  Mid-width                  4.2-45
  Single spiral roll              10-35
  28-32
  18-28
  13-25
  22-29
  19-24
  15-19
  12-13
  10-13
   9-12
   35
21,31,36
 21,36
   37
   37
   37
 31,38
 31,38
 31,38
increase was in the range of 5 to 15
percent, varying with depth. He
attributed the increase to a 70-
percent increase in effective surface
area with the discs. He also indicated
that the larger surface area limits the
degree of bubble coalescence. Houck
and Boon17 and Yunt and Hancuff27
have also reported a similar
relationship between dome/disc
diameter and oxygen transfer per
diffuser.

The data from the references in Table
5 are plotted in Figure 9 to show the
general trend between SOTE  and
diffuser density and air flow rate per
diffuser. Increasing diffuser density
increases SOTE, and increased air
flow rates for a given diffuser density
decreases SOTE.
                                                                                                                13

-------
    o
    CO
         40
         35
         30
         25
         20
         15
         10
                  Ceramic Disc/Dome Grid
                  (References 21,31,33,34)
     Higher SOTE values for one
     diffuser type at any given flow
     rate indicates increased diff user
     density or dual placement.

     Diffuser Submergence = 15 ft
          Porous Plastic Tubes
          (References 21,31,36)
                                            Coarse Bubble Diffusers
                                            (References 31,38)
                                   6          9

                            Air Flow Rate per Diffuser (scfm)
                   12
                               15
Figure 6.

Effect of Air Flow Rate per Diffuser on SOTE for Four Diffuser Types
Process Water Performance

Development of a clean water
standard was the springboard from
which additional studies were
undertaken by the ASCE Oxygen
Transfer Standards Committee to
evaluate a number of test procedures
used for estimating oxygen transfer
under process conditions. Substantial
process oxygen transfer data have
been collected using these
procedures over the past few years.
The standard clean water transfer
rate (SOTR), as measured at 20°C
with a zero residual DO
concentration, may be related to
actual field conditions (OTRf)
according to the following
equations:40
 OTR, = cSOTR
                        - C
where:  a =
                KLa,
                KLa

         C* (field)
      C* (clean water)
 T =
Q =
           de
      PS + de - P»
flT-20 _
KLaT
K ta 20
                                      KL3f =  apparent volumetric mass
                                              transfer coefficient in
                                              process water
 C  =    equilibrium DO saturation
         concentration corresponding
         to a given partial pressure of
         oxygen, temperature, and
         volume

 CsT =    surface DO saturation at 1
         atm total pressure, 100
         percent relative  humidity,
         and temperature T

 CS2o =   surface DO saturation
         concentration at 1 atm total
         pressure, 100 percent
         relative humidity, and a
         temperature of 20°C

 Pb =     base pressure

 Ps =     standard pressure of 1  atm

 Pv2o =   vapor pressure of water at a
         temperature of 20°C

 de =     effective saturation depth at
         infinitive time

 Before 1981, the methods used to
 evaluate aerator performance under
 process conditions were inconsistent
 and coherent data on process water
 performance were extremely limited.
 Alpha is probably the most
 controversial and reasearched
 parameter used in translating clean
 water oxygen transfer data to actual
 field performance. Variables affecting
 the value of alpha include aerator
 type, nature of wastewater
 contaminants, position within the
 treatment scheme, process loading
 rate, bulk liquid DO, water depth, and
 air flow rate. Coherent data on alpha
 values for various aeration devices
 are limited. Alpha values  of 0.2**^o
 1 .SS^nave been published. Because
 much of the reported alpha data was
 obtained from bench-scale units
 (which did not properly simulate
 mixing and Kua levels, aerator type,
 water depth, and/or the geometry
 effects of their full-scale
 counterparts), these data  are of
questionable value. Reliable full-
scale test procedures for use under
 process conditions, coupled with
clean water performance data are
required to overcome these
deficiencies. Several references on
this subject provide useful
 information.40'43"45
14

-------
           50
          40
          30
          20
           10
                Tank: 20 ft x 20 ft
                Power: ~1 hp delivered/1,000 cu ft for tubes
                         and coarse bubble diffusers
                       —0.5 hp delivered/1,000 cu ft for
                         ceramic domes
                                         I
                          10            15

                                  Water Depth (ft)
               20
25
Figure 7.

Effect of Water Depth on SOTE for Three Diffuser Types31
Test Methods

In 1981, the ASCE Oxygen Transfer
Standards Subcommittee undertook
a seven-site study to evaluate, in
parallel, four principal methods for
estimating oxygen transfer under
process conditions.46 These methods
include the steady state method, the
nonsteady state method, an off-gas
analysis procedure, and two inert gas
tracer techniques.

Those test methods requiring that the
rate of DO change be zero at any
given point in the test volume are
referred to as steady state methods;
those depending on a rate of DO
change with time are called
nonsteady state tests. In both cases,
however, it is necessary that the
wastewater influent flow rate and
characteristics, as well as the test
volume, oxygen uptake rate, and field
oxygen transfer coefficient, Ki_at, be
constant. In addition, basin DO
values must be in excess of 1 mg/L
for carbonaceous oxidation and 2
mg/L for nitrification to obtain valid
uptake data.

To overcome the problem of
maintaining steady load and KL3(
conditions and to ensure better
precision, wastewater flow may be
discontinued during a test. This
method of testing is referred to as the
batch or batch endogenous technique
as contrasted with continuous flow
methods. Batch testing, however,
suffers the  critical disadvantage that
it does not realistically measure true
field transfer rates of alpha values
under normal loading conditions. For
this reason, it was not included as
one of the methods studied by the
Oxygen Transfer Standards
Committee.
In contrast to the steady state and
nonsteady methods, the off-gas and
inert gas tracer procedures do not
require steady process loads, do not
need positive basin DO, and do not
require the measurement of oxygen
uptake rate. Accordingly, these
procedures can be more effective in
measuring oxygen transfer in the
field under actual process conditions
than the steady state and nonsteady
state methods.

Of the four methods discussed, the
off-gas procedure is unique in that it
measures the fraction of oxygen
transferred from the gas stream
directly, whereas the other methods
(the liquid phase methods) determine
KL3f. For those methods relying on
Ki_a determinations, errors in applied
air flowrates proportionally affect
computations of OTE and oxygen
transfer rate.  Since the off-gas
procedure measures OTE directly as
well as the rate of gas flow leaving
the liquid surface at each test
position, accurate plant air flow
measurement is not critical. Accurate
plant air flow measurement is
desirable, however, to validate that a
representative gas sampling was
obtained. Where off-gas OTE results
must be converted to standard
conditions, accurate measurements
of basin temperature and DO must be
made.
Selected factors affecting the
estimation of OTE are identified in
Table  6. The inert gas tracer methods
have the broadest applicability since
they may be used for both
mechanical and diffused air devices.
The steady state and nonsteady state
methods generally are not applicable
to plug flow reactors where alpha,
DO, backmixing, and applied air flow
rate vary throughout the basin. The
tracer techniques, though less
affected by the above factors, also
are not ideally suited for use in plug
flow regimes. The questionable
impact of variable gas flow rate and
KL3f throughout the basin, along with
the need for accurate knowledge of
local air flow  rates throughout the
basin, can adversely affect the
accuracy of the tracer techniques.

The off-gas procedure, which is
capable of measuring localized
performance throughout the basin
with respect to OTE, air flow rate.
                                                                                                             15

-------
10



8
CD
ra
i
o
i 6
a
CM *
0 4
.D
LLJ
2
o-
<
" Tank: 20 ft x 20 ft
Power: —1 hp delivered/1 ,000 cu ft for tubes
and coarse bubble diffusers
—0,5 hp delivered/ 1,OOO cu ft for ceramic domes
-
Ceramic Domes - Grid Placement

-
Porous Plastic Tubes - Dual Spiral Roll Placement
"
^»TT—- ,.
^^^^ff/^/ZZZZz^
Coarse Bubble Diffusers
1111
3 10 15 20 25
Water Depth (ft)
Figure 8.

Effect of Water Depth on SAE for Three Diffuser Types3'
                                       affected by a myriad of factors, some
                                       of the more important of which are

                                       • wastewater characteristics,
                                       • process type and flow regime,
                                       • loading conditions,
                                       • basin geometry,
                                       • diffuser placement and
                                         performance characteristics,
                                       • changes in performance due to
                                         fouling,
                                       • mixed liquor DO control and air
                                         supply flexibility,
                                       • mechanical integrity of the
                                         system,
                                       • operator expertise, and
                                       • quality of preventive maintenance.

                                       Previous Water Pollution Control
                                       Federation (WPCF) Manuals of
                                       Practice (MOP) on Aeration,5'7 along
                                       with the upcoming revised MOP No.
                                       5 are good general references on the
                                       above factors. To  minimize life cycle
                                       costs of an aeration system, all of
                                       these factors must be considered
                                       during design.

                                       The areas of greatest concern in
                                       process water oxygen transfer
                                       performance are wastewater
                                       characteristics, process type and flow
                                       regime, and loading conditions. They
                                       all have a significant effect on the
                                       alpha profile of a system, DO control,
                                       and changes in aerator performance
                                       with time due to diffuser fouling.
                                       These factors are discussed after the
                                       following process water data base
                                       presentation.
Table 3.

Clean Water Oxygen Transfer Efficiencies of Porous Plastic Tubes
Placement
Grid*
Dual Spiral Roll
Single Spiral Roll
Air Flow
(scfm/diffuser)
2.4-4.0
3.2-6.3
9.0-9.7
2.0-6.7
8.0-12.0
SOTE (%) at Water
1 0 ft 1 5 ft
28-32
11-16 17-24
10-14 15
12-15 15-20
10-15 10-17
Depth
20ft
—
22-32
21-26
22-25
22
Reference
35
21,31,36
21,31,36
21,31,36
21,31,36
•Placement density = 7.7 sq ft/tube. Tank is 14.4 ft x 108.2 ft.
and driving force, is well suited for
evaluating the process water
performance of diffused aeration
systems in plug flow as well as
complete mix tanks. As with all test
methods, representative  sampling of
the test basin is essential with this
procedure if an accurate  appraisal of
system performance is to be
obtained.

Factors Affecting Performance

The performance of diffused aeration
systems under process conditions is
Process Water Data Base

As indicated earlier, a substantial
data base exists for the clean water
performance of the diffused aeration
systems considered in this report.
The process water oxygen transfer
data base is much more limited.
Since oxygen transfer performance
under field  conditions is really the
ultimate goal, expansion of the latter
data base is needed. The following
summarizes and discusses available
data for the fine pore diffusion
systems previously described. A few
aeration systems not previously
described are also examined for
comparative purposes.

Process water oxygen transfer
performance data from 13
evaluations at various sites
employing a variety of aeration
16

-------
Table 4.

Clean Water Oxygen Transfer Efficiencies of Flexible Sheath Tubes37
Placement
Floor Cover (Grid)
Quarter Points
Mid-Width
Single Spiral Roll
Air Flow
(scfm/diffuser)
1-4
2-6
2-6
2-6
SOTE (%) at Water Depth
10ft
14-18
13-15
9-11
7-11
15ft
21-27
18-22
15-18
14-18
20ft
29-35
24-29
23-17
21-28
Table 5.

Clean Water Oxygen Transfer Efficiencies of Ceramic Disc/Dome Grid Systems
   Diffuser Density
    (sq ft/diffuser)
   Air Flow
(scfm/diffuser)
                                      SOTE(%) at Water Depth
10ft
        15ft
20ft
                         Reference
     Disc-9,4 in,

        6.4

        4.1

        3.2

     Dome-7 in.
   0.9-3.0       20-22   31      34-37        21

   0.8-2.9       21-24   30-34   35-41        21

   0.7-2.6       22-25   31-34   38-41        21
5.6

4.2-4.4
3.2-3.3
2.2-2.5
1.5
0.5-2.0

0.5-2.5
0.5-2.0
0.5-2.5
0.5-2.5
—
i f
16-23
20-24
17-23
18-26
25-31

25-32
27-37
27-35
27-34
28-40

30-41
31-44
33-47
—
33

33,34
21,31,33
33,34
34
systems are presented in Table 7.
Each data set represents the
observed performance of a particular
system over a period of several hours
only and is not suitable for the design
of similar systems. The intent of this
table is to give the reader a general
feeling for the range in performance
of the systems listed under a variety
of operating conditions.

The oxygen transfer data were all
collected using the off-gas test
procedure. Apparent values of alpha
were estimated from clean water
performance data for similar tank
geometry, air flow rate per diffusion
unit, and diffuser placement. Since
the performance of most porous
diffusion devices is likely to change
with time, the term "apparent
alpha," aa, has been adopted to
distinguish between differences in
clean and process water performance
                 for cases where the diffusers are
                 process tested at a condition of
                 undetermined fouling (aa) vs. those
                 where they are process tested'new or
                 just after cleaning (a). The latter
                 condition measures the alpha value
                 due to wastewater characteristics
                 only. In all cases, the OTE< (field
                 results) values have been converted
                 to aaSOTE values, i.e., to 20° and
                 zero residual DO.

                 The first three data sets originated
                 from off-gas testing at Madison,
                 Wisconsin."7"149 The ceramic grid data
                 (the first data set) represent the
                 overall performance of  a three-pass
                 system. OTEf, air flux rate (air flow
                 per unit surface area of tank), and
                 residual DO profiles are shown in
                 Figure 10 as a function of tank
                 length. Values of apparent alpha with
position in the basin are plotted in
Figure 11. Apparent alphas were
estimated from clean water data
having the same diffuser density, air
flux rate, and liquid submergence as
the grids from which the off-gas data
were collected. Due to variable flux
rates and diffuser densities, the OTEf
values in Figure 10 do not accurately
reflect changes in apparent alpha
along the tank. At this facility, the
apparent alpha varies from about 0.4
at the tank inlet to near 1.0 at the
tank outlet. A reduction in apparent
alpha occured at each point of
primary effluent addition.

The second Madison data set for
ceramic and SAN plastic tubes,
applied in a dual spiral roll
configuration, represents
performance for the first pass of a
three-pass system  (Figure 12).
Passes two and three, represented by
the third data set, are equipped with
wide-band, fixed-orifice, coarse
bubble diffuser, also oriented in a
dual spiral roll placement. The higher
relative alpha values of the latter two
passes are strongly influenced by the
favorable position of these passes at
the middle and effluent end of the
process train compared to the lead-
pass position of the ceramic and SAN
plastic tubes. This relationship of
alpha to tank position or degree of
treatment is similar to that observed
for the first Madison data set (Figure
11).

The two data sets for Whittier
Narrows, California
represent approximately 9 months of
operation.47'48 The two systems for
which data are presented were part
of a three-system field oxygen
transfer evaluation conducted by the
Los Angeles County Sanitation
Districts (LACSD) for EPA in parallel
trains.30

These data sets compare the
performance of a ceramic grid system
to that of a jet aeration system where
the jets were installed on one side of
the basin along the entire tank length
with the nozzles being directed
across the basin floor in a reverse
spiral roll. Figure 13 is a plot of
apparent alpha for each system  vs.
position from the inlet end. The  ratio
of apparent alpha values varies with
tank length,  decreasing toward the
effluent end of the tank.
                                                                                                               17

-------
    o
    C/J
          45--
          40--
          35--
          30--
          25--
          20
                 Water Depth = 15 ft
                                  Increasing Density of Placement
                                              5.4 sq ft/diffuser
            0         0.5        1.0        1.5        2.0       2.5

                             Air Flow Rate per Diffuser jscfm)
Figure 9.

Effect of Diffuser Density on SOTE for Ceramic Disc/Dome Grid Configurations21
Of particular interest are the
apparent alpha values near the
discharge end of these basins as
contrasted to those observed at
Madison, Wisconsin. The terminal
apparent alpha of the ceramic grid
system at the Whittier Narrows
facility was approximately 0.6 vs.
almost 1.0 for Madison's ceramic
grid system. The presence of
nonbiodegradable surfactants is one
explanation  for the low apparent
alphas at Whittier Narrows. Other
possibilities  include high process
loadings, low DO operation, and
significant diffuser fouling. This
observation  illustrates the dangers of
extracting data from specific sites for
general design purposes. Each
treatment facility has unique
characteristics that must be
considered individually.

The Brandon, Wisconsin, data set
depicts performance of a
9.l-m (30-ft) long x 4.6-m (15-ft) wide
x 4.6-m (15-ft) deep completely
mixed aeration tank using jet
aerators at two different air flow
rates.48'49 This municipal facility
treats a combination of domestic and
industrial wastewaters.

In contrast, the Orlando, Florida,
aeration system,51 which employs
wide-band, fixed-orifice coarse
bubble diffusers, treats domestic
wastewater only. This system is
currently being retrofitted with a
ceramic grid system in an effort to
improve aeration efficiency and
increase  aeration capacity.

The data  shown  for
Seymour, Wisconsin,52 a site
analyzed by Houck53 in his North
American survey of disc and dome
diffuser systems and also studied by
Vik et al.,54 were collected on a lightly
loaded system with a sludge
retention time in excess of 25 days at
the time of the tests.
The two data sets from Lakewood,
Ohio ,55 demonstrate the
relative performance of two parallel
basins, one whose diffusers had
recently been cleaned and the other
which had been operating for
approximately I year with no diffuser
cleaning. The entire system was
retrofitted with ceramic disc diffusers
in a grid configuration during 1 982
and 1983. In this instance, the
uncleaned system as found was
performing at a mean weighted
aaSOTE of 8.9 percent vs. 14.5
percent for the cleaned system.
During the 1 -year operating period, it
appears that oxygen transfer
performance deteriorated by roughly
40 percent. Part of this reported
performance deterioration may  have
been  due to  fouling resulting from
several periods of air interruption to
make necessary modifications to the
air supply piping during the retrofit
process.

The last two data sets
provide information on  new ceramic
grid and static aerator systems that
were  tested  on brewery wastes
within the same completely mixed
basin.56 Of interest is the relative
performance of both systems as
measured by oxygen transfer and
apparent alpha data. The ratio of the
mean weighted apparent alphas of
the static aerator system to that of
the ceramic  grid system was
observed to be 0.50/0.37 = 1.35.
This ratio is  not considered
appropriate for design since, among
other things, the levels of alpha
observed in this industrial
wastewater  application are lower
than usually encountered. The
respective ratio of craSOTE values
was 7.4/14.2 = 0.52.

Data are presented in Table 8 from a
Madison, Wisconsin, oxygen transfer
field evaluation for the last pass of a
three-pass system employing
selected tubular diffusers in a dual
spiral roll configuration.47 The aerator
layout is depicted in Figure 14. The
off-gas test procedure was used in
collecting the OTEt data. Since alpha
approached unity at this tank
location, direct use of the data is not
suitable for design purposes. The
relative performance of the new and
used ceramic tubes and the used
SAN  plastic tubes indiactes the
significance  of fouling. The used
ceramic and SAN plastic tubes were
in service continuously for about 3
years in a different tank prior to
relocation for this test. It should be
noted that analysis of multiple
systems within a given tank cannot
be conducted by any other technique
than  off-gas  analysis. Known
18

-------
Table 6.

Selected Factors Affecting Oxygen Transfer Field Testing for Estimation of Oxygen
Transfer Efficiency46
                                             Oxygen Transfer Test
    Factors
                                   Steady
                                    State
      Nonsteady
        State
Off-Gas
 Inert
 Gas
Tracers
  Sensitivity To

    Variations in
      Influent wastewater flow rate
      Oxygen uptake rate
      Alpha
      DO concentration
      Product of air flow rate x KLa

     ccurate measure of
      Oxygen uptake rate
      DO concentration
      DO saturation value
      Air flow rate
      Other

  Costs
Manpower +
Analytical +
Capital investment +
Calculations +
Estimated Precision

0
+/0
0
0
1 Calculate OTE directly.
2 Requires accurate measurement of CDs in gas.
3 Requires accurate estimate of the ratio of Kt,ac8r/KLa.
+ Positive response (e.g., not sensitive, less costly, more precise,
0 Intermediate response.
- Negative response.
0
0
0
0
•f
easier).
0
0

available data on tube and flexible
sheath systems are scant, and
additional reliable information would
be of significant value.

On the basis of the data presented in
Table 7, it appears that the
differences between apparent alpha
values for ceramic grid fine pore
diffusers and apparent alpha values
for other more turbulent systems
such as jet aerators and static
aerators may not be as great as
previously reported in the literature.57
In addition, the overall average
apparent alpha values presented in
Table 7 and elsewhere58"60 for a
variety of aeration devices are lower
than many alpha values historically
used for design purposes.
A recent study at Rye Meads, United
Kingdom,61 demonstrates the impact
of process goals relative to aeration
efficiency. In this study, optimization
of the nitrification process in
conjunction with an initial anoxic
zone, tapering diffuser density to
meet oxygen demand, and the use of
automated DO control resulted in an
overall aeration efficiency of 2 kg
Oa/kWh (3.3 Ib/wire hp-hr) vs. 1.2
kg Oa/kWh (2.0 Ib/wire hp-hr) for an
unmodified control basin. A third
parallel train employing tapered air
and DO control in a non-nitrifying
operational mode averaged about 1.4
kg O2/kWh (2.3 Ib/wire hp-hr) during
the study phase. Proper placement of
the ceramic dome diffusers,
automated DO control, and level of
treatment were identified as
essential elements of Rye Mead's
aeration efficiency optimization.
 Another factor of concern was
 observed in a recent, long-term study
 of ceramic grid systems62 where the
 slope of log OTE vs.  log applied air
 flow rate under process conditions
 had a significantly steeper negative
 slope with increasing air flow rate
 than observed under clean water
 conditions. An illustration of this
 observation is shown in Figure  15.
 Other investigators,61 however, have
 not observed this phenomenon.
 Figure 15 shows that the slope of the
 log OTE vs.  log applied air flow rate
 curve of a new or clean porous
 diffuser is very different from that of
 a fouled or partially fouled unit.
 Danley63 has observed that,  as
 diffusers become biologically fouled,
 the effective pore area of the
 diffusers decreases drastically.
 Typical  plant practice is to operate
 diffusers at the same or greater
 specific air flow rate over a period of
 time. Since the effective pore area
 has been greatly reduced by the
 accumulated foulants, the actual air
 flow rate per operating pore
 correspondingly increases.
 Generalizations on this relationship
 cannot be made at this time,
 however, due to the  lack of an
 adequate data base.

The data described above represent a
diverse  cross section of process
performance for selected oxygen
transfer devices under a variety of
operating conditions. No attempt has
been made here to correlate oxygen
transfer performance to process type,
process loading, wastewater
characteristics, and other factors. It is
evident that gaps in the current  data
base still exist for which additional,
in-depth study is needed to address
designer concerns.
                                                                                                               19

-------
Table 7.
Process Water Oxygen Transfer Efficiency Comparison for Selected Aeration Systems
Site
Madison, Wl
Madison, Wl
Madison, Wl
Whittier
Narrows, CA
Whittier
Narrows, CA
Brandon, Wl
Brandon, Wl
Orlando, FL
Seymour, Wl
Lakewood, OH
Lakewood, OH
Brewery
Brewery
System
Ceramic grid
Ceramic & SAN
plastic tubes
Wide-band, fixed-
orifice coarse
bubble diff users
Ceramic grid
Jet aerators
Jet aerators
Jet aerators
Wide-band, fixed-
orifice coarse
bubble diff users
Ceramic grid
Ceramic grid
Ceramic grid
Ceramic grid
Static aerators
Flow
Regime
Step feed
Step feed
Step feed
Plug flow
Plug flow
Complete mix
Complete mix
Complete mix
Plug flow
Plug flow
Plug flow
Complete mix
Complete mix
a. SOTE (%) s
Mean
17.8
11.0
10.0
11.2
9.4
10.9
7.5
7.6
16.5
14.5
8.9
14.2
7.4
Range
12.6-26.2
7.5-13.4
7.9-10.9
9.3-15.2
7.8-10.8
9.7-12.1
7.4-7.7
6.8-8.4
12.0-18.8
12.4-15.9
7.0-11.1
12.5-15.2
5.7-8.8
Diffuser
ubmergence Variation
(ft) in aa SOTE
14.8
15.0
15.0
13.5
13.5
12.5
12.5
13.0
13.8
13.3
13.3
19.2
19.8
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Random
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Random
Random
Random
Random
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Rising from
inlet to outlet
Uniform
Uniform
Estimated a.
Mean
0.64
0.62
1.07
0.45
0.58
0.45
0.47
0.75
0.66
*^
0.31
0.37
0.50
Mean Air
Flux Rate
Range (scfm/sq ft)
0.42-0.98
0.46-0.85
0.83-1.19
0.35-0.60
0.48-0.72
0.40-0.50
0.46-0.48
0.67-0.83
0.49-0.75
0.44-0.57
0.26-0.37
0.32-0.37
0.36-0.51
0.28
0.53
0.53
0.21
0.37
0.13
0.39
0.92
0.07
0.14
0.09
0.30
0.53
20

-------
       16 -
       14
       12
       10
               Gridl
Tapered air, step aeration system with ceramic dome grid layout

OTEt values measured at indicated field conditions
of DO and air flux rate

PE = Primary effluent

RAS = Return activated sludge
          834 Domes
                                         GridS
      7
 505
Domes
                                                             Grid 4
                                                           410 Domes
                                         f Grid 5
7
 392
Domes
                                                                                            Grid6
           332 Domes
                                                                                                   <
                                                                                                 -X
                                                                                                      0.5
                                                                                                     -0.3
                                                                                                    4. 0.14-0
                                                                          o>
                                                                     .2 £
                                                                         O
                                                                         Q
                               100
                  200

             Tank Length (ft)
                              300
Figure 10.

Gas Transfer Analysis Along Tank Length, Madison, Wl47
                                                                                                                 21

-------
2.
a
a.
<
c
ffi
             1.0
             0.8
            0.6
        •o
            0.4
            0.2
                \i
                                        Ceramic dome grid system

                                        PE = Primary effluent

                                        RAS = Return activated sludge
                                        LU
                                        O_
                                      100
                                                    200

                                               Tank Length (ft)
300
 Figure 11.

 Estimated Change in Apparent Alpha with Tank Length, Madison, Wl47
22

-------
                      Pass 1
                  Fine Pore Tubes
    Passes 2 and 3
Coarse Bubble Diffusers
                                                 OTEi values measured at indicated field conditions
                                                 of DO and air flux rate

                                                 PE = Primary effluent

                                                 RAS = Return activated sludge
                                                                                                     -|0.45
                          100
                                         200
                                                           300
                                                      Tank Length (ft)
                400
                                500
                                                                                                        0.4
                                                                                                       0.35
                                                                                                        0.3
                                                                                                            -4
                                                                                                                o>

                                                                                                                O
                                                                                                                Q
                                                                                                            -2
Figure  12.

Gas Transfer Analysis Along Tank Length, Madison, Wl47


Table 8.

Process Water Oxygen Transfer Comparison  for Selected Tubular Diffusers at
Madison47
Diffuser Type
Wide-Band, Fixed-Orifice
Coarse Bubble Diffusers
New Flexible Sheath Tubes
Used SAN Plastic Tubes
Wide-Band, Fixed-Orifice
Coarse Bubble Diffusers
New Ceramic Tubes
Used Ceramic Tubes
Wide-Band, Fixed-Orifice
Coarse Bubble Diffusers
Location*
Station 8
Station 9
Station 9
Station 10
Station 1 1
Station 1 1
Station 1 2
OTE, (%)
8.0
11.6
9.2
8.0
12.9
9.1
7.0
DO fmg/L)
0.9
1.7
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.7
1.2
a.SOTE (%)
8.3
14.2
11.3
10.3
16.0
11.0
8.3
'Refer to Figure 14.
                                                                                                                  23

-------
        0.8
1
10
r.
a.


5  0.6
c
0)

<0
Q.
Q.
        0.4
        0.2
                                        Jet Aeration System
                                    Ceramic Disc

                                    Grid System
                                                 I
                         100                200


                             Tank Length (ft)
                                                                   300
Figure 13.


Estimated Change in Apparent Alpha with Tank Length, Whittier Narrows, CASO
24

-------
Y-Wall
\ .
Wide-Band j
Fixed-Orifice |
Coarse Bubble j
Diffuser
New Flexible

Sheath Tubes
Wide-Band

Fixed-Orifice
Coarse Bubble
Diffuser

New Ceramic
Tubes
Wide-Band

Coarse Bubble
Diffuser
L



A
v i
r""~""~— - n^* — — 1| — -•». —
1 8A 8B 8C I
\ 9-1A 9-1B 9-1C J
f • 	 1[~~ 	 -Jl "— ^Ti1
I
r 	 ir — • — Ji — -,
I 9-2A 9-2B 9-2C
| 10-1A 10-1B 10-1C
H—— -J[ — — 	 II - — .
L — w. ^
f- 	 Jf^1 	 IP — — J
J10-2A 10-2B 10-2C fi
Jl1-1A 11-1B 11-1C
11 	 ^\ 	 •— -Jl • 	 J

F— -
|l1-2A 11-2B 11 -2C
1 12A 12B 12C
^ 	 1P~ 	 Jl — -,
I Outlet
25.5ft

32.5ft

<

•e
to
in







u>
T





I



Header
mf
Wide-Band
Fixed-Orifice-
Coarse Bubble
Diffuser
Used SAN
m T i-



Fixed-Orifice
Coarse Bubble
Diffuser

Used Ceramic
Tubes
Wide-Band

Coarse Bubble
Diffuser



Figure 14.

Diffuser and Off-Gas Hood Sample Site Layout for Comparative OTEf Analysis of
Table 8"
                                                                                                       25

-------
                               Clean Water
                                 (New D iff users)
                                    Dirty Water
                                      (New Diffusers)
                                          Dirty Water
                                            (Fouled Diffusers}
                            Log Air Flow Rate per Diffuser
Figure  15.

Change in OTE with Fine Pore Diffuser Fouling—A Hypothetical Case
26

-------
Operation and
Maintenance
Considerations
 Preceding sections of this report have
 described the various fine pore
 diffused aeration systems available
 and discussed their performance
 characteristics. Considerations
 relative to the operation and
 maintenance (O&M) of fine pore
 diffusers are addressed in this
 section. Design and installation
 practices are examined specifically as
 they relate to O&M and operating
 problems commonly encountered.
 Techniques are reviewed for dealing
 with these problems, the most
 frequently occurring of which is
 diffuser fouling. The causes of, and
 approaches to coping with, diffuser
 fouling are given special emphasis in
 this discussion.

 Impact of System Design and
 Installation on O&M

 The principal objective in the design
 of fine pore aeration  systems should
 be to provide a system with the
 lowest possible life cycle cost,
 maintaining an optimum balance
 between capital and  long-term O&M
 expenditures. Since long-term O&M
 characteristics will generally be
 determined by the capabilities and
 constraints originally designed into
 such systems, it is  important that due
 consideration be given during design
 to anticipated O&M requirements.  In
 some cases, relatively minor capital
 expenses can lead to significant
 reductions in overall  cost by reducing
 those requirements.

 This subsection assesses the impacts
 of process design, materials
 selection, aeration  basin design, air
 supply design, and  aeration system
 installation on O&M. Emphasis is
 placed on identifying key areas
 where  additional consideration
 during  design can lead to significant
 long-term benefits.

Process Design

The operating characteristics of fine
 pore diffusers are different than
those of other oxygen transfer
devices, and these differences affect
process design. While diffused
aeration systems can produce strong
vertical mixing components,
 horizontal components will generally
either be unidirectional (as where the
diffusers are located along only one
wall of the basin as in a spiral roll
configuration) or largely nonexistent
(as in full floor coverage
applications). Consequently, the
 wastewater flow pattern is likely to
 approach plug flow in character
 above certain length-to-width
 (aspect) ratios, establishing a
 gradient in process oxygen demand
 (high to low) from the aeration basin
 inlet to the outlet.

 Wastewater constituents may also
 affect fine pore diffuser OTEs to a
 greater extent than they do other
 oxygen transfer devices, resulting in
 lower alpha factors. Diffuser layout
 design is strongly affected by this
 phenomenon since the region in the
 aeration basin where oxygen demand
 is likely to be the highest (at the tank
 inlet) is also the  region where the
 alpha value is likely to be the lowest.
 This combination of practical
 considerations usually requires that
 fine pore diffuser density be
 substantially increased in the inlet
 portion of a plug flow basin to avoid
 DO deficiencies and potential process
 upsets during high-load operation.

 For most fine pore diffusers, the
 practical maximum-to-minimum
 operating range in air flow rates per
 diffuser is roughly 5 to 1, providing
 an approximate 4 to 1 range in
 oxygen transfer capacity. The lower
 air flow limit per diffuser, which is
 set by the manufacturer, is the gas
 rate required to maintain a uniform
 flow of air across the surface of the
 diffuser. Operation below this limit
 for an extended period of time has
 been found to result in accelerated
 diffuser fouling rates.17 The upper
 limit corresponds to the air flow rate
 beyond which headloss across the
 diffuser control orifice increases
 substantially and/or OTE decreases
 significantly.

 Taken together, the above factors
 generally dictate that fine pore
 diffused aeration systems be
 designed with tapered aeration
 capabilities in tanks with high aspect
 ratios. At a minimum, the diffuser
 density, i.e., the effective basin floor
 area per diffusion unit, should vary
 with the highest density near the
tank inlet and the lowest at the tank
 outlet. The design should be capable
of meeting expected variations  in air
flow requirements, considering both
variations in process oxygen
 requirements and alpha factors along
the length of the aeration basin. It
 may also be desirable to section the
diffusion system into grids, with
independent air supply control to
each grid. For example, a total of
                                                                                                             27

-------
three grids might typically be
provided in an aeration basin with a
length-to-width ratio of 3 to 1 or
greater.

Failure to provide proper aerator
tapering in tanks with high aspect
ratios or in staged tanks can result in
inadequate oxygen transfer capacity
and low DO concentrations at the
inlet end. Such conditions have been
found to accelerate biofouling of fine
pore diffusers (discussed in more
detail below) and contribute to other
process-related and/or operational
problems.53 On the other hand,
overdesign, particularly insufficient
tapering of diffuser density in the
middle and latter stages of a long
plug flow tank,  can lead to inefficient
use of energy when the air flow rate
to meet the minimum operating
requirement per diffuser exceeds that
to meet process oxygen
requirements.

In some cases,  it may not be possible
to accurately forecast future
variations in oxygen demands and
alpha values along an aeration basin.
If the aeration system is designed
with sufficient oxygen transfer
capacity and turndown capability,
however, process operation can be
adjusted to meet actual demands. For
example, assuming that adequate
flexibility has been designed into the
air supply system, overaeration
caused by the maintenance of
minimum air flow rates per diffuser
can be combatted by removing
diffusers from the area of the
aeration basin that is overaerated.

A eration Basin Design

The mixing characteristics of a
particular oxygen transfer system
may necessitate the use of inlet and
outlet flow distribution schemes to
prevent short-circuiting in the
aeration tank. Weirs, baffles, multiple
gates, or favorable mixing patterns
induced by diffuser placement may
be used for this purpose.
Consideration should also be given to
the point of entry of flow into an
empty aeration  basin.  For example,
entry over a weir may be acceptable
when the basin is full  but may cause
damage to the diffusers and/or
header system below when the basin
is empty. In this case,  an alternate
means of filling the basin must be
provided (perhaps through the basin
drainage system).
 As previously discussed, many fine
 pore aeration systems are
 nonretrievable while in service; this
 necessitates that the aeration basin
 be drained to gain access to the
 diffusers. Because of the fouling
 characteristics of these diffusers
 (discussed below), periodic access via
 basin drainage will be required. A
 reliable and easy-to-operate aeration
 basin drainage system capable of
 completely draining the  basin in a
 convenient time interval (say 8 to 24
 hours) is recommended. The required
 frequency of drainage will vary
 depending on the rate of fouling and
 the cleaning methods used.
 Adequate volumes of nonprocess
 water should also be provided,
 including hydrants or faucets at
 frequent intervals along the aeration
 basin, to assist in basin washdown.

 Air Supply System Design

 The air supply system must be
 designed to meet both the process
 oxygen needs and the operational
 requirements of the selected fine
 pore diffusion system. Air
 requirements will vary as process
 oxygen requirements vary, and the
 air supply system must have
 sufficient flexibility to meet these
 demands  if the full energy benefits of
 the fine pore diffusion are to be
 realized. Achieving this flexibility will
 generally require the use of multiple
 blowers,  each provided with
 appropriate turndown capability, i.e.,
 variable-speed motors on positive
 displacement blowers or various
 means of control on centrifugal
 blowers. The air flow meter(s) and
 flow control valve(s) must also be
 sized properly for the range of air
 flow rates anticipated. Flexibility can
 be enhanced with instrumentation
 and automated controls that should
 be integrated with the air supply
 system design. These control
 features will be discussed in the
 upcoming WPCF MOP No. 5.

The small air passage orifices in fine
 pore diffusers that cause them to be
 more efficient in transferring oxygen
 also make them more prone to
 plugging by paniculate matter in the
air supply. Proper air filtration must
be provided to prevent atmospheric
dirt or blower oil from entering the
air distribution system and causing
air-side plugging of the diffusers.
Removing these potentially  harmful
particles requires efficient air
filtration. Manufacturers of  ceramic
fine pore diffusers have historically
 recommended a minimum removal of
 95 percent of all particles 0.3 micron
 and  larger to avoid air-side plugging
 of the diffusers. Alternatively,
 specifications on filtered air quality
 require paniculate concentrations
 less than 0.1 mg/28 m3 (1,000 cu
 ft).5'7

 Air filters can be located on the inlet
 to the blowers or in-line in the air
 distribution system. One drawback of
 in-line filters is the incremental
 increase in blower discharge
 pressure required to overcome losses
 in the filter. This consumes some
 power, but the effects can be
 minimized by properly sizing and
 maintaining the filters. Large plants
 may wish to investigate baghouse
 filters or electrostatic precipitators as
 economic alternatives to in-line
 filters. Unique problems such as the
 filtering of wet air will require special
 attention.

 Uniform distribution of air among
 individual diffusers in an aeration
 grid  is also an important
 consideration. The use of fixed-size
 orifices on individual diffusers  is a
 common practice today to achieve
 uniform air distribution.

 A final consideration is the reliability
 of the power supply. Interruptions in
 service allow mixed liquor to enter
 the air header system through  the
 diffusers and any leaks in the system.
 Some suspended solids will be
 filtered out by the diffusers, but some
 will also enter the system piping.
 When air supply is resumed, a
 properly designed purge system
 should be used to clear the system so
 that  the suspended solids will not be
 trapped and retained on the inner
 surfaces of the diffusers. Suspended
 solids filtered out by the diffusers
 during a power outage may be
 retained within the media on
 resumption of air delivery. These
 retained solids will result in higher
 headlosses across the diffusers and
 may  lead to a change in OTE.
 Consequently, extra care should be
taken during design to provide  a
 reliable power supply with
 appropriate backup to  minimize the
occurrence of power outages.

 Materials Selection and
 Specification

 O&M of fine pore diffused air
 systems is facilitated when the
 materials of construction of the
 diffusion system components are
28

-------
 properly selected and specified.
 These tasks are typically the
 responsibility of the engineer. Unless
 the aeration system is provided with
 the necessary degree of mechanical
 and structural integrity, the potential
 energy economies of fine pore
 diffuser operation will not be realized
 due to air leaks. Leaks may also allow
 entry of mixed liquor into the
 diffusion piping, resulting in plugging
 of the diffusers from the air side. The
 detailed aspects of selecting
 materials for fine pore diffusion vary
 among manufacturers and with
 diffuser type. Additional details will
 have to be considered as new
 equipment is developed.
 Nevertheless, some  general
 principles are relevant.

 Special precautions  must  be taken to
 select materials that will contribute
 to trouble-free operations of fine pore
 aeration systems. Factors such as
 freeze/thaw and sunlight exposure
 are  important. Due consideration
 should be given to the use of
 stainless steel appurtenances.53
 Specifying stainless  steel for items
 such as anchorage straps  and bolts
 will  add  little to overall system cost,
 but  may significantly increase the
 mechanical  and structural integrity of
 the system.  The selection of
 corrosion-resistant materials is also
 recommended since  corrosion
 products can be transported to
 diffusers through the air supply
 system, producing air-side diffuser
 plugging.

 Many fine pore diffusion systems use
 plastic header piping to reduce
 system capital cost. Although such
 use  has proven successful, the
 resulting system is more fragile than
 the steel or cast iron  piping systems
 previously used.

 All normal and abnormal forces
 should be considered during the
 design of the header  piping
 anchorage system. This can be
 especially critical if a new fine  pore
 aeration system is to be used in
 conjunction with another aeration
 system in the same basin.  For
 example, expansion and contraction
 of the header system must be taken
 into  account during both header
 layout and detailed design. The
 anticipated temperature range  should
 consider both in-service and out-of-
 service conditions, e.g., a drained
tank on a hot summer day. Long-term
structural/mechanical integrity and
 long-term maintainability will be
 greatly affected by the consideration
 given during design to the static and
 dynamic forces that the air
 distribution system is expected to
 withstand.

 System Installation

 Special precautions are required with
 regard to certain aspects of fine pore
 aeration system installation. As an
 example, all construction debris and
 dust should be removed from the air
 supply system before the diffusers
 are installed. If not removed, these
 materials can be transported to the
 diffuser during operation, resulting in
 plugging. Flushing can be
 accomplished with either air or water
 and should be followed by inspection.

 Care  also must be exercised in the
 installation of the more fragile
 components of the air header and
 diffusion system. For example,
 structural failures resulting from
 overtightening of the retaining bolt
 have  occurred with  one type of
 ceramic dome diffuser.
 Overtightening during installation
 resulted in failure of either the plastic
 retaining bolt or the plastic saddle
 that it was inserted  into.53 The
 problem may be addressed by the use
 of a properly-set torque wrench to
 install the bolt. This example
 illustrates the need  for increased
 concern with some fine pore
 systems, particularly those using
 plastic components. These
 considerations are more crucial to a
 fine pore than to a coarse bubble
 aeration system because air leaks
 can lead to proportionally higher air
flow and energy requirements, thus
 negating the major advantage of the
fine pore system.


 Impact of Fouling
 Phenomena on O&M

 Background

 Porous ceramic plate diffusers,
 introduced in the United States in the
 1920s, had become the predominant
 air diffusion device by mid-century.5'7
Various types of foulants were
 identified by early investigators, and
the list has been expanded by recent
studies to include the following:26
 Air Side

  • Dust and dirt from unfiltered air
  • Oil from compressors or viscous
    air filters
  • Rust and scale from air pipe
    corrosion
  • Construction debris due to poor
    cleanup
  • Wastewater solids entering
    through diffusers or pipe leaks

 Liquor Side

  • Fibrous material attached to sharp
    edges
  • Inorganic fines entering media at
    low or zero air pressure
  • Organic solids entering media at
    low or zero air pressure
  • Oils or greases in wastewater
  • Precipitated deposits, including
    iron and carbonates
  • Biological growths on diffuser
    media

 A number of different cleaning
 procedures have been developed,
 identified, and applied including the
 following:5'7

 Ex-Situ

 •  Refiring
 •  Silicate-phosphate washing
 •  Alkaline washing
 •  Acid washing
 •  Detergent washing

 In Situ

    Acid washing
    Flaming
    High pressure water hosing
   Withholding influent (creating
   endogenous conditions)
   Sandblasting
   Chlorine washing
   Air bumping (air turned off and on)
   Steam cleaning
   Gasoline washing
   Drying

The rate of fouling has historically
 been gauged by the rise of back
 pressure while in service. Since
significant biological fouling can  take
place with little attendant rise in
backpressure, this provided a crude
and qualitative measure at best.

It was common practice in earlier
times to operate a number of
diffusers from a common plenum.
This practice resulted in less
uniformity of air  distribution than is
obtained today with the use of
restrictive flow control orifices on
individual diffusers. The  lack of air
                                                                                                               29

-------
 flow uniformity probably augmented
 the rate of biological fouling
 experienced in the past.

 In the 1960s and early 1970s, the
 relative cost of energy to
 maintenance labor was low. As a
 consequence, many of the ceramic
 plate installations were replaced with
 less efficient, fixed-orifice coarse
 bubble diffusers.  In the middle
 1970s, this trend was reversed and
 many of those installations are now
 being replaced by porous media
 diffusers with individual air flow
 control.

 In the early 1980s, better methods of
 measuring the degree of fouling and
 the effects of cleaning became
 available. These methods include
 dynamic wet pressure (DWP), bubble
 release vacuum (BRV), the ratio of
 one to the other, and chemical, as
 well as microbiological, analysis. The
 practice of employing pilot diffusers
 that could be removed from the tank
 and individually analyzed also came
 into use.26

 Concurrently, better methods were
 being developed to measure the
 performance of operating aeration
 systems, which permitted better
 appraisal of the effects of fouling and
 facilitated better preventive and/or
 corrective maintenance scheduling.
 These methods include inert gas
 tracers, off-gas analysis, a dual
 nonsteady state technique that uses
 hydrogen peroxide, and DO and
 respiration rate profiles.46'47'64"66 Off-
 gas equipment has been effectively
 used to evaluate the adverse effects
 of fouling on both full-scale systems
 and on individual  diffusers.47
Fouling Processes

Recent work has contributed
measurably toward an increased
understanding of some of the
mechanisms of fouling.67 For
example, it has become apparent that
flux rate is a parameter that can have
a significant influence on the rate of
fouling and its consequences. Flux
rate may be expressed in several
ways. For the purposes of this
discussion, apparent flux rate is
defined as the air flow rate per
diffuser or diffusers divided by the
effective diffuser area involved. Local
flux rate is defined as the air flow
rate per unit area of a small defined
segment of a given diffuser. Effective
flux rate is defined as the weighted
average flux rate for one or more
 diffusers. This value may be obtained
 for a given diffuser by measuring the
 local flux rates on representative
 sample positions of a diffuser and
 dividing the sum of the products of
 flux rate  and air flow rate of the
 individual sample points by the sum
 of the measured air flow rates.

 Types of  fouling may be differentiated
 on the basis of the effects of flux rate
 on them. For one classification of
 foulants, fouling rates are increased
 by high local flux rates and reduced
 by low local flux rates. Included in
 this classification are air-side  fouling
 from air-borne particulates and
 liquid-side fouling by precipitates
 such as metal  hydroxides and
 carbonates. In  the process of fouling,
 the areas of the diffusers with the
 highest local flux rate foul more
 rapidly, which  serves to reduce the
 flux rate in high flow  areas and to
 increase  it in low flow areas, the
 combined effect of which is to
 improve uniformity of air distribution.
 The effective flux rate approaches the
 apparent flux rate as fouling
 progresses. In the case of chemical
 precipitate fouling, the accumulation
 of foulants in the pores reduces the
 effective pore diameter and the
 backpressure or DWP rises
 correspondingly. Due to the reduced
 effective pore diameters and the
 smaller bubbles produced, OTE does
 not decline and can actually increase.
 At the same time, the increase in
 DWP can exceed the capabilities of
 the air supply system  and process air
 delivery may fall short of
 requirements. An idealized
 representation  of OTE and
 backpressure (DWP) changes with
 time under fouling conditions of this
 type is shown in Figure 16a.

 Another classification of foulants
 causes fouling  rates to increase with
 low local flux rates and decrease
 with high local  flux rates. Included  in
 this category are microbiological
 slimes. Examples of this type of
 fouling  may be  observed on the
 underside of fine pore tubular
 diffusers and on the less pervious
 portions of planar diffusers.

As fouling progresses with the latter
type of foulant,  low local flux rates
tend to further decrease, high local
flux rates  tend to increase, and air
distribution becomes progressively
 less uniform. A  condition can be
reached where  the flux rates in the
small remaining working areas of the
 diffusers are so high that subsequent
 fouling is nearly completely arrested.
 The net result of high effective flux
 rates for individual diffusers or
 groups of diffusers is a substantial
 reduction in OTE. Figure 16b is an
 idealized representation of OTE and
 backpressure (DWP) changes with
 time under fouling  conditions of this
 type.

 Process variables that appear to
 affect the rate of biofouling are not
 fully understood. Experience and test
 data67 provide some indications that
 the rate of biofouling is increased by
 operation at high organic loading
 rates and/or low air flow rates. Other
 data indicate that biofouling rates
 may be accelerated by the presence
 of certain types of industrial wastes,
 particularly high-strength,  readily-
 biodegradable, and/or nutrient
 deficient wastes.68  It is believed that
 under service conditions all of the
 types of fouling discussed above, and
 some others in addition, can occur
 singly or in combination with variable
 dominance from plant to plant and
 within the same plant from time to
 time.

 Fouling Observations

 Substantial data are available and in
 the process of being assembled
 regarding fine pore diffuser fouling
 and its effects.  Unfortunately,
 consistent methods of reporting have
 not as yet been developed. Table 9 is
 a tabulation of fouling rate data from
 a number of ceramic diffuser-
 equipped municipal treatment plants
 that are considered to be
 representative of the data base from
 which it was selected. A similar
 selection of fouling  rate data is
 presented in Table 10 from various
 treatment plants using ceramic
 diffusers in which a significant
 fraction of the wastewater is of
 industrial origin. A parameter called
 BRV (bubble release vacuum) is
 introduced in Tables 9 and 10. BRV is
 defined as the negative pressure
 required to form and release bubbles
 in tap water at a given location or
 locations on a given diffuser at an  air
flux rate of 5.1 L/m2/s(1 scfm/sq
ft).62 Fouling rates in terms of
 ABRV/yr and ADWP/yr were
calculated from actual
measurements of pressure difference
assuming a linear increase with time.
Since fouling rates usually are not
30

-------
    Q.

    Q
    LU
    o
                                       Time

           High local flux rate fouling (indicative of air-side paniculate fouling and/or
           water-side chemical precipitate fouling) produces a significant increase in
           DWP and a slight increase in OTE.
   CL

   Q
                                      Time

        b.  Low local flux rate fouling (indicative of water-side biological fouling)
           produces a slight increase in DWP and a significant decrease in OTE.
Figure 16.

Effect of two types of fine pore diffuser fouling on DWP and OTE
constant with time, these values are
not directly comparable, but are
believed to be useful in generating
approximate estimates.

Foulants in plants A, M, N,  HI, Jl, and
Kl were known to contain higher-
than-usual fractions of inorganic
constituents. Diffusers in these
plants also exhibited higher ADWP/
ABRV ratios with the exception of
plant Kl where the inorganic
constituents appeared to be very
loosely attached to the diffusers.

A number of tentative observations
may be proposed from Tables 9 and
10 as well as other ongoing work:
  • Fouling rates appear to be widely
    variable for a given plant as well
    as at a given location within a
    tank.

  • Industrial plant fouling rates
    appear to be higher than those of
    municipal plants.
  • Air-side fouling due to particulates
    in the air has not been found to be
    a significant adverse factor in any
    of the installations cited in Table 9
    or10 or in the data base of the
    approximate 50 plants from which
    they were drawn.
  • The visual appearance of foulants
    has failed to consistently provide
    reliable bases for identifying the
    nature or origin of the foulants.
  • In plug flow regimes, the fouling
    rate is greatest at the influent end
    of the tank.  If the influent end air
    flux rate is reduced below the
    level required to maintain positive
    DO, fouling  can progress down the
    tank.
 • Predominately biological and/or
    inorganic fouling may reduce
    OTEs up to one-half of their
    original values in a matter of
    weeks.74 Yet, in other situations,
    very little reduction in OTE may  be
    noted in over a year.
 •  Pilot plant fouling tests appear to
    correlate reasonably well with
    full-scale tests that employ the
    same diffusers at comparable air
    flow rates.74
 •  Ferrous sulfate (and probably
    other metallic salts) added ahead
    of or to the aeration tank for
    phosphorous control may
    aggravate fine pore diffuser
    fouling.74
 •  Silica has frequently been found
    as a major constituent of fine pore
   diffuser foulants.

The present data base is not
sufficient to develop firm conclusions
on the above observations. A current,
pressing need exists to analyze and
expand the data base  being
assembled for fine pore diffuser
systems with respect to their
tendencies to foul and the
consequences thereof. Insufficient
information is available to evaluate
the fouling tendencies of flexible
sheath diffusers. Relative fouling
rates for glass-bonded ceramic
diffusers and porous plastic  diffusers
are not known. The comparative
overall fouling rates of plug flow and
complete mix systems also are not
well documented. Various biological,
physical, and chemical factors
                                                                                                                 31

-------
 Table 9.

 Representative Ceramic Diffuser Fouling Data for Municipal Treatment Plants
Plant
A
B
C
D
E
G
H
K
L
M
N
Diffuser
Type
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Domes
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Domes
Domes
Domes
Domes
Domes
Domes
Discs
Discs
Exposure
Time
(Days)
120
120
133
360
90
365
365
1100
210
93
93
100
210
210
360
360
350
350
900
900
BRV (in.'W.G.)
Initial
5.9
5.6
5.7
6.3
5.8
6.0
5.7
6.2
—
4.9
(5.0)
(5.0)
5.0
4.0
4.3
4.3
(5.6)
(5.6)
After
Exposure
9.0
11.6
8.5
10.7
27.4
16.3
23.0
36.8
18.0
—
11.8
13.0
11.2
9.8
11.7
10.3
17.5
68.9
199
DWP(in. W.G.)
Initial
6.6
6.5
(5.8)
5.3
6.0
6.5
6.2
5.5
5.8
6.0
5.8
(5.0)
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.0
4.0
(5.6)
(5.6)
After
Exposure
8.6
8.4
(7.0)
9.6
9.3
8.7
11.2
16.8
10.5
14.3
10.8
9.8
9.2
11.4
7.3
6.8
6.5
9.1
18.6
130
ABRV
(in./yr)
I9-?
17.3
8.2
7.6
20.0
10.5
17.0
10.3
20.6
—
25.1
19.9
10.8
4.8
6.7
6.0
13.5
25.5
77.8
ADWP
(in./yr)
6.1
5.8
3.3
3.8
17.4
2.2
4.0
3.8
8.2
32.6
19.6
17.5
7.3
11.1
2.3
1.8
2.5
5.1
13.0
50.3
ADWP
ABRV
0.67
0.33
0.40
0.51
0.87
0.21
0.29
0.36
0.40
—
0.70
0.53
1.01
0.48
0.27
0.42
0.38
0.51
0.65
Reference
69
69
69
70
69
69
69
69
69
69
71
 Numerical values in parentheses represent estimated values.
 influencing the rate of fouling need
 further investigation and
 quantification. Finally, standardized
 O&M procedures need to be
 developed to address fouling for
 different types of fine pore diffusers.


 Process Monitoring

 Fouling  phenomena can induce
 changes in process performance.
 Proper process monitoring is
 necessary to define  system
 performance, identify process
 problems, and determine system
 O&M requirements. Recommended
 process  monitoring measurements
 are listed in Table 11.

 Air-side and liquid-side fouling of the
 type produced by high local air flux
 rates causes an increase in diffuser
 headloss at constant air flow rates.
 Such increases in wet headloss may
 be detected by operating conditions
 within the air supply system.
 Depending on the specific design
 approach, an increase in air supply
 system pressure  (monitored, for
 example, in the blower discharge
header or by increased opening of
the flow control valves) can indicate
an increase in diffuser headloss.
Significant increases in blower
pressure may be indicative of
extensive fouling of major portions of
the diffuser system. For this reason,
blower pressure along with air flow
rate should be monitored on a daily
basis.

While overall system pressure
monitoring serves as a potential
indicator of extreme fouling, it does
not provide a very sensitive indication
of increased diffuser headloss, nor
will it necessarily reveal significant
fouling of the type inversely affected
by air flux rate. For example, a 10-
percent increase in system air
pressure (an apparently minor
increase) may represent a much
higher percentage increase in
diffuser headloss. Even more
importantly, this buildup in headloss
may be having a significant
detrimental effect on OTE. In
addition,  fouling of only a portion of
the diffusion system may lead to a
substantial redistribution in air flow
but little increase in overall system
pressure. Consequently, use of a
monitoring technique more sensitive
than system pressure is desirable
and often necessary.

Increased headloss sensitivity is
provided by measuring  DWP with a
device of the type illustrated in Figure
17. Individual diffusers are outfitted
with an array of manometers that
allow measurement of the headloss
across the air distribution control
orifice and  across the diffuser.
Headloss across the orifice is used in
determining the rate of air flow
through the diffuser, while headloss
across the diffuser media indicates
the degree  to which the diffuser has
fouled. By outfitting  selected
individual diffusers throughout the
aeration system with DWP
measuring  setups, the condition of
various portions of the diffusion
system can be monitored.
32

-------
Table  10.
Representative Ceramic Diffuser Fouling Rates for Industrial Treatment Plants
Plant
Al

Bl

Cl

Dl
El

Gl

HI

Jl

Kl





LI

Diffuser Plant
Type Type
Domes

Discs

Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs

Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Discs
Plates

Plates

Plates

Domes

Pulp & Paper
and Domestic
Pulp & Paper
and Domestic
Pulp & Paper
Pulp& Paper
Pulp & Paper
Domestic &
Industrial
Pharamaceutical
Pharamaceutical
Food Processing
Food Processing
Brewery
Brewery
Domestic &
Industrial
Domestic &
Industrial
Domestic &
Industrial
Domestic &
Industrial
Exposure
Time
(Days)
720

120

16
92
218
21

34
31
420
420
90
90
30

77

58

110

BRV(in. W.G.)
Initial
5.7

9.5

5.8
5.6
6.3
5.8

5.8
5.8
5.6
5.6
6.2
5.9
6.0

6.8

7.0

6.5

After
Exposure
28.5

29.1

48.0
(92)
27.4
28^4

(31.9)
12.0
50.6
61.0
54.0
66.8
129

50.0

12.1

31.6

DWP(in. W.G.)
Initial
5.5

8.9

6.2
5.7
6.0
5.3

6.8
5.8
5.6
5.6
5.1
5.2
	

7.5

—

6.0

After
Exposure
50

15.0

12.0
20.0
9.3
12.7

«*»
7.8
42.4
43.0
45.9
48.0
—

12.4

—

12.5

ABRV
(in./yr)
141

59.3

962
341
35.3
383

Hah
73.0
39.1
53.0
219
270
1470

208

33.0

83,4

ADWP
(in./yr)
22.6

18.6

132
56.5
5.3
128

t*£ri
24.1
32.0
37.4
186
194
—

17.2

—

18.3

ADWP
ABRV
0.16

0,31

0.14
0.17
0.16
0.33

&J&
0.33
0.82
0.71
0.85
0.72
—

0.10

—

0.22

Reference
69

72

69

69
69

69

69

69

73





69

Numerical values in parentheses represent estimated values.
Table  11.
Recommended Process Monitoring
Measurements for O&M of Fine Pore
Diffusers
  System Pressure
  Dynamic Wet Pressure
  Bubble Release Vacuum
  Specific Air Flow (Air Volume per Unit of
    Oxygen Demand Satisfied)
  OTE Measurement
  Air Distribution Assessment
  Visual Observations
    • Boils
    • Coarse bubbling
    • Poor air distribution
                                               Air Source
    Liquid Surface
                — j
Diffuser^ •' .
*\ f




-
Mane
j r
^
m
•^

eters
Tap 2
'••'.': •''.;.'; •
I] •>:','••..•:; •.•,'-:x;.'">:i-;c\'rAlJ
, Bubbler
' Pipe
Tap 3
; Bubbles
                                                          Orifice
                                        Figure 17.
                                        On-Line  Device for Monitoring DWP of Fine Pore Diffusers
                                                                                                                   33

-------
Since diffuser fouling can
substantially decrease OTE without
significant attendant increases in
backpressure, effective process
monitoring should include other
parameters in addition to diffuser
headloss and system pressure
measurements. Savings in power
obtainable by optimizing diffuser
cleaning schedules will usually
justify the modest equipment and
labor costs required for such
additional monitoring. Candidate
parameters for additional monitoring
include OTE and BRV. Another
candidate parameter is specific air
flow, which is the volume of air
supplied per unit  of oxygen demand
satisfied. Air  flow rate is measured in
standard m3 (standard cu ft), while
the reduction in oxygen demand can
be measured in terms of BOD or COD
removed plus ammonia nitrogen
oxidized to nitrate nitrogen. The ratio
m3 air supplied/kg 02 demand
satisfied (cu ft/lb) should be routinely
monitored along with aeration basin
DO. An increase in the specific air
flow, a decrease in mixed liquor DO,
or both  may indicate  a decrease in
OTE, although other conditions such
as an increase in  system organic
loading can produce similar effects.
OTE can be measured using a variety
of techniques described in the
previous section.  The easiest and
most direct is the off-gas method.

These quantitative measures of
oxygen  transfer performance should
also be  combined with visual
observations  of the system. The
surface pattern on the aeration basin
should be smooth with no air "boils."
Boils arise because of breaks in the
air supply piping that allow large
quantities of  air to leak from the
distribution system at one or more
point sources. Such leaks should be
repaired as quickly as possible, both
because of the decrease in OTE that
will occur due to maldistribution of
air along with the release of coarse
bubbles and because of the
possibility of further damage to the
diffusion system.
Nonuniformity of the surface pattern
can signify that portions of the
diffusion system are becoming
plugged. For example, an unusually
low degree of surface turbulence in a
segment of the aeration basin may
indicate restriction of air flow to that
portion  of the basin resulting from
fouled diffusers. Cleaning of the
affected diffusers  may be required.
The size of the air bubbles evident on
the aeration basin surface can also
provide an indication of fouling.
Loosely adherent biomass on fine
pore diffuser media causes the
formation of large bubbles. Some
degree of "coarse bubbling" is
typically observed at the inlet end of
an aeration basin that may not be a
result of biofouling. It is believed that
the observed phenomenon may
sometimes be due to high  local air
flux rates caused by surfactants
contained in the influent wastewater.
These surfactant materials are
quickly adsorbed and/or degraded by
the activated sludge, which restricts
the size of the "coarse bubble" zone.
On the other hand, if biofouling
occurs, the coarse bubble zone can
expand  until, in the worst cases, it
covers the entire surface of the
aeration basin. It is recommended
that the surface of the aeration basin
be inspected and photographed when
initially placed in service to become
familiar with the size and appearance
of the bubbles at the inlet and outlet
ends of the basin. This familiarity will
provide  a basis for recognizing more
extreme coarse bubbling should it
occur later.

Once problems are identified
qualitatively by visual observation,
quantitative  measurements should
be made to confirm the type and
extent of fouling and the type of
cleaning required. Experience
indicates that qualitative
observations can be a valuable tool
when used in conjunction with
quantitative  measures of system
oxygen transfer performance.

Preventive Maintenance

A major finding of a survey
conducted by Houck and Boon17 on
dome diffuser plants in the United
Kingdom and Holland was that the
historically excellent O&M
performance of these grid systems
was due to both the knowledge and
diligent care of treatment plant
operators. Routine draining, tank and
grid washdown, and hardware
inspection were standard operating
procedures at all plants surveyed.
Operators were also aware of the
symptoms of problems in the diffuser
system and were quick to respond.

Preventive maintenance is necessary
to keep a fine pore aeration system in
proper working order and at an
optimum level of performance and to
minimize the rate of diffuser fouling.
It should also eliminate the need for
emergency maintenance resulting
from system failure.

Preventive maintenance on the air
filtration and supply system can
virtually eliminate air-side dust and
paniculate fouling of fine pore
diffusers. The guidance provided by
the equipment manufacturer is
generally sufficient for this purpose.
Proper maintenance procedures will
also decrease the frequency of
interruptions in air supply that can
lead to the entry of solids into the
distribution system as discussed
previously. The deposition of solids
on the liquid side of the diffusers and
subsequent penetration  into the
upper pores will also decrease with a
decrease in air supply interruptions.
Operation at or above minimum
allowable air flow rates per diffuser
will assist in preventing the
deposition of solids on diffuser
media."'7

Experience indicates that the above
preventive maintenance steps will
help reduce the rate of liquid-side
fouling of fine pore diffusers. Fouling
will still occur (although at a lower
rate), however,  and the diffusers will
have to be cleaned periodically.
Diffuser Cleaning

A variety of fine pore diffuser
cleaning techniques are currently
available.  They can be broadly
classified  as process interruptive or
process noninterruptive. Process
interruptive cleaning techniques
require that the aeration basin be
taken out  of service to provide access
to the diffusers, while process
noninterruptive techniques do not
require such access. A further
distinction in cleaning techniques
can be made between those that do
not require removal of the diffusers
from the basin (in-situ) and those
that do require diffuser removal  (ex-
situ). All ex-situ techniques are
process interruptive, while only  some
in-situ techniques are process
interruptive.

Among the important in-situ cleaning
methods in use today are water
hosing, steam cleaning, and acid
cleaning, all of which are process
interruptive, and gas cleaning, which
is process noninterruptive. Hosing
with either high pressure or low
pressure sprays and/or steam
cleaning will effectively dislodge
loosely adherent, liquid-side
34

-------
 biological growths. The application of
 14-percent HCI (a 50-percent
 solution of 18° Baume inhibited
 muriatic acid) with a portable spray
 applicator to each ceramic diffuser
 following hosing or steam cleaning
 and, then,  rehosing the spent acid  is
 effective in removing both organic
 and inorganic foulants.67'74'75

 Gas cleaning consists of the injection
 of an aggressive gas (HCI or formic
 acid)  into the air feed to the fouled
 diffusers. The cleaning agent is
 transported to the diffuser by the air
 flow where it may dislodge most
 foulants. The exceptions are
 atmospheric dust deposited on the  air
 side of the diffuser, which has not
 been  found to be a significant source
 of fouling as previously reported, and
 granular material such as silica
 deposited on, or incorporated in, a
 gelatinous  slime adherring to the
 liquid side of the diffuser.

 Refiring is the most expensive
 cleaning technique used and applies
 only to ceramic diffuser elements. It
 involves removal of the diffuser from
 the aeration basin, placing it in a kiln,
 and heating it in the same fashion
 originally used in its  manufacture.
 The result is removal of most
 foulants from, or incorporated in, the
 diffuser element and restoration of
 the element to essentially its original
 condition.

 The quantitative effectiveness of the
 various cleaning methods being used
 today for the variety of foulants
 encountered on different fine pore
 media is not well documented.
 Furthermore, costs for these methods
 are not generally available. Current
 research being conducted by
 EPA/ASCE78 is attempting to develop
 a sound data base on cleaning
 technology. As a general premise at
 this point in time, it is believed that
 most  fine pore diffusers (including
 virtually all those cited in  Tables 9
 and 10) can be restored to
 substantially original conditions by
 one or combinations of the following
 in-situ cleaning methods: water
 hosing,  steam cleaning, gas cleaning,
 and acid soaking.69'7*7^

The EPA/ASCE research program*^
 may ultimately identify the factors
 affecting diffuser cleaning rates and
costs  and provide an adequate data
base from which to develop typical
cleaning procedures and schedules
for various generic devices. Until that
occurs, the effects of various
cleaning methods and their required
 frequencies should be considered
 site specific and should be developed
 specifically for each system.
 Several methods are available to
 measure the effects of diffuser
 cleaning on the characteristics of the
 diffuser. One approach is to apply the
 process monitoring procedures
 previously discussed. The effects are
 measured as a decrease in  system
 pressure or diffuser DWP, an
 increase in system OTE, or  a
 decrease in system specific air flow,
 i.e., air flow per unit of oxygen
 demand satisfied. Techniques can
 also be applied to directly measure
 the characteristics of individual
 diffusers. These include OTE47
 chemical  analysis of foulants, and
 measurements of air flow capacity of
 individual diffusers. These latter
 techniques include specific
 permeability and BRV, which
 measure, respectively, the air flow
 rate at a specified applied diffuser
 headless and the applied headloss
 required to induce air flow through
 the diffuser.25'87 Pilot-scale  cleaning
 tests have also been shown to
 produce correlative data applicable to
 full-scale cleaning situations.77

 As discussed above, the
 effectiveness and costs of the various
 fine pore diffuser cleaning
 techniques is an area of active
 research. The development  of
 detailed information in this  area
 should be forthcoming. However,
 there is little doubt that the
 incorporation of an effective diffuser
 cleaning schedule is a necessary and
 justifiable component of any fine
 pore diffused aeration preventive
 maintenance program.
Cost Tradeoff Analysis

Diffuser cleaning may be
accomplished according to a regular
preventive maintenance schedule
that balances the cost of diffuser
cleaning against the power cost
savings resulting from higher system
OTE and lower system pressure. It
may be possible to generate a
relationship of the type illustrated in
Figure 18. System power costs
decrease with higher OTE due to
lower system air requirements. On
the other hand, the cleaning costs
required to maintain a certain
average OTE increase as the target
OTE increases. This occurs because
an increased cleaning frequency and.
perhaps, a more rigorous cleaning
method may be required to maintain
a higher OTE. The optimum OTE is
the OTE that minimizes the sum of
the power cost and the cleaning cost
required to maintain that OTE, thus
producing the lowest overall system
operating cost. This same concept
may be applied to system pressure.

It should be recognized that Figure
18 is an idealized plot. It presumes,
among other things, that  the fouling
rate and its effects remain constant
with time and that the relationship of
cleaning vs. OTE does not
progressively change. A cost-
effective solution to overcoming
these assumptions could  consist of
instituting routine monitoring
programs and initiating diffuser
cleaning at set-point changes in OTE
or DWP, whichever occurs first.
                                                                                                               35

-------
   (I)
   o
   o
                 Cleaning Cost to Maintain

                 Specified OTE
                                                Optimum OTE
                                     OTE
Figure 18.


Idealized Plot of Optimum OTE to Balance Power and Diffuser Cleaning
36

-------
Retrofit
Considerations
 The aeration equipment used in
 activated sludge service performs the
 dual roles of supplying oxygen to the
 process and maintaining the mixed
 liquor solids in suspension. Retrofit
 evaluations should be considered
 whenever more efficient, reliable
 aeration devices become
 commercially available. The principal
 benefit of retrofitting an existing
 aeration system with fine pore
 diffusers  is to reduce the air flow
 required to provide the oxygen
 necessary for effective activated
 sludge treatment. This reduction  in
 required air flow can result in
 significant energy savings if proper
 design and O&M  attention are given
 to all system components. Estimates
 of electrical energy cost increases of
 25 to 35 percent in excess of
 inflation by the year 1989 have been
 made78.

 Other reasons for considering fine
 pore retrofitting are to:

 • replace existing aeration
   equipment that has  reached the
   end of its useful life,
 • increase treatment capacity to
   handle higher influent flow
   and/or organic load, and
 • improve process removals to meet
   more stringent National Pollutant
   Discharge Elimination System
   (NPDES)  Permit limits.

 Increased oxygen transfer capability
 in itself may not alter plant treatment
 capacity. Adequate capacity must
 also exist in all unit processes and
 appurtenances to handle higher plant
 loadings.  If air supply capacity is the
 limiting factor,  however, replacing
 existing coarse bubble  aeration
'systems with fine pore diffusers can
 increase plant treatment capacity.

 System  Design Factors

 The design of a fine pore diffused
 aeration system to replace an
 existing coarse bubble  diffused
 aeration system or a mechanically
 aerated system is essentially the
 same as any aeration system design
 with some notable exceptions:

 • The aeration tank dimensions are
   fixed as the tanks are already in
   existence.
 • The air supply and air distribution
   systems are already in place in the
   case of an existing diffused air
   system.
 • The design and actual flows and
   organic loadings to the aeration
   system are known through review
   of the design criteria for the
   existing system and recent plant
   records.

These "given" conditions must be
reviewed and evaluated during the
design phase of the retrofit project as
outlined in the discussions that
follow.

Wastewater Characteristics

The wastewater characteristics that
impact the design of a fine pore
aeration system are flow, BOD5 load
to the aeration system, and NH3-N
load to the aeration system if the
plant's NPDES Permit requires
nitrification all or part of the year.
These parameters establish the
oxygen demand placed on the
system. Other constituents present in
the influent may significantly affect
oxygen transfer rates and/or
promote the rapid plugging or fouling
of fine pore diffusers. For example,
very hard water, or other sources of
calcium from industrial wastes, may
contribute to the precipitation of
inorganic compounds within the
media of fine pore diffusers. In
addition, surfactants, or surface
active agents, are typically
detrimental to oxygen transfer rates
in mixed liquor.

The capabilities of the new aeration
equipment should be assessed for
satisfying current operating
requirements and future design
conditions of flow and load. Present
and anticipated future NPDES Permit
effluent limitations establish the
mass of oxygen demanding
substances that may be discharged
with the plant effluent.

Methods for determining actual
oxygenation requirements (AOR) are
well documented in the literature.79'80
                                                                           Existing Facilities

                                                                           Aeration Tanks:

                                                                           Aeration tank dimensions and
                                                                           configurations have a number of
                                                                           important impacts on proper diffuser
                                                                           selection. Minimum airflows
                                                                           required to maintain adequate mixing
                                                                           in the basins are dictated by tank
                                                                           geometry. Minimum mixing
                                                                           requirements with coarse bubble
                                                                           diffusers in a cross roll pattern are
                                                                           generally estimated at 0.7 to 1.2
                                                                           mVhr/m3 (12 to 20 scfm/1000 cu ft)
                                                                                                            37

-------
 of tank volume.81 Mixing
 requirements with fine pore tube
 diffusers in the same arrangement
 are comparable. Minimum air flow
 rates for mixing with fine pore
 diffusers in a grid configuration are
 estimated in the range of 1.8 to 2.7
 m3/hr/m2 (0.1  to 0.15 scfm/sq ft) of
 tank surface area.**1''

 The number of aeration tanks and the
 interconnecting piping design
 strongly influences the type of
 process modifications that are
 possible with a given activated
 sludge system. The flexibility to
 dewater single tanks or portions of
 individual tanks must be carefully
 considered in selecting fine pore
 diffusion devices and methods for
 cleaning them when they  become
 fouled. Finally,  aeration tank depth
 and geometry have a direct impact on
 OTE for both the existing aeration
 equipment and the proposed fine
 pore retrofit system as described in
 the section on Performance
 Characteristics.

 Air Supply and Distribution:

 If the  aeration system to be replaced
 is either a diffused air system or
 mechanical aerators with sparged
 air, air blowers and distribution
 piping will already be present.
 Obviously,  a plant with mechanical
 surface aerators will require
 installation of new blowers and air
 piping to use fine pore diffusers.
 Replacement blowers may be
 required in some cases due to age or
 lack of flexibility or capacity.

 The energy savings available with
 fine pore diffusers result from a
 reduction in the volume of air
 required to provide the process with
 necessary oxygen. On the  other
 hand, savings may be partially offset
 by the increased operating pressure
 in fine pore diffusion systems. The
 reduction in air flow, if achieved, will
 result in operating fewer blowers
 and/or operating the same blowers
 at different points on their
 performance curves.

 Most air supply blowers in municipal
treatment plants are either single- or
 multi-stage centrifugal types or
 rotary positive displacement units.
The efficiency of both single- and
 multi-stage centrifugal blowers can
vary from more than 80 percent to
 less than 40 percent, depending on
the blower  itself and the operating
combination of discharge volume and
discharge pressure. Estimating input
horsepower for these units should
always be done using actual
performance curves generated from
power factor and power consumption
measurements at the plant.

Potential power savings from
operating at reduced air flows with
fine pore diffusers can be completely
negated by a decrease in blower
operating efficiency resulting from
the reduction in air flow itself. It is
critical, therefore, to accurately
estimate blower horsepower for the
actual conditions that will prevail
with the retrofitted system and not by
using compression formulae that
require an estimate of blower
efficiency to determine power for a
given discharge condition.

Centrifugal blower capacity should be
regulated to the extent possible by
throttling on the inlet side, as
significant power  savings are
available at any duty point. A method
for estimating  blower brake
horsepower for a centrifugal blower
with inlet throttling is illustrated in
Figure 19. Rotary  positive
displacement blower capacity  cannot
be varied by throttling for all practical
purposes. Air flow to the aeration
system can be changed only by
operating more or less units, varying
speed, or by "blowing off" some of
the air to atmosphere. Wasting air to
the atmosphere may reduce the
actual air flow to the aeration
system, but will not reduce the power
consumption of the blowers. Here
again, it is crucial that blower
horsepower be estimated using
actual blower performance curves
and under the  anticipated actual
conditions of operation  because
efficiency for rotary positive blowers
is by no means constant from  one
unit to another.
Blower peak capacity should be
checked at the maximum anticipated
inlet temperature  and the minimum
expected pressure at the blower inlet
flange. The overall blower system
integrity should be evaluated in
terms of its turndown capability and
flexibility of operation.

The existing air distribution piping
can in general  be reused with  some
reservations. Because air flow rates
will decrease with enhanced OTE,
the size of the  existing blower
discharge headers and air mains that
deliver air to the tanks will normally
be sufficient. Depending on the type
and arrangement of fine pore
diffusion equipment, the individual
drop pipes into the tanks may also be
large enough. The air distribution
system should be checked for
capacity, corrosion, and integrity.

For new systems that will employ full
floor coverage grid configurations
and fewer air drops per aeration tank,
each drop pipe should be sized such
that air velocities at average flow
rates are less than 900 m (3,000
fjXmin|to avoid excessive air
pressure drop in these reaches of
pipe.7

Air Filtration:

Blower inlet filters will effectively
remove contaminants from the
outside air but will not protect the
diffusers from dirt, rust, scale, or
other debris that might already be  in
the downstream piping. It is
recommended, therefore, that careful
consideration be given to the use of
in-line filters. In some cases, it may
even be desirable to locate filters
adjacent to the air drops into the
aeration system so that new
corrosion-resistant pipe need only be
located between the filters and the
diffusers. Existing piping systems
composed of galvanized or stainless
steel will present little danger of
present or future rust or scale
particles plugging the diffusers if
blower inlet filters are selected.
Existing painted or uncoated steel  or
iron pipe, however, should be reused
only with extreme caution unless in-
line filters are installed downstream.

Diffuser Selection

Selection of the proper fine pore
diffuser for a given retrofit situation
will depend on the oxygen transfer
capabilities of the device within the
constraints of the existing aeration
tank geometry, existing blower
characteristics, wastewater
properties, desired O&M
requirements, and the desired air
flow control scheme. Refer to the
discussions in previous sections of
this report.

Economic Analysis

General

The factors used in the design of a
fine pore diffusion retrofit system
also comprise the basis for
determining its economic viability.
Installation of fine pore equipment
38

-------
                             Barometer: 14.3 psia
                             Inlet Temperature: 38°C (100°F)
                                        Blower
                                        Horsepower Curve
                                     Pt. A: 3,030 icfm
                                          at 21.2
                                                                       _Qc = 4,180 icfm
                                                                 Pt. B: 4,060 icfm
                                                                      at 20.3 psia
                                                                              Blower
                                                                           Performance
                                                                              Curve
                                                 HPT = Horsepower with inlet throttling
                                                     = HPdQr/Qc)
                                                  HPC = Horsepower from blower performance curve

                                                  QT = QA at throttled position

                                                  Qc = QA from blower performance curve

                                                  Pt. A: HPT =  1 40(3,030/3,1 50) = 1 35 bhp

                                                  Pt. B: HPT =  158(4.060/4,180) = 153 bhp
1000
                                       2000        3000        4000

                                             Blower Inlet Air Flow, QA (icfm)
                                                5000
                                                                                        6000
Figure 19.

Method for Estimating  Centrifugal Blower BHP with  Inlet Throttling (Power
Computation per Reference 82)
                                                                                                                 39

-------
should be undertaken only if a
reasonable return on investment can
be foreseen. The cost effectiveness of
retrofitting is most appropriately
based on present day flow and
loading to the plant rather than
anticipated future increases and
should consider the total present
worth of the investment as well as
simple payback.


Determining System Cost

The cost of a fine pore retrofit
includes the new aeration
equipment, modifications to the
existing air filtration system, air
distribution piping  modifications if
required, and replacement or
modification of the air supply
equipment as necessary. If the
existing system uses mechanical
aerators, a completely new air supply
and distribution system will obviously
be needed. The cost of installation,
either by a private contractor or the
owner, must also be  included.
Determining Annual Savings

Net annual savings in operating costs
with fine pore diffusers consist of
annual electrical (or other) energy
savings resulting from the reduction
in air flow to the aeration tanks, less
any additional O&M costs associated
with the fine pore diffusers. Annual
power cost savings can be
determined by comparing the
average input power required for
operating the existing system and the
estimated average input power for
operating the new system. Power
determinations should be made using
actual blower performance curves.
Power requirements should also be
estimated with varying inlet
temperatures depending on the time
of year.  One method of accounting
for the variables involved is to
develop average air flow
requirements for the existing and
proposed aeration equipment on a
monthly average basis and compute
horsepower input monthly. Minimum
air flow requirements for mixing
should be determined and compared
with estimates of air flow for
satisfying oxygen demand alone. This
is especially important in plants with
NPDES Permits that specify seasonal
nitrification. When mixing requires
more air than necessary to satisfy
oxygen demand, the higher air flow
rate should be used to determine
input power for the period in
question.
Determining Additional O&M
Costs

Additional O&M costs with fine pore
diffusers include diffuser monitoring
and cleaning and air filter
maintenance and/or replacement.
Liquid-side diffuser cleaning is the
subject of other sections of this
report, and the method used will
depend on the type of fine pore
device selected and the particular
operating characteristics of the plant
in question. The cost of the labor and
materials for diffuser cleaning must
be accounted for in the economic
analysis. In addition, labor and
material for monitoring diffuser
conditions and air filter maintenance
and/or replacement must also be
factored into the economic analysis.

Determining Economic Viability

Economic viability of a fine pore
diffuser retrofit project can be
evaluated by comparing the present
worth of all future energy savings
minus the O&M costs of the fine pore
diffuser system against its initial
capital cost. In determining the
present worth of both future savings
and costs in the following example, a
"real" (inflation-free) discount rate
will be used. This avoids the need to
inflate future prices. An inflation-free
discount rate, r, can be obtained from
a "market" discount rate, R, by
adjusting the latter for the inflation
rate, I:
For a planning period of n years, the
net present worth of project savings,
NPWS, can be calculated as:

NPWS = SPWF(r,n)(EAS) - ICC

where:

SPWF(r.n) = series present worth
            factor at discount rate 4
            over n years

   SPWF = [(1+r)n-1]/[r(1+r)n]

     EAS = estimated annual
            savings

      ICC = initial capital cost
For the project to be economically
viable, NPWS must be positive over
the planning period.

EAS can be written as follows:

EAS = AES - AROM - EACC

where:

      AES = annual energy cost
             savings

    AROM = annual cost of routine
             O&M on the fine pore
             diffuser  system, e.g., air
             filter cleaning, air flow
             monitoring, etc.

     EACC = equivalent annual cost
             of diffuser cleaning

If the diffusers are cleaned every t
years at a cost of DCC, the EACC can
be expressed as:

EACC =

In this manner, the effect of
alternative diffuser cleaning
frequencies can be analyzed.

An  equivalent payback period can be
defined as the length of the planning
period that yields zero net present
worth savings. From the expression
above for NPWS, this occurs when:

SPWF(r,n)=ICC/EAS

A table of series present worth
factors at discount rate r can then be
consulted for the value of n with
entry closest to the computed SPWF.
This payback period should not be
interpreted as one based on actual
cash flow since it incorporates the
equivalency effects of discounting.

Example Evaluation

A generalized example of a simplified
economic evaluation of fine pore
diffuser retrofitting is presented
below. The energy savings analysis  is
for one month only. For a complete
analysis, it is recommended that
appropriate costs be determined for
each month in a 12-month period.
40

-------
     Flow
       Present average                                       5,0 mgd
       Future average                                        7.5 mgd

     Primary effluent BOD5                                    120mg/L

     Primary effluent NH3-N                                   15mg/L

     NPDES Permit Limit
       BOD5                                                30 mg/L
       NH3-N                                               2.0 mg/L

     Average Mixed Liquor
      DO                                                   2.0 mg/l

     Average Water
      Temperature                                           18°C(64°F)

     Blower Inlet Pressure                                    14.3 psia

     Blower Inlet
      Temperature                                           38°C(100°F)

     Aeration Tanks
       Number                                              4
       Dimensions                                           120 ft x 35 fix
                                                             14 ft SWD

     Average Power Cost
      (including demand
      charge)                                               S0.06/kWh


Existing Aeration System (Coarse Bubble Spargers)

ffaSOTE                                5.0 percent
OTEt                                   4.0 percent (off-gas measurement)
C*2o                                   10.1 mg/L (see Performance Characteristics
                                       Section)
AOR                                   7,500 Ib/d
Mass flow of air                         804,400 Ib/d
Inlet air flow                            8,120icfm
Air for mixing                           3,530 icfm (15 icfm/1,000 cu ft)

Proposed Aeration System (Dome/Disc Diffusers, Full Floor Grid)

OTE(                                   10.8 percent
C*,2o                                   10.2 mg/L (see Performance Characteistics
                                       Section)
AOR                                   7,500 Ib/d
Mass flow of air                         300,000 Ib/d
Inlet air flow                            3,030 icfm
Air for mixing                           2,015 icfm (0.12 icfm/sq ft)

For this month, mixing does not
control, so power cost estimates will
be made using the air flow rates
required for process oxygen transfer.
System pressure required for blower
operation should be determined by
developing a system head curve.
However, pressures are estimated for
this example as follows:

Submergence
Diffuser head loss
System losses (estimated)
Total system pressure
Coarse Bubble
12ft-0. in.
Oft - 8 in.
1 ft -3 in.
13ft- 11 in.
= 6.0 psig
(20.3 psia)*
Fine Bubble
13 ft -3 in.
1 ft -4 in.
1 ft - 3 in.
15 ft -10 in.
= 6.9 psig
(21. 2 psia)"
*Local barometric pressure = 14.3 psia.

                                                                                                                   41

-------
Estimated Blower Input Horsepower
(from Figure 19):

Existing spargers = 306 bhp,
2 blowers at 4060 icfm each

Proposed fine pore = 1 35 bhp,
1 blower at 3030 icfm

Input power in kW must take into
account blower  motor efficiency and
the blower/motor flexible coupling
efficiency. For this example, motor
efficiency is assumed at 90 percent,
coupling efficiency at 95 percent.

Estimated Power Costs:

Existing = $11,918
Proposed = $ 5,258

Estimated cost savings for month =
$6,660

If this month was typical of the entire
year, annual energy savings,^A
would be estimated at $79,920.
Actual savings, however, will vary
from month to month depending on
plant operating conditions.

For this example, no change in
blowers is recommended.
Development of detailed construction
costs and annual maintenance costs
is beyond the scope of this report.
The initial  capital cost is estimated  to
be $150,000, including the new fine
pore aeration system, new efficient
air filters, installation, engineering,
and contingencies. Additional annual
routine O&M costs, AROM, including
air filter cleaning and replacement
are estimated to be $2,620. Diffuser
cleaning is assumed to occur every 2
years at a cost, DCC, of $10,000
(2,000 diffusers at $5/diffuser). An
inflation-free discount rate, r, of 8
percent is  used.

The estimated annual savings, EAS,
for this retrofit project are computed
as follows:

EAS = $79,920-2,620-(10,000)
       (0.08)/[(1+0.08)2-1]

EAS = $72,492
The net present worth savings,
NPWS, for various project periods, n,
are summarized below:
Year
1
2
3
4
5
10
15
20
SPWF
(0.08,n)
0.926
1.783
2.577
3.312
3.993
6.710
8.560
9.818
Net Present Worth
Savings
$72,492 (SPWF) -
$150,000
-82,872
-20,747
36,812
90,094
139,461
336,421
470,531
561,726
As shown by the progressive growth
of the project's net present worth, ->av
the investment breaks even after
slightly longer than 2 years. If the
results of a simplified analysis of the
type presented above are favorable, a
more rigorous analysis considering
actual variations in daily air flow
requirements, DO and air flow
control schemes, and other operating
considerations should be undertaken.
 42

-------
Ongoing Studies
Significant progress has been made
in the last 5 years to better delineate
the design, testing, maintenance, and
control requirements of fine pore
diffused aeration systems. The
discussions in this report clearly
indicate, however, that many gaps
still exist in our complete
understanding of these systems. For
example:

• How do the various fine pore
   aeration systems perform in
   processwaters, both in absolute
   terms and relative to each other?
• How can clean water test data
   best be translated to field
   conditions?
• What is the behavior of fine pore
   diffusers with respect to long-
   term, liquid-side fouling?
• What strategies will cost
   effectively control and maintain
   these systems while still yielding
   acceptably high field OTEs?

Several research projects have been
recently completed or are presently
underway in the United States,
Canada, and the United Kingdom,
addressing the above and other
questions related to fine pore
aeration system design,  performance,
operation, maintenance, installation,
control, and costs. Among the
significant government-sponsored
projects are those briefly described
below.
In addition to the above-listed
government-sponsored studies,
numerous shop and field tests are
being conducted every day by
consultants, manufacturers, and
owners of wastewater treatment
facilities to better characterize fine
pore diffuser behavior. This
information also will be disseminated
into the public sector as it becomes
available.

In the preparation of a
comprehensive design information
manual on fine pore diffused aeration
systems, currently scheduled for
completion in late 1987 or early 1988,
the ASCE Committee on Oxygen
Transfer will make every effort to
review all pertinent technical data
and information in the literature as
well as in unpublished reports made
available from consulting
engineering firms, municipal
treatment plant owners and
operators, universities, and research
organizations.
                                     Country/Performing
                                     Organization:

                                     Sponsors:
                                     Topic/Dates:


                                     Objectives/Scope:
                                     Site:
                       United Kingdom - Water Research Centre

                       Department of Energy - United Kingdom; Environmental
                       Canada - Canada; EPA - United States

                       Full-Scale Optimization of Fine Pore Aeration to Produce
                       Energy Savings - 1982 to 1985

                       To modify the design of ceramic dome diffuser systems
                       in existing aeration tanks at a large treatment plant to
                       significantly reduce the energy used in treating waste-
                       water and to increase the throughput capacities of the
                       modified  tanks while still  meeting specific effluent
                       objectives.

                       To make an economic comparison of the modified vs. the
                       existing systems to produce a fully nitrified effluent of
                       high quality 95 percent of the time in one train and a
                       non-nitrified effluent of 30:20 mg/L (SS:BOD) 95
                       percent of the time in  a second train.

                       To obtain design information that will enable new and
                       retrofitted plants equipped with ceramic dome diffuser
                       systems to achieve higher OTEs and greater throughput
                       capacities.

                       Rye Meads (England) Sewage Treatment Works (121,000
                       m3/d = 32 mgd); parallel process trains
                                                                                                           43

-------
 Country/Performing
 Organization:

 Sponsors:

 Topic/Dates:
 Objectives/Scope:
Site:
Canada - Wastewater Technology Centre

Environment Canada - Canada; EPA - United States

Full-Scale  Demonstration of  Energy  Savings,  Opera-
tional Benefits, and Instrumentation/Control in Auto-
mated Aeration Systems - 1 982 to 1987

To demonstrate energy savings and improved operation
with DO set-point maintenance through automated air
distribution and effective blower control.

To determine and optimize the true cost of maintaining
the integrity of on-line instrumentation and  control
hardware.

To conduct cost/benefit analyses with respect to the
benefits of  implementing automated DO control.

This project  is  currently  evaluating  coarse  bubble
diffused aeration systems. It  is anticipated that the
systems will be retrofitted with fine pore diff users before
the project  is completed.

Tillsonburg (Ontario) Wastewateer Treatment Plant
(6,000 mVd = 1.6 mgd); parallel process trains
Country/Performing
Organization:


Sponsor:

Topic/Dates:
Objectives/Scope:
Site:
United  States  -  Madison (Wisconsin) Metropolitan
Sewerage District

EPA

Investigation of Biological Fouling of Ceramic Fine Pore
Diffusers  and the Effectiveness of Several Cleaning
Strategies - 1982 to 1985

To evaluate the effects of selected aeration tank control
parameters (DO, total and soluble organic load, and gas
flow per diffuser) on  the  biological fouling of glass-
bonded, ceramic fine pore diffusers.

To evaluate the effects of these parameters on diffuser
characteristics and OTE.

To evaluate the effectiveness of a  number of cleaning
methods on fouled ceramic diffusers.

Madison (Wisconsin) Nine Springs Wastewater Treat-
ment Plant; 3,800- and 5,600-L (1000- and 1500-gal)
pilot aeration tanks;  selected full-scale aeration trains;
laboratory studies of cleaning
44

-------
Country/Performing
Organization:

Sponsor:

Topic/Dates:


Objectives/Scope:
Site;
United States - Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts

EPA

Comparative Full-Scale Evaluation of Two Types of Fine
Pore Diffusion with Jet Aeration - 1980 to 1985

To compare over a 6-month period the field oxygen
transfer  and fouling  performance of ceramic  dome
diffusers (grid configuration),  porous plastic tube
diffusers (dual spiral roll configuration), and directional
flow jet aerators.

To evaluate the long-term process performance, oxygen
transfer performance, and fouling characteristics of the
most efficient of the above systems (which was deter-
mined to be the dome diffuser system in the 6-month
preliminary phase) at  varying volumetric organic loads
and under two different flow regimes (plug flow and step
aeration).

Whittier Narrows (California) Water Reclamation Plant
(58,000 mVd = 15 mgd); parallel  process trains
Country/Performing
Organization:

Sponsor:

Topic/Dates:


Objectives/Scope:
Site:
United States - ASCE

EPA

Design Information on Fine Pore  Diffused Aeration -
1985 to 1988

To evaluate the existing data base on the performance of
fine pore diffused aeration systems in clean and process
waters.

To  carry out field  studies at a number of municipal
wastewater treatment facilities employing a variety of
fine pore aeration systems to fill perceived data gaps in
the design and performance of these systems.

To evaluate the field effectiveness of available fine pore
diffuser cleaning technologies.

To conduct economic  analyses of the most promising
cleaning technologies and delineate factors affecting
the selection of best methods of cleaning for site-specific
conditions.

To  prepare an  interim guidance  report on fine pore
diffused aeration systems.

To prepare a final  comprehensive design information
manual on fine pore diffused aeration systems.

ASCE (New York, New York) administers project under
technical direction of the Steering Subcommittee of the
Committee on Oxygen Transfer with studies conducted
at a number of selected sites  throughout  the United
States and Europe.
                                                                                                            45

-------
References
When an NTIS number is cited in a
reference, that reference is available
from:

National Technical Information
Service
5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
(703)487-4650

  1.  Wesner, G.M., L.J. Ewing, Jr.,
     T.S. Lineck, and D.J. Hinrichs.
     Energy Conservation in
     Municipal Wastewater
     Treatment. EPA-430/9-77-
     011, NTIS No. PB81-165391,
     U.S. EPA, Washington, DC,
     March 1977.

  2.  Barnhart, E.L. An Overview of
     Oxygen Transfer Systems. In:
     Proceedings of Seminar
     Workshop on Aeration System
     Design, Testing, Operation, and
     Control, EPA-600/9-85-005,
     NTIS No. PB85-173896/AS,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     January 1985. pp. 1-5.

  3.  Roe, F.C. The Installation and
     Servicing of Porous Air Diffuser
     Mediums. Water and Sewage
     Works, 81 (4):115-118, 1934.

  4.  Committee on Sewage
     Disposal. The Operation and
     Control of Activated Sludge
     Sewage Treatment Works.
     Sewage Works Journal,
     14(1):3-69, January 1942.

  5.  Sub-Committee on Air
     Diffusion. Air Diffusion in
     Sewage Works.  Manual of
     Practice No. 5, Federation of
     Sewage and Industrial Wastes
     Associations, Champaign, IL,
     T952.

  6.  Bushee, R.J. and S.I. Zach. Test
     on Pressure Loss in Activated
     Sludge Plants. Engineering
     News Record, 93:21-24, 1924.

  7.  Subcommittee on Aeration in
     Wastewater Treatment.
     Aeration in Wastewater
     Treatment. Manual of Practice
     No. 5, Water Pollution Control
     •Federation, Washington, DC,
     1971.

  8.  Benefield, L.D. and L.W.
     Randall. Biological Process
     Design for Wastewater
     Treatment. Prentice-Hall,
     Englewood, NJ,  1980.
 9.   Eckenfelder, W.W., Jr. Water
     Quality Engineering for
     Practicing Engineers.
     Professional Engineering
     Career Development Series,
     Barnes & Noble, New York, NY,
     1970.

10.   Schmidt-Holthausen, H.J. and
     B.C. Bievers. 50 Years of
     Experience in Europe with Fine
     Bubble Aeration. Presented at
     the 53rd Annual Conference of
     the Water Pollution Control
     Federation, Las Vegas, NV.
     October 1980.

11.   Brenner, R.C. Philosophy of and
     Perspectives on an Oxygen
     Transfer Standard. In:
     Proceedings of Workshop
     Toward an Oxygen Transfer
     Standard, EPA-600/9-78-021,
     NTIS No. PB-296557/2, U.S.
     EPA, Cincinnati, OH, April
     1979. pp. 12-16.

12.   McCarthy, J.J. Technology
     Assessment of Fine Bubble
     Aerators. EPA-600/2-82-003,
     NTIS No. PB82-237751, U.S.
     EPA, Cincinnati, OH, February
     1982.

13.   Porex Porous Plastic Materials.
     Product information bulletin.
     Porex Technologies, Fairburn,
     GA, 1983.

14.   Personal communication from
     J. Moody, Porex Technologies,
     Fairburn, GA, to G.L.
     Huibregtse,  Rexnord, Inc.,
     Milwaukee,  Wl, April 22,  1985.

15.   Nopal Aeration System for
     Wastewater. Product
     information  bulletin, Nokia
     Metal Products, Vantaa,
     Finland, (undated).

16.   Personal communication from
     R. Cook, Parkson Corporation,
     Ft. Lauderdale,  FL, to R. C.
     Brenner, U.S. EPA, Cincinnati,
     OH, June 12, 1985.

17.   Houck, D.H.  and A.G. Boon.
     Survey and Evaluation of  Fine
     Bubble Dome Diffuser Aeration
     Equipment.  EPA-600/2-81-
     222, NTIS No. PB82-105578,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     September 1981.
46

-------
18.  Wren, J.D. Diffused Aeration
     Types and Applications. In:
     Proceedings of Seminar
     Workshop on Aeration System
     Design, Testing, Operation, and
     Control, EPA-600/9-85-005.
     NTIS No. PB85-173896/AS,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     January 1985. pp. 6-13.

19.  Ewing, L. and  D.T. Redmon.
     U.S. Patent No. 4,261,933,
     April 14, 1981.

20.  Filtros. Product information
     bulletin, Ferro Corporation,
     Refractories Division, East
     Rochester, NY, May 1984.

21.  Huibregtse, G.L., T.C. Rooney,
     and D.C. Rasmussen. Factors
     Affecting Fine Bubble Diffused
     Aeration. Journal WPCF,
     55(8):1057-1064, August
     1983.

22.  Yunt, F.W. and T.O.  Hancuff.
     Relative Number of  Diffusers
     for the Norton and Sanitaire
     Aeration Systems to Achieve
     Equivalent Oxygen Transfer
     Performance. Internal report,
     Los Angeles County Sanitation
     Districts, December 14, 1979.

23.  Alundum Porous Mediums.
     Product information bulletin,
     Norton Company, Refractories
     Division, Worcester, MA,
     August 1968.

24.  Carborundum  Aloxite Porous
     Products for Filtration,
     Aeration,  and Diffusion.
     Product information bulletin.
     Carborundum  Company,
     Bonded Abrasives Division,
     Niagara Falls,  NY, May 1970.

25.  Redmon, D.T. Operation and
     Maintenance/Troubleshooting.
     In: Proceedings of Seminar
     Workshop on Aeration System
     Design, Testing, Operation, and
     Control, EPA-600/9-85-005,
     NTIS No. PB85-173896/AS,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     January 1985. pp. 274-285.

26.  Boyle, W.C. and  D.T. Redmon.
     Biological Fouling of Fine
     Bubble Diffusers: State-of-Art.
     Journal of the  Environmental
     Engineering Division, ASCE,
     109(EE5):991 -1005, October
     1983.
27.  Personal communication from
     J. Wahl, Parkson Corporation,
     Ft. Lauderdale, FL, to G.L.
     Huibregtse, Rexnord, Inc.,
     Milwaukee, Wl, April 22, 1985.

28.  Proceedings of Workshop
     Toward an Oxygen Transfer
     Standard. Edited by W.C. Boyle.
     EPA-600/9-78-021, NTIS No.
     PB-296557/2, U.S. EPA,
     Cincinnati, OH, April 1979.

29.  American Society of Civil
     Engineers. ASCE Standard
     Measurement of Oxygen
     Transfer in Clean Water. ISBN
     0-87262-430-7, New York, NY,
     July 1984.

30.  ASCE Oxygen Transfer
     Standards Subcommittee.
     Development of Standard
     Procedures for Evaluating
     Oxygen Transfer Devices. EPA-
     600/2-83-102, NTIS No. PB84-
     147438/REB, U.S. EPA,
     Cincinnati, OH. October 1983.

31.  Yunt, F.W., T.O. Hancuff, R.C.
     Brenner, and G.L. Shell. An
     Evaluation of Submerged
     Aeration Equipment. Presented
     at the 53rd Annual Conference
     of the Water Pollution  Control
     Federation, Las Vegas, NV,
     October, 1980.

32.  Bewtra, J.K. and W.R.  Nicholas.
     Oxygenation from Diffused Air
     in Aeration Tanks. Journal
     WPCF, 36(10):1195-1224,
     October 1964.

33.  Sullivan, R.C. and R.G. Gilbert.
     The Significance of Oxygen
     Transfer Variables in the Sizing
     of Dome Diffuser Aeration
     Equipment. Presented at the
     56th Annual Conference of the
     Water Pollution Control
     Federation, Atlanta, GA,
     October 1983.

34.  Paulson, W.L. Oxygen
     Absorption Efficiency Study
     Norton Dome Diffusers. Report
     prepared for the Norton
     Company, Worcester, MA,
     March 1976.
35.  Popel, J.H. Improvements of Air
     Diffusion Systems Applied in
     the Netherlands. In:
     Proceedings of Seminar
     Workshop on Aeration System
     Design, Testing, Operation, and
     Control, EPA-600/9-85-005,
     NTIS No. PB85-173896/AS,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     January 1985. pp. 156-176.

36.  Paulson, W.L. and J.K.
     Johnson. Oxygen Transfer
     Study of FMC Pearlcomb
     Diffusers. Report prepared for
     the FMC Corporation, Lansdale,
     PA, August 1982.

37.  Wyss Flex-A-Tube Diffuser
     Systems. Product information
     bulletin, Wyss, Inc., Ada, OH,
     October 1983.

38.  Personal communications from
     W.L.  Paulson, University of
     Iowa, Iowa City, IA, to W.C.
     Boyle, University of Wisconsin,
     Madison, Wl, 1985.

39.  Rooney, T.C. and G.L.
     Huibregtse. Increasing Oxygen
     Transfer Efficiency with Coarse
     Bubble Diffusers. Journal
     WPCF, 52(9):2315-2326,
     September 1980.

40.  Doyle, M.C. and W.C. Boyle.
     Translation of Clean to Dirty
     Water Oxygen Transfer Rates.
     In: Proceedings of Seminar
     Workshop on Aeration System
     Design, Testing, Operation, and
     Control, EPA-600/9-85-005,
     NTIS  No. PB85-173896/AS,
     U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
     January 1985. pp. 45-61.

41.  Kiiskinen, S. Comparison of
     Different Aerators for Diffused
     Aeration. Progress in Water
     Technology, 11(3):139-149,
     1979.

42.  Downing, A.L., R.W. Bayley,
     and A.G. Boon. The
     Performance of Mechanical
     Aerators. Journal Institute of
     Sewage Purification, Part
     3:231-247, 1960.
                                                                                                          47

-------
43.  Mancy, K.H. and W.E. Barlage,
     Jr. Mechanism of Interference
     of Surface Active Agents with
     Gas Transfer in Aeration
     Systems. In: Advances in Water
     Quality Improvement, Edited by
     E.F. Gloynaand W.W.
     Eckenfelder, Jr., University of
     Texas Press, Austin, TX, 1968.
     pp. 262-286.

44.  Barnhart, E.L. Transfer of
     Oxygen in Aqueous Solutions.
     Journal of the Sanitary
     Engineering Division, ASCE,
     95(SA3):645-661, June 1969.

45.  Gilbert, R.G. Measurement of
     Alpha and Beta Factors. In:
     Proceedings of Workshop
     Toward an Oxygen Transfer
     Standard, EPA-600/9-78-021,
     NTIS No. PB-296557/2, U.S.
     EPA, Cincinnati, OH, April
     1979. pp. 147-162.

46.  ASCE Oxygen Transfer
     Standards Subcommittee.
     Evaluation of Oxygen Transfer
     Test Procedures. Draft final
     report for Cooperative
     Agreement No. CR808840
     between U.S. EPA and ASCE
     (report to be published by U.S.
     EPA, Cincinnati, OH, in 1986).

47.  Redmon, D.T., W.C. Boyle, and
     L. Ewing. Oxygen Transfer
     Efficiency Measurements in
     Mixed Liquor Using Off-Gas
     Techniques. Journal WPCF,
     55(11 ):1338-1347, November
     1983.

48.  Redmon, D.T. and W.C. Boyle.
     Preliminary Findings: Off-Gas
     Analysis. A report to the ASCE
     Oxygen Transfer Standards
     Subcommittee, Detroit, Ml,
     October 1981.

49.  Brochtrup, J.A. A Study of the
     Steady-State and Off-Gas
     Methods of Determining
     Oxygen Transfer Efficiency in
     Mixed Liquor. Masters Thesis,
     Department of Civil and
     Environmental Engineering,
     University of Wisconsin,
     Madison, Wl, 1983.
50.  Yunt, F.W. Aeration Equipment     58.
     Evaluation Phase II: Process
     Water Results. Draft final
     report for Contract No. 68-03-
     2906 between U.S. EPA and
     Los Angeles County Sanitation
     Districts (report to be published
     by U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH, in     59.
     1986).

51.  Personal communication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Camp,
     Dresser & McKee, Inc., Boston,
     MA, April 1982.

52.  Personal communication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Sanitaire        60.
     Water Pollution Control
     Corporation, Milwaukee, Wl,
     August 1983.

53.  Houck, D.H. Survey and
     Evaluation of Fine Bubble
     Dome and Disc Aeration
     Systems in North America.         61.
     Draft final report for Purchase
     Order No. C2667NASX
     between U.S. EPA and D.H.
     Houck Associates, Inc. (report
     to be published by U.S. EPA,
     Cincinnati, OH, in 1986).

54.  Vik, T.A., D.J. Lamars, and D.L.
     Roder. Full-Scale Operating
     Experience Utilizing Fine
     Bubble Ceramic Aeration with
     In-Place Gas Cleaning at           62.
     Seymour, Wisconsin.
     Presented at the 57th Annual
     Conference of the Water
     Pollution Control Federation,
     New Orleans, LA, October
     1984.

55.  Personal cummunication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,       63.
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Sanitaire
     Water Pollution Control
     Corporation, Milwaukee, Wl,
     April  1984.

56.  Personal communication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,       64.
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Sanitaire
     Water Pollution Control
     Corporation, Milwaukee, Wl,
     June 1984.

57.  Stenstrom, M.K. and  R.G.
     Gilbert. Effects of Alpha, Beta,
     and Theta Factor Upon the
     Design, Specification and
     Operation of Aeration Systems.
     Water Research, 15(6):643-
     654, 1981.
Lister, A.R. and A.G. Boon.
Aeration in Deep Tanks: An
Evaluation of a Fine-Bubble
Diffused-Air System. Journal
Institute of Water Pollution
Control, 72(5):590-605, 1973.

Campbell, H.J., Jr. Oxygen
Transfer Testing Under Process
Conditions. In: Proceedings of
Seminar Workshop on Aeration
System Design, Testing,
Operation, and Control. EPA-
600/9-85-005, NTIS No. PB85-
173896/AS, U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, OH, January 1985.
pp. 345-363.

von der Emde, W. Aeration
Developments in Europe. In:
Advances in Water Quality
Improvement, Edited by E.F.
Gloyna and W.W. Eckenfelder,
Jr., University of Texas Press,
Austin, TX, 1968. pp. 237-261.

Robertson, P., V.K. Thomas,
and B. Chambers. Energy
Saving-Optimisation of Fine-
Bubble Aeration. Draft final
report and replicators guide for
Cooperative Agreement No.
CR808855 between U.S. EPA
and Water Research Centre,
Stevenage, England (report to
be published by U.S. EPA,
Cincinnati, OH, in 1986).

Allbough, T., D. J. Benoit, and
J. Spangler. Aeration System
Design Using Off-Gas Oxygen
Transfer Testing. Presented at
the 58th Annual Conference of
the Water Pollution Control
Federation, Kansas City, MO,
October 1985.

Danley, W.B. Biological Fouling
of Fine Bubble Diffusers Phase
I. Masters Thesis, Department
of Civil and Environmental
Engineering, University of
Wisconsin, Madison, Wl, 1984.

Boyle, W.C. and H.J. Campbell,
Jr. Experiences with Oxygen
Transfer Testing of Diffused Air
Systems Under Process
Conditions. Water Science and
Technology, 16(10/11 ):91-106,
1984.
48

-------
 65.  Hovis, J.S. and J.J. McKeown.      73.
      Gas Transfer Rate Coefficient
      Measurement by Stable Isotope
      Krypton/Lithium Technique I.
      Treatment Plant Studies. In:
      Proceedings of International
      Symposium on Gas Transfer at      74.
      Water Surfaces, ACS, AGU,
      ASCE, VSNSF, WNO, Cornell
      University, Ithaca, NY (in press).

 66.  Mueller, J.A., R. Sullivan, and
      R. Donahue. Comparison of         75.
      Dome and Static Aerators
      Treating Pharmaceutical
      Wastes. In: Proceedings of the
      38th Industrial Waste
      Conference, Purdue University,
      West Lafayette, IN, May 1983.
      pp. 181-191.                      76.

 67.  Boyle, W.C., D.T. Redmon, W.B.
      Danly, M.G. Rieth, H.E. Chao,
      and P. Nehm. Investigations of
      Biological Fouling of Ceramic
      Fine Bubble Diffusers. Draft
      final report for Cooperative
      Agreement No. CR809254
      between U.S. EPA and Madison
      (Wl) Metropolitan Sewerage
      District (report to be published
      by U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH, in     77.
      1986).
68.  Alkema, T. Slime Growth on
     Ceramic Fine Bubble Dome
     Diffusers. In: Proceedings of
     Seminar on High Efficiency
     Aeration in Wastewater
     Treatment, The Canadian
     Institute of Energy, Toronto,
     Ontario, May 1983.

69.  Personal communications from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Santaire
     Water Pollution Control
     Corporation, Milwaukee, Wl,
     1980-1985.
78.
79.
70.  Personal communication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to D.H. Houck      80.
     Associates, Inc., Silver Spring,
     MD, June 1983.

71.  Personal communication from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to F.W. Yunt,
     Los Angeles County Sanitation
     Districts, June 1984.

72.  Personal communications from
     Ewing Engineering Company,
     Milwaukee, Wl, to Donahue
     and Associates, Inc.,
     Sheboygan, Wl, 1983.
 Personal communications from
 Ewing Engineering Company,
 Milwaukee, Wl, to Milwaukee
 Metropolitan Sewerage
 District, 1984.

 Personal communications from
 Ewing Engineering Company,
 Milwaukee, Wl, to W.C. Boyle,
 University of Wisconsin,
 Madison, Wl, 1985.

 Yunt, F.W. Some Cleaning
 Techniques for Fine Bubble
 Dome and Disc Aeration
 Systems. Internal report, Los
 Angeles County Sanitation
 Districts, October 1984.

 Design Information on Fine
 Bubble Diffused Aeration.
 Cooperative agreement
 application submitted by
 American Society of Civil
 Engineers, New York, NY, to
 U.S. EPA, October 4, 1984
 (resulted in award of
 Cooperative Agreement No.
 CR812617 on file at U.S. EPA,
 Cincinnati, OH).

 Chao, H.E. Evaluation of
 Cleaning Methods for Fine
 Bubble Diffusers. Masters
 Thesis, Department of Civil and
 Environmental Engineering,
 University of Wisconsin,
 Madison, Wl, 1985.

 Consulting Engineer, 64(4): 10,
 April 1985.

 A Joint Committee of the Water
 Pollution Control Federation
 and the American Society of
 Civil Engineers. Wastewater
 Treatment Plant Design.
 Manual of Practice No. 8,
 Water Pollution Control
 Federation, Washington, DC,
 1977.

 Boon, A.G. and B. Chambers.
 Design Protocol for Aeration
 Systems UK Perspective. In:
 Proceedings of Seminar
Workshop on Aeration System
 Design, Testing, Operation, and
Control, EPA-600/9-85-005,
 NTIS No. PB85-173896/AS,
U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH,
January 1985. pp. 99-138.
                                     81.   Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.
                                          Wastewater Treatment
                                          Engineering: Treatment/
                                          Disposal/Reuse. Second
                                          Edition, McGraw-Hill, New
                                          York, NY, 1979.

                                     82.   Centrifugal Compressor
                                          Engineering. Clarkson
                                          Industries, Inc., Hoffman Air
                                          and Filtration Division, New
                                          York, NY, Second Edition, 1973.
                                          pp. 90-102.
                                                                                                          49

-------
                                       This Summary Report was prepared by the American Society of Civil
                                      Engineers (ASCE), Committee on Oxygen Transfer, New York, NY, under
                                      Cooperative Agreement No. 812167 between U.S. EPA and ASCE. The report
                                      was edited by Committee Chairman William C. Boyle, University of Wisconsin,
                                      Madison, Wl. Principal contributors were Thomas A. Allbaugh and S. Joh Kang,
                                      McNamee, Porter & Seeley, Ann Arbor, Ml; Glen T. Daigger, CHUM Hill, Denver,
                                      CO; Lloyd Ewing and David T. Redmon, Ewing Engineering Company,
                                      Milwaukee, Wl; Gregory L. Huibregtse, Rexnord, Inc., Milwaukee, Wl;  and
                                      Wayne L. Paulson, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA. Review comments were
                                      solicited from the entire Committee. Detailed peer review was provided by
                                      Walter G. Gilbert, Office of Municipal Pollution Control, U.S. EPA, Washington,
                                      DC; Henryk Melcer,  Environment Canada, Burlington, Ontario; and H.  David
                                      Stensel, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Co-project officers for U.S. EPA
                                      were Richard C. Brenner, Water Engineering Research Laboratory, Cincinnati,
                                      OH, and Denis J. Lussier, Center for Environmental Research Information,
                                      Cincinnati, OH.
                                       This document has been reviewed in accordance with U.S. Environmental
                                      Protection Agency policy and approved for  publication. Mention of trade names
                                      or commercial  products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for
                                      use.
50

                                                                     •frU. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1985/559-l 11/20657

-------