-------
Feed Tank
T-l
R3F Lag
Filter
Effluent
Sample Port
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-5
R3F Inlet
R3F Lead
Filter
Control
Panel
Figure 2-3. R3F Filter Setup at the EPA T&E Facility
Backwash Drain
Multi-media Filter
Effluent Sample Port
Figure 2-4. Multimedia Filter Setup at the EPA T&E Facility
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-6
The R3F filtration system is operated using an automated, touch screen, programmable logic
controller (PLC) that allows the settings to be modified for the mode of operation, system
configuration, filtration sequence, backwashing sequence, manual operation and alarm set points.
The system is set for automatic backwashing for 2 minutes every two hours in a sequence that
includes backwash water purging, rinsing and draining.
During the filtration operation, inlet forward flow from T-l is pumped by the R3F filter feed
pump. A three-way ball valve, BV5, is in Position 1, which controls the suction side of the
pump to draw from T-l. Flow meter FM1 displays the flow. The effluent control valve
automatically controls the forward flow to the target flow of either 10 gpm (8.20 gal/ft2/minute)
or 5 gpm (4.10 gal/ft2/minute). The forward flow enters the R3f filter through the top, through
Valve BV1 Position 3 and ball valves BV1A and BV1B. If the second R3f column is to be
engaged, BV1A and BV1B are closed and BV3, BV2A and BV2B are opened. If there is a need
to operate two columns in series, BV1C and BV1D are closed and BV4A is opened. For flow
through one column, the flow passes radially through the media and exits the filter through the
center outlet and valve BV1D with valve BV1C closed. The filtered effluent passes through
Valve BV2, in Position 1, and enters Tank T-3. When the pressure drop across the filter media
builds to approximately 30 psi, the unit automatically goes into a Backwash/Air Scour cycle.
The Backwash/Air Scour cycle lasts for 1.5 minutes.
During backwash, BV5 switches to Position 2, allowing clean water to be used for backwash.
The flow rate for backwash is 25 gpm. The backwash water enters the filter through the bottom
center and valve BV1D. The backwash water fluidizes the media and any trapped contaminants
exit the filter through the top center and valve BV1 A. The backwash water is directed through
valve BV1, in Position 1, to a collection tank (Tank T2) so that the backwash volumes can be
recorded. Air is pulsed into the filter during this cycle to assist in removing contaminants that
remain on the screens. The air pulse valve, APV1, is opened for one second, every ten seconds.
During the last 30 seconds of the cycle, the bottom annular valve BV1C opens to assist in
removing any contaminants remaining on the screens as well as BV2 and BV4B. The filter
automatically goes into a rinse cycle, to rinse out any remaining contaminants in the annular
space of the filter. The rinse cycle lasts for one minute.
During the one-minute rinse cycle, BV5 remains in Position 2, so that clean water can be used
for the rinse cycle. The effluent control valve automatically controls the forward flow to the set
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-7
point of either 10 gpm or 5 gpm. The rinse water drives the media back into place and exits
through both bottom openings in the filter and valves BV1C and BV1D. The water flows
through valve BV2, in Position 2 and exits out valve BV4B to drain. The rinse water is collected
in Tank T-2 so that the backwash volume can be recorded. Air is added at the end of the rinse
cycle to assist in leveling out the media in the filter column. Valve APV1 opens for one second
at the end of the cycle.
After the rinse cycle is completed, forward flow with raw water begins again, as described
previously. No filter ripening phase is implemented as ripening for the R3f is typically not
required. However, if this cycle is required, BV2-2 and BV4B directs water to Tank T2.
Multimedia Filter
The multimedia filter system has been installed to run in parallel with the R3f filter and is
designed for a flow rate of 2.0 gal/ft2/minute. The system includes the following elements:
• Valves: Three way valves, MMV1, MMV2, MMV3, MMV4 and MMV5 each with ports
-1 and -2.
• Multimedia filter feed pump with flow meter and flow control valve.
The multimedia filtration system installed for these tests is operated manually. A multi-purpose
valve regulates the filtration, backwashing and drain modes. The flow rate is regulated and
recorded by a manually operated valve and flow meter. An automatic alarm system is installed
to signal for backwashing. The clean water from both the R3f and multimedia filters is collected
in a clean water tank that is either drained or used for backwashing.
During the filtration operation, a 3 gpm inlet forward flow from T-l is pumped by the
multimedia pump from MMV1-1, and enters the top of the unit through valves MMV2-2 and
MMV3-2, passes through the filtration media and exits the bottom of the multimedia unit
through valves MMV4-land MMV5-2. The normal filtration rate is 2.44 gal/ft2/minute. As the
solids build up in the top layer of media, the pressure drop across the media increases until, at
approximately 20 psi, the unit is placed in the backwash mode. The pressure drop at which
backwash is initiated can be varied to extend the run time if the effluent turbidity does not
exceed 0.3 Nephelometric Turbidity Units (NTU).
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-8
At the start of the backwash cycle, air solenoid valve APV2 is opened for 2 seconds, then closed
and reopened during the backwash period to allow air to scour the bed and to help re-stratify the
media. During backwash, valve MMV1 changes to Position 2, and clean water from tank T-3 is
pumped at 30 gpm through MMV2-1 and into the bottom of the filter tank through MMV4-2.
The backwash water expands the media bed to wash out any contained solids. The backwash
water with the solids exits the multimedia filter at the top through MMV3-1 and goes to a
backwash/rinse collection tank T-2. The backwash time period is approximately 2.5 minutes.
After backwash, forward flow begins again, but in a rinse/ripening cycle mode using water from
T-l through MMV1-2 and into MMV2-2 and MMV3-3. This water enters the filter tank at the
top and exits at the bottom through MMV4-1 and MMV5-1 to the backwash/rinse collection tank
T-2 for approximately 15 to 45 minutes, depending on the ripening cycle. The ripening cycle is
terminated when the effluent turbidity is less than 0.5 NTU. After the rinse/ripening cycle is
completed, forward flow with raw water begins again, as described above, and valve MMV5-1
changes to Position 2.
Both systems are fed from a feed water tank, T-l. The feed water tank receives the matrix water
either from a 5000-gallon mix water tank or a 1000-gallon dechlorinated potable water tank,
depending on the experiment being conducted. A flow totalizer that records the flow rate and
total flow is installed in the effluent line.
The following polishing filtration units have been tested to date on the effluent of the R3f
system:
• Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 jim absolute) bag filter shown in Figure 2-5
• Harmsco (1 |im) cartridge filter shown in Figure 2-6
• Nanoceram (0.2 - 0.6 jim) cartridge filter shown in Figure 2-7
• Low-cost, UF system (0.05 jim) filter shown in Figure 2-8
These polishing units were not tested on the effluent of the multimedia filter since the tests were
conducted on the multimedia filter only to benchmark the performance of the R3f system.
A UV system using a lamp with radiation in the germicidal range (255 nm) was tested as tertiary
treatment for virus and bacteria inactivation. This system is shown in Figure 2-9.
-------
Rosedale
Pre-Filter
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-9
Rosedale
Post-Filter
Figure 2-5. Rosedale PS 740 Filter Setup at the T&E Facility
Harmsco
Filter
Figure 2-6. Harmsco Cartridge Filter Setup at the T&E Facility
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-10
Figure 2-7. Nanoceram Filter Setup at T&E Facility
Nanoceram
Filter
Ultrafilter
Figure 2-8. UF Filter Setup at T&E Facility
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-11
Figure 2-9. UV System at T&E Facility
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-12
2.4 Test Procedures and Conditions
The R3f and multimedia filter systems were both challenged with turbidity, Polystyrene Latex
(PSL) beads, Bacillus subtilis and Escherichia coll. Additional challenge tests using
Cryptosporidium oocysts and MS2 bacteriophage were conducted on the R3f system. The post
R3f polishing filtration units - Rosedale, Harmsco, Nanoceram and UF filters - were evaluated
individually. Tests were conducted using the following contaminants and surrogates:
• For evaluating turbidity removal, water from the Mill Creek (adjacent to the T&E
Facility) was mixed with dechlorinated potable water in a 5000-gallon tank at the T&E
Facility to achieve the influent target turbidity levels. The R3f and multimedia systems
were evaluated for their ability to achieve a turbidity level of less than 0.3 NTU. Tests
were conducted with and without the use of chemical coagulants to establish the baseline
performance of the system. Heterotrophic plate count (HPC), total organic carbon
(TOC), and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) were also measured during the turbidity
challenges. An inline particle counter was used during the turbidity challenge tests to
measure the removal of particles in the size range of 2-5 jim (that encompasses the size
of C. parvuni). This measurement was intended to provide an indirect, secondary
measure of protozoa removal.
• For evaluating general bacteria removal, the UPC concentrations in the influent and
effluent were compared.
• For evaluating protozoa removal, PSL beads with a mean size of 2.83 jim were used as a
non-biological surrogate for C. parvum which have a mean size of 2 - 5 jim. A single
test using Cryptosporidium oocysts was conducted on the R3f system to determine the
equivalence of the PSL bead test results in predicting Cryptosporidium removal by the
system.
• For evaluating specific bacteria removal performance, the system was challenged with E.
coli (human pathogen) and B. subtilis endospores. The soil-based aerobic spore B.
subtilis was also used to evaluate its potential as a surrogate for Cryptosporidium.
• For evaluating inactivation of virus, the R3f system was challenged with MS2
bacteriophage, a biological surrogate for enteric virus.
Details of the test plan are described in the QAPP QA ID: 627-Q-10-0 (Shaw, 2007) and the
QAPP Addendum (QA ID: 627-Q-10-1) (Shaw, 2009).
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 2-13
2.5 Sampling Procedures and Quality Assurance
The sampling and analytical procedures for these tests are described in the QAPP (QA ID: 627-
Q-10-0) (Shaw, 2007) and the QAPP Addendum (QA ID: 627-Q-10-1) (Shaw, 2009). Grab
samples from the influent and effluent streams were collected during turbidity challenges.
Turbidity samples were collected at an hourly interval and HPC and TOC/DOC samples were
collected twice during the evaluation stage of the turbidity challenges. E. coll, B. subtilis and
MS2 bacteriophage samples were collected from the influent and effluent streams at time 0 (TO),
5 (T5), 10 (T10), 20 (T20) and 40 (T40) minutes following the start of injection of the
contaminants into the influent stream.
For PSL bead and Cryptosporidium challenges, the membrane sampling technique was used to
collect the beads and oocysts from the effluent stream. The membrane sampling technique
involves diverting a slip stream of the effluent through a 1 |im membrane in a manifold. The
membrane sampling technique was used to provide a direct comparison of the results with PSL
beads and evaluate the potential of the B. subtilis spores as a surrogate for Cryptosporidium. A
0.40 |im membrane was used for collecting the B. subtilis spores from the effluent.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-1
3.0 Test Results
Table 3-1 summarizes the test runs conducted on the R3f system and multimedia filtration
systems. From November 2007 to December 2008 a total of 45 challenges were conducted to
optimize the system configuration and to evaluate the performance of the system under various
configurations. Additional tests are planned on the system to evaluate the removal efficiency at
field sites.
3.1 Turbidity Challenges
A total of twelve turbidity challenges were conducted during the test period. Seven of these
turbidity tests were conducted to optimize the R3f system configuration and five turbidity tests
were conducted to evaluate the performance of the system with the optimized configuration.
During the system evaluation stage (Test Run Nos. 8, 9, 30, 31 and 32), post-filter units
(Rosedale, Nanoceram, Harmsco and UF) were used as a final polishing system following the
R3f system. Alum (4 mg/L) was used as a chemical coagulant during three turbidity challenges
(Test Run Nos. 30, 31 and 32). Feed water with the target turbidity was prepared by mixing
dechlorinated potable water and Mill Creek water in a 5000-gallon mix tank and pumped to the
test systems. Basic experimental parameters monitored during the system optimization stage
included turbidity, pressure, flow rate and total flow. During the system evaluation stage,
additional parameters including TOC, DOC, and HPC were monitored along with the basic
parameters. For ease of understanding, the turbidity test results during the optimization and
evaluation stages are discussed separately in this section. Raw data for different parameters
during the turbidity challenge tests are presented in Appendix A.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-2
Table 3-1. Summary of Test Runs Conducted on the R3f and Multimedia Filtration
System
Test
Run No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Test Run Date
1 1/08/07
11/21/07
1 1/29/07
12/04/07
12/06/07
12/12/07
12/21/07
01/22/08;
01/23/08;
01/24/08
01/29/08;
01/30/08;
01/31/08
02/07/08
02/08/08
02/11/08
02/12/08
02/18/08
02/19/08
02/25/08
02/26/08
02/27/08
02/28/08
03/03/08
03/04/08
03/06/08
03/10/08
03/11/08
03/13/08
04/01/08
04/08/08
04/10/08
Test Description
Turbidity Challenge 1
Turbidity Challenge 2
Turbidity Challenge 3
Turbidity Challenge 4
Turbidity Challenge 5
Turbidity Challenge 6
Turbidity Challenge 7
Turbidity Challenge 8
Turbidity Challenge 9
PSL Bead Challenge 1
PSL Bead Challenge 2
PSL Bead Challenge 3
PSL Bead Challenge 4
PSL Bead Challenge 5
PSL Bead Challenge 6
E. coll Challenge 1
E. coli Challenge 2
E. coli Challenge 3
PSL Bead Challenge 7
E. coli Challenge 4
E. coli Challenge 5
B. sub tills Challenge 1
B. subtilis Challenge 2
B. subtilis Challenge 3
B. subtilis Challenge 4
B. subtilis Challenge 5
B. subtilis Challenge 6
Cryptosporidium Challenge 1
Filter Configuration
Glass bead (140-230 pm) + Glass bead (70-100 pm)
Glass bead (140-230 (im) + Glass bead (70-100 (im)
Glass bead (120-200 pm) + Garnet (33 pm)
Glass bead (120-200 (im) + Garnet (33 (im)
Glass bead (120-200 pm) + Garnet (33 pm);
Glass bead (70-100 (im) + Garnet (33 (im)
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im); Multimedia
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im) + Bag Filter;
Multimedia
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im) + Bag Filter;
Multimedia
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Bag Filter
Multimedia Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Filter
Multimedia Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Nanoceram Filter
Multimedia
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Nanoceram Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Nanoceram Filter
Multimedia Filter
Multimedia Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Bag Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Bag Filter
Multimedia Filter
Multimedia Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Bag Filter
Multimedia Filter
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ Rosedale Bag Filter
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-3
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
08/19/08;
08/20/08
08/27/08
09/11/08
09/24/08
09/30/08
10/07/08
10/13/08
10/27/08
10/28/08
1 1/26/08
12/03/08
12/12/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
12/16/08
Turbidity Challenge 10
Turbidity Challenge 1 1
Turbidity Challenge 12
B. subtilis Challenge 7
B. subtilis Challenge 8
B. subtilis Challenge 9
B. subtilis Challenge 10
PSL Bead Challenge 7
PSL Bead Challenge 8
PSL Bead Challenge 9
PSL Bead Challenge 10
E. coli Challenge 6
E. coli Challenge 7
MS2 bacteriophage Challenge 1
MS2 bacteriophage Challenge 2
MS2 bacteriophage Challenge 3
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im) + UF Unit; Multimedia
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im) + UF Unit; Multimedia
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im) +UF Unit; Multimedia
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im )+UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit + UV Unit
Garnet (33 (im) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit + UV Unit
Garnet (33 urn) + Garnet (33 (im )+ UF Unit + UV Unit
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-4
3.1.1 Selection of System Configuration
Tables 3-2 and 3-3 present the turbidity challenge results and operational parameters for the R3f
system. Tables 3-4 and 3-5 present the turbidity challenge results and the operational parameters
for the multimedia filtration systems. The results of turbidity challenges conducted to optimize
the system configuration are summarized below:
Turbidity Challenge 1 [Filter Configuration: Glass bead (140-230 fim) + Glass bead (70-100
fim); Target flow: 10 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 10 NTU]
This test was conducted using a coarse glass bead (140-230 jim) in the lead filter and a fine (70-
100 |im) glass bead in the lag filter. This configuration was tested at 10 gpm using feed water
with a target influent turbidity of 10 NTU. Chemical coagulants were not used in this challenge
test. For an average influent turbidity of 7 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the coarse
glass bead filter was 2.49 NTU and from the fine glass bead filter was 1.5 NTU. The overall
average turbidity removal efficiency was 78.5%. The initial operating pressure was 76 psi. This
operating pressure was reset to 42 psi after two hours of the test run. During the entire test run,
there was only a negligible increase in the pressure drop across the system. Subsequent
investigations found a faulty screen in the fine glass bead filter that caused short-circuiting and
hence the negligible pressure buildup.
Table 3-2. Summary of Turbidity Challenge Tests of R3f System during Optimization of
System Configuration
Test No.
1
2
O
4
5a
5b
6
7
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
7.00
11.80
9.70
4.74
4.60
5.00
5.33
4.30
Effluent 1
2.49
6.90
5.00
3.43
3.30
2.50
2.57
0.92
Effluent 2
1.50
1.90
1.84
1.67
1.20
0.90
1.20
0.61
Overall %
Removal
78.5
83.8
81.0
64.7
73.9
82.0
77.3
84.6
a Operational flow rate 10.0 gpm
b Operational flow rate 5.0 gpm
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-5
Table 3-3. Summary of Operational Parameters of R3f System during Optimization of
System Configuration
Test
Run
1
2
O
4
5a
5b
6
7
Flow
Rate
(gpm)
10.0
10.0
10.9
10.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
Initial
Pressure
(psi)
76.0
50.0
60.0
64.0
65.0
64.0
54.0
54.0
Diff. Pres. 1
Initial
(psi)
4
10
12
13
14
16
10
12
Final
(psi)
12
20.5
26
18
_
13
48
Diff. Pres. 2
Initial
(psi)
8
17
15
20
23
12
4
4
Final
(psi)
3
63
15
20
_
4
4
Test
Run
(hours)
6
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
4.0
Total
flow
(gallons
)
2223
1190
1196
1112
_
-
1128
a Operational flow rate 10.0 gpm
b Operational flow rate 5.0 gpm
Table 3-4. Summary of Turbidity Challenge Results of Multimedia System during
Optimization of System Configuration
Test No.
5
6
7
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.6
5.3
4.3
Effluent
2.3
2.5
1.9
Overall %
Removal
50.0
51.6
56.1
Table 3-5. Summary of Operational Parameters of Multimedia System during
Optimization of System Configuration
Test Run
5
6
7
Flow Rate
(gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
Initial
Pressure
(psi)
0.7
0.7
0.7
Diff. Pres. 1
Initial
(psi)
0.7
0.7
0.7
Final
(psi)
0.7
0.7
0.8
Test Run
(hours)
2
2
2
Total flow
(gallons)
360
360
360
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-6
Turbidity Challenge 2 [Filter Configuration: Glass bead (140-230 fim) + Glass bead (70-100
fim); Target flow: 10 gpm; Tar get feed water turbidity: 10 NTV]
This test was conducted using a coarse glass bead (140-230 jim) in the lead filter and a fine glass
bead (70-100 jim) in the lag filter (with the screen repaired) at 10.0 gpm using feed water with a
target turbidity of 10 NTU. Chemical coagulants were not used in this challenge test. With an
average influent turbidity of 11.8 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the lead glass bead
filter was 6.9 NTU and that for the fine glass bead filter was 1.90 NTU. The overall average
turbidity removal efficiency was 83.9%. The initial operating pressure was 50 psi and the
differential pressure increased from 10 psi to 20.5 psi in the coarse filter and from 17 psi to 63
psi in the fine filter in approximately two hours. The effluent turbidity, not being satisfactory, it
was decided to use a smaller sized glass bead (120-200 jim) for the lead filter and a fine garnet
(33 |im) instead of the fine glass bead filter for the lag filter.
Turbidity Challenge 3 [Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 fim) + Garnet (33 fim);
Target flow: 10 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 10 NTV]
This test was conducted using a glass bead media with the size range of 120-200 jim (which is
one size smaller than the previous configuration) in the lead filter followed by garnet (33 jim) in
the lag filter. This system was tested at 10 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 10
NTU. Chemical coagulants were not used in this challenge test. For an average influent
turbidity of 9.7 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the modified lead glass bead unit was 5
NTU and from the lag fine garnet filter was 1.84 NTU. The overall average turbidity removal
efficiency was 81.0%. The initial operating pressure was 60 psi and the differential pressure
increased from 12 psi to 26 psi in the coarse filter while remaining unchanged at 15 psi in the
fine garnet filter over approximately two hours. The overall turbidity removal performance was
similar to the previous configuration. The initial differential pressure in the modified coarse
glass bead filter was high and it increased rapidly during the test run. The initial differential
pressure in the fine garnet filter was high and it did not increase rapidly during the two hours of
the test run. Thus, it was decided to conduct the next test using the same configuration with
lower feed water turbidity.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-7
Turbidity Challenge 4 [Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 fim) + Garnet (33 fim);
Target flow: 10 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTV]
This test was conducted on the same filtration configuration as the previous test, i.e., a coarse
glass bead (120-200 jim) media in the lead filter followed by a fine garnet (33 jim) media in the
lag filter but at a lower target turbidity of 5 NTU instead of 10 NTU as in the previous test.
Chemical coagulants were not used in this challenge test. With an average influent turbidity of
4.74 NTU and at 10 gpm, the average effluent turbidity from the lead glass bead filter was 3.63
NTU and for the lag fine garnet filter was 1.67 NTU. Thus, the final effluent turbidity remained
the same as for the previous test. The initial operating pressure was 64 psi and the differential
pressure increased from 13 psi to 18 psi in the coarse filter while remaining unchanged at 20 psi
in the fine garnet filter during the two-hour runtime. It was decided to conduct the next test
using the same configuration along with the multimedia filter.
Turbidity Challenge 5 [Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 fim) + Garnet (33 fim);
Target flow: 10 gpm and 5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU]
This test was conducted on the modified coarse glass bead (120-200 jim) and fine garnet (33 jim)
configuration at 10 gpm and 5 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Only
two samples, one at 10 gpm and the other at 5 gpm flow rate were collected. Chemical
coagulants were not used in this challenge test. At 10 gpm, for an influent turbidity of 4.60
NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the lead glass bed filter was 3.30 NTU and from the lag
garnet filter was 1.20 NTU. At 5 gpm, for an influent turbidity of 5 NTU, the average effluent
turbidity from the lead glass bead filter was 2.50 NTU and from the lag garnet filter was 0.90
NTU. Thus, the lower flowrate resulted in improved effluent quality.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing turbidity. For an average influent
turbidity of 4.60 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the multimedia filter was 2.30 NTU
with an associated 50% removal efficiency.
It was decided to conduct the next test using a finer glass bead media in the lead filter and the
same fine garnet media in the lag filter at 5 gpm with 5 NTU feed water.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-8
Turbidity Challenge 6 [Filter Configuration: Fine glass bead (70-100 fim) + Garnet (33 fim);
Target flow: 5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTV]
This test was conducted using a finer glass bead media (70-100 jim) in the lead filter and the
same garnet (33 jim) media in the lag filter. This configuration was operated at 5 gpm using
feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Chemical coagulants were not used in this
challenge test. For an average influent turbidity of 5.33 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from
the lead fine glass bead filter was 2.57 NTU and that from the lag garnet filter was 1.20 NTU.
Thus, this test produced a poorer final effluent than the previous test. The initial operating
pressure was 54.0 psi and the differential pressure in the fine glass bead filter increased from 10
to 13 psi and that in the finer garnet filter remained unchanged at 4.0 psi in approximately two
hours.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing turbidity. For an average influent
turbidity of 5.33 NTU, the average effluent turbidity for the multimedia filter was 2.54 NTU
with an associated 51.6% removal efficiency.
It was decided to conduct the next test using the fine garnet-garnet configuration.
Turbidity Challenge 7 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 fim) + Garnet (33 fim); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTV]
This test was conducted using the fine garnet (33 jim) media in both the lead and lag filters. The
tests were conducted at 5 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5 NTU. Chemical
coagulants were not used in this challenge test. For an average influent turbidity of 4.30 NTU,
the average effluent turbidity from the lead filter was 0.92 NTU and from the lag filter was 0.61
NTU. The initial operating pressure was 54.0 psi and the differential pressure increased from 12
to 48 psi in the lead filter while remaining unchanged in the lag filter after operating for almost
four hours. This configuration provided the best effluent quality of all the configurations
previously tested.
Although the multimedia filter was cleaned thoroughly by backwashing prior to the test, it did
not perform adequately in removing turbidity. For an average influent turbidity of 4.30 NTU,
the average effluent turbidity for the multimedia filter was 1.92 NTU with an associated 56.1%
-------
removal efficiency.
multimedia filter.
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-9
It was decided to review the depth and media specification for the
Final Configuration for System Evaluation
As the garnet (33 jim) - garnet (33 jim) in-series configuration yielded relatively improved
effluent quality, this configuration was selected for further turbidity and planned contaminant
challenges. As the existing multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing turbidity, it
was decided to re-design the multimedia filter to increase the overall media depth/ media
diameter ratio (L/D) for the contaminant challenges. The revised media specifications for the
multimedia filter are shown in Table 3-6. The total L/D ratio for the existing design was 1100
(less than the generally recommended ratio of 1200) and was increased to 1600 for the re-
designed filter. The bottom garnet and gravel layers are the underdrainage system.
Table 3-6. Revised Media Specification for the Multimedia Filter
Media
Anthracite
Sand
Garnet
Garneta
Gravela
Total
Size Range
(mm)
0.6-2.55
0.35-0.45
0.18-0.35
1.18-2.36
3.00-6.00
-
Effective
Size (DIG)
(mm)
1.0
0.4
0.2
-
-
-
Depth (mm)
100
300
150
100
150
800
Depth
(inch)
4
12
6
4
6
32
L/D Ratio
100
750
750
-
-
1600
a Underdrainage
3.1.2 Evaluation of System Performance
Two turbidity challenges (Challenges 8 and 9) were conducted at a 5.0 gpm flow rate using feed
water with 5.0 NTU and 10.0 NTU on the selected garnet-garnet configuration and re-designed
multimedia filter without using chemical coagulants to evaluate the system performance.
Rosedale, Nanoceram, and Harmsco filters were individually tested following the R3f effluent as
the final polishing stage. Three additional turbidity challenges (Challenges 10, 11 and 12) were
conducted at a 5.0 gpm flow rate using feed water with 5.0 NTU turbidity on the selected garnet-
garnet configuration and re-designed multimedia filter using chemical coagulant (4 mg/L alum)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-10
to evaluate the system performance. A UF unit was tested following the R3f effluent as the final
polishing stage.
The turbidity test results from this evaluation phase are presented in tabular form and graphical
form at the end of Section 3.1.2. Tables 3-7, 3-8 and 3-9 present the results of turbidity tests for
the R3f filter, the multimedia filter and the tested post-filters, respectively, during the five
turbidity challenges. The operational parameters corresponding to these tests are summarized in
Tables 3-10, 3-11 and 3-12. Figures 3-1 to 3-5 show the influent and effluent turbidities for the
R3f system during the five turbidity challenges. Figures 3-6 to 3-10 show the development of
differential pressure in the garnet-garnet R3f configuration during the five challenges. Figures 3-
11 to 3-15 show the influent and effluent turbidity for the multimedia filter during the five
challenges. As the headloss development in the multimedia filter was negligible during the five
challenges, it is not shown graphically. Tables 3-13, 3-14 and 3-15 present the summaries of
TOC/DOC results for the garnet-garnet R3f filter, multimedia filter and post-filters, respectively,
during the five turbidity challenges. Tables 3-16, 3-17 and 3-18 present the FtPC results of the
garnet-garnet R3f filter, multimedia filter and post-filters, respectively during the five
challenges. Table 3-19 presents the particle count results for the R3f system.
With reference to the above tables and figures, the results of the Turbidity Challenge Tests 8, 9,
10, 11 and 12 are discussed below.
Turbidity Challenge 8 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 fim) + Garnet (33 fim); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTUJ
This test was conducted on the R3f unit using garnet (33 jim) in the lead filter and lag filters at
5.0 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Chemical coagulants were not used
during this test. For an average influent turbidity of 4.70 NTU, the average effluent turbidity
from the lead filter was 0.83 NTU and that from the lag filter was 0.60 NTU. The effluent
turbidity improved gradually with time and after 10 hours of filtration run, the lag filter started
producing effluent with 0.5 NTU turbidity. The garnet-garnet R3f system treated 4508 gallons
of water during 17 hours of test run. The total headloss developed in the lead filter was 34 psi
and that in the lag filter was only 8 psi.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-11
The volume of clean water required for backwashing of the system was 75 gallons, which was
1.7% of the total production. No noticeable removal of TOC/DOC and HPC by the R3f system
was observed. The R3f system performed adequately in removing Cryptosporidium size (2-5
|im) particles. For influent particle counts of >20000/mL, the effluent particle counts for Filter 1
was 1200/mL and that for Filter 2 was 925/mL with an overall removal of >95.4%.
An attempt was made to quantify the Silt Density Index (SDI) test on the R3f system. However,
it was not possible to determine the SDI15 values (measured after 15 minutes) for the garnet
system due to rapid blockage of the SDI Kit filter; SDI10 values (measured after 10 minutes)
were measured instead. The SDI 10 values for influent, effluent from the lead filter and effluent
from the lag filter were 8.63, 8.15, and 8.13, respectively. The estimated SDI15 values
calculated from these SDI10 values are 5.75, 5.43, and 5.41, respectively.
The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as a final polishing filter consistently produced effluent
with < 0.5 NTU turbidity. The Harmsco 1 |im cartridge filter also produced effluent with < 0.5
NTU. The Rosedale bag filter developed an additional 2 psi headloss during 12 hours of test run
and no headloss developed in the Harmsco filter during 5 hours of test run. TOC, DOC and HPC
samples were only collected from the Rosedale system and no noticeable removals of these
parameters were observed.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing turbidity without chemical
coagulants. For an average influent turbidity of 4.30 NTU, the average effluent turbidity was
1.95 NTU and the associated average removal efficiency was 53.3%. Although the effluent
quality improved gradually with time, the effluent turbidity was consistently >1.5 NTU for the
multimedia filter. The multimedia filter treated 3060 gallons of water during 17 hours of the test
run. The total additional headloss was only 0.3 psi. It was not necessary to clean the multimedia
filter. No noticeable TOC/DOC and HPC removals by the multimedia filter were observed
during the test.
Turbidity Challenge 9 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU]
This test was conducted on the R3f unit with garnet (33 |im) and garnet (33 jim) in the lead and
lag filters at 5 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 10 NTU. Chemical coagulants
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-12
were not used during this test. For an average influent turbidity of 9.70 NTU, the average
effluent turbidity from the lead filter was 1.15 NTU and that from the lag filter was 0.91 NTU.
The overall average turbidity removal efficiency was 90.5%. The effluent turbidity improved
gradually with time, however, the values were consistently >0.50 NTU. The garnet R3f system
treated 2015 gallons of water during 7.25 hours of the test run before backwashing. The total
additional headloss developed in the lead filter was 42 psi and that in lag filter was only 5 psi.
The volume of clean water required for backwashing of the system was 75 gallons which was
3.7% of the total production. After backwashing, the test was continued and showed rapid
development of pressure in the lead filter (26 psi in 2.5 hours), indicating insufficient cleaning of
the filter in one backwashing cycle. No noticeable removal of TOC/DOC by the R3f system was
observed. The HPC removal performance improved significantly in comparison with the
previous challenge. The overall removal performance was 77.6%. The relatively inferior
performance during Challenge 8 was attributed to the leaching of HPC from the media. The R3f
system performed adequately in removing Cryptosporidium size (2-5 jim) particles. For influent
particle counts of >20000/mL, the effluent particle counts for Filter 1 was 2321/mL and that for
Filter 2 was 1632/mL with an overall removal value of >91.8%. Silt Density Index test was not
conducted during this challenge.
The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as the final polishing filter consistently produced effluent
with >0.5 NTU during this challenge. The test was continued after backwashing of the garnet
filter, and Nanoceram filter was used instead of Rosedale filter as the final polishing filter. For
an average influent turbidity of 0.57 NTU, the average effluent turbidity of the Nanoceram filter
was 0.38 NTU. One measurement was conducted on the Harmsco 1 |im cartridge filter and the
effluent turbidity was 0.55 NTU. The Rosedale bag filter developed an additional 2 psi headloss
during 7.25 hours of the test run and no headloss developed in the Nanoceram filter during 2
hours of the test run. Additional HPC removal (33%) was achieved by the Rosedale filter, but
no additional removal of HPC was achieved by the Nanoceram filter. No noticeable removal of
TOC/DOC was achieved by the Rosedale and Nanoceram filters.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing turbidity without chemical
coagulants. For an average influent turbidity of 9.70 NTU, the average effluent turbidity was
2.85 NTU and the associated average removal efficiency was 70.3%. Although the effluent
quality improved gradually with time, the effluent turbidity was consistently >2.0 NTU for the
multimedia filter. The multimedia filter treated 1305 gallons of water during 7.25 hours of the
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-13
test run. The total additional headloss was only 0.2 psi, and, thus, it was not necessary to clean
the multimedia filter. No noticeable TOC/DOC removal by the multimedia filter was observed
during the test. The HPC removal performance improved significantly in comparison with the
previous challenge. The overall removal performance was 75.2%. The relatively inferior
performance during Challenge 8 was probably due to leaching of HPC from the media.
Turbidity Challenge 10 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 fim) + Garnet (33 fim); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTUJ
This test was conducted on the R3f unit using garnet (33 jim) in the lead filter and lag filter at
5.0 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Alum was used a chemical
coagulant at a concentration of 4mg/L to aid in filtration. For an average influent turbidity of
5.00 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the lead filter was 0.79 NTU and that from the lag
filter was 0.31 NTU thus showing an improved removal performance. However, the effluent
turbidity of the lead filter was relatively high at the beginning of the test but improved after 2
hours of filtration run. The average final effluent turbidity (0.31 NTU) from the R3f series
configuration came close to satisfying the LT2ESWTR regulation (<0.30 NTU) (U.S. EPA,
2006) for turbidity removal. The R3f system performed adequately in removing
Cryptosporidium size (2-5 jim) particles. For influent particle counts of >20000/mL, the effluent
particle count for Filter 1 was 1000/mL and that for Filter 2 was 445/mL with an overall removal
value of >97.8%. Samples for TOC/DOC and HPC were not collected during this test.
The R3f system treated 750 gallons of water during 3.4 hours of test run. The total headloss
developed in the lead filter was 54 psi and that in the lag filter was only 11 psi. The volume of
clean water required for backwashing of the system was 150 gallons, which was 20% of the total
production. The system had to be backwashed twice to restore the original flow rate. The rate of
headloss development and backwash water requirement were relatively high due to the addition
of alum.
The UF unit used as a final polishing filter consistently produced effluent with 0.15 NTU
turbidity. Therefore, the combination of the R3f system followed by the UF system consistently
produced effluent that satisfied the LT2ESWTR regulation (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-14
The performance of the multimedia filter improved due to the addition of 4 mg/L alum as
chemical coagulant. For an average influent turbidity of 3.44 NTU, the average effluent
turbidity was 0.34 NTU and the associated average removal efficiency was 90.1%. The effluent
turbidity was close to the LT2ESWTR requirement (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal. The
multimedia filter treated 420 gallons of water during 2.33 hours of the test run. No noticeable
headloss was observed during the test period.
Turbidity Challenge 11 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 fim) + Garnet (33 fim); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU]
This test was conducted on the R3f unit using garnet (33 jim) in the lead filter and lag filter at
5.0 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Alum was used a chemical
coagulant at a concentration of 4 mg/L to aid in filtration. For an average influent turbidity of
5.59 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the lead filter was 0.23 NTU and that from the lag
filter was 0.20 NTU. The average final effluent turbidity (0.20 NTU) from the R3f series
configuration satisfied the LT2ESWTR regulation (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal. Samples
for TOC/DOC were not collected during the test. The R3f system performed adequately in
removing HPC; the overall removal performance was 86.3%. The R3f system performed
adequately in removing Cryptosporidium size (2-5 jim) particles. For an influent particle counts
of >20000/mL, the effluent particle counts for Filter 1 was 820/mL and that for Filter 2 was
485/mL with an overall removal value of >97.4%.
The R3f system treated 522 gallons of water during 3.0 hours of test run. The total headloss
developed in the lead filter was 68 psi and that in the lag filter was only 4 psi. The volume of
clean water required for backwashing of the system was 150 gallons, which was 26% of the total
production. The system had to be backwashed twice to restore the original flow rate. Following
the use of alum, the rate of headloss development and backwash water requirement increased.
The UF unit used as a final polishing filter consistently produced effluent with 0.15 NTU
turbidity. Therefore, the combination of R3f series configuration and UF system produced
effluent that satisfied the LT2ESWTR regulation (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal. The UF
system performed adequately in removing FtPC; the overall removal performance was 91.9%.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-15
The performance of the multimedia filter improved due to the addition of 4 mg/L alum as a
chemical coagulant. For an average influent turbidity of 5.64 NTU, the average effluent
turbidity was 0.29 NTU and the associated average removal efficiency was 94.8%. The effluent
turbidity (0.29 NTU) satisfied the LT2ESWTR requirement (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal.
The multimedia filter treated 540 gallons of water during 3.0 hours of the test run. The total
headloss developed during the test was 2.3 psi. The multimedia system performed adequately in
removing HPC; the overall removal performance was 84.4%.
Turbidity Challenge 12 [Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 fim) + Garnet (33 fim); Target flow:
5.0 gpm; Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTV]
This test was conducted on the R3f unit using garnet (33 jim) in the lead filter and lag filter at
5.0 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU. Alum was used a chemical
coagulant at a concentration of 4 mg/L to aid in filtration. For an average influent turbidity of
4.22 NTU, the average effluent turbidity from the lead filter was 0.27 NTU and that from the lag
filter was 0.22 NTU showing an improvement in performance. The average final effluent
turbidity (0.22 NTU) from the R3f series configuration satisfied the LT2ESWTR regulation
(<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal. No noticeable removal of TOC/DOC was observed during
this test. The R3f system performed adequately in removing FtPC; the overall removal
performance was 48.5%. The relatively lower percent removal of FtPC during this test was
attributed to a lower influent concentration. Particle counts were not monitored during this test.
The R3f system treated 966 gallons of water during 4.25 hours of test run. The total headloss
developed in the lead filter was 28 psi and that in the lag filter was only 5 psi. The volume of
clean water required for backwashing of the system was 150 gallons which was 15.1% of the
total production. The system had to be backwashed twice to restore the original flow rate. The
rate of headloss development and backwash water requirement were relatively high due to the
addition of 4 mg/L alum.
The UF unit used as a final polishing filter consistently produced effluent with 0.16 NTU
turbidity. Therefore, the combination of R3f series configuration and UF system produced
effluent that satisfied the LT2ESWTR regulation (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity removal. The UF
system performed adequately in removing FtPC; the overall removal performance was 88.8%.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-16
The performance of the multimedia filter improved due to the addition of 4 mg/L alum as a
chemical coagulant. For an average influent turbidity of 6.32 NTU, the average effluent
turbidity was 0.42 NTU and the associated average removal efficiency was 94.8%. The effluent
turbidity (0.42 NTU) was close to the LT2ESWTR requirement (<0.30 NTU) for turbidity
removal. The multimedia filter treated 630 gallons of water during 3.5 hours of the test run. The
total headloss developed during the test was 2.0 psi. The multimedia system performed
adequately in removing HPC; the overall removal performance was 30%. The relatively lower
percent removal of HPC during this test was attributed to the lower influent concentration.
Particle counts were not monitored during this test. No noticeable removal of TOC/DOC was
observed during this test.
Table 3-7. Summary of Turbidity Challenge Results of R3f System during Evaluation of
System Performance
Test No.
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
Effluent 1
Effluent 2
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.30
9.70
0.83
1.15
0.60
0.91
81.5
90.5
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
5.0
5.59
4.22
0.79
0.23
0.27
0.31
0.20
0.22
93.8
96.4
94.8
Table 3-8. Summary of Turbidity Challenge Results of Multimedia System during
Evaluation of System Performance
Test No.
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.30
9.70
1.95
2.85
53.3
70.3
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
3.44
5.64
0.34
0.29
90.1
94.8
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-17
32
6.32
0.42
93.3
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-18
Table 3-9. Summary of Turbidity Challenge Results for the Polishing Filter during
Evaluation of System Performance
Test No.
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 um absolute); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
0.62
0.92
0.46
0.58
25.8
36.9
Harmsco (1.0 um); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
0.47
0.57
0.41
0.55
12.7
3.5
Nanoceram (0.3 - 0.6 um); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
-
0.57
-
0.38
-
33.3
UF System (0.01 um); With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
0.31
0.20
0.22
0.15
0.17
0.16
51.6
15.0
27.2
Table 3-10. Summary of Operational Parameters of R3f System during Evaluation of
System Performance
Test
Run
Flow
Rate
(gpm)
Initial
Pressure
(psi)
Diff. Pres. 1
(psi)
Initial
Final
Diff. Pres. 2
(psi)
Initial
Final
Test
Run
(hours)
Total
flow
(gallons
)
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
5.0
5.0
60.0
56.0
8
14
34
42
4
4
8
4
17
7.5
4508
2015
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
5.0
5.0
5.0
64
70
10
12
19
10
54
68
28
6
4
5
0
0
0
3.5
3.0
4.25
750
572
966
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-19
Table 3-11. Summary of Operational Parameters of Multimedia Filter during Evaluation
of System Performance
Test Run
Flow Rate
(gpm)
Initial
Pres. (psi)
Diff. Pressure
(psi)
Initial
Final
Test Run
(hours)
Total flow
(gallons)
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
3.0
3.0
1.3
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.6
1.6
17
7.25
3060
1305
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
3.0
3.0
3.0
6.9
6.2
6.6
1.9
1.2
1.1
0
2.3
2.0
2.33
3.0
3.5
420
540
630
Table 3-12. Summary of Operational Parameters of Polishing Filters during Evaluation of
System Performance
Test Run
Flow Rate
(gpm)
Initial
Pres. (psi)
Diff. Presssure
(psi)
Initial
Final
Test Run
(hours)
Total flow
(gallons)
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 um absolute); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
5.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
11.0
12
7.25
3258
1305
Harmsco (1.0 um); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
5.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
5
1
1250
300
Nanoceram (0.3 - 0.6 um); Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
-
5.0
-
0.0
-
0.0
-
0.0
-
2
-
600
UF Unit; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
5.0
5.0
5.0
42
52
40
42
52
40
36
22
62
3.5
3.0
4.25
750
572
996
-------
I4
5 10
Time (hour)
-Influent
-Bfl. 1
Bfl. 2
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-20
Figure 3-1. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 8
(Without Chemical Coagulant)
12
O
_ 8
3
£ 6
•c
^
-n H—n n-
3 4 5
Time (hour)
Influent — •— Effl. 1
Effl. 2
Figure 3-2. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 9
(Without Chemical Coagulant)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-21
Time (hours)
• Influent —•— Eff I. 1
Effl. 2
Figure 3-3. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 10
(With 4 mg/L Alum)
T3
'5 3
0.5
-rv
1.5 2 2.5
Time (hours)
. Influent —•— Effl. 1
Effl. 2
3.5
Figure 3-4. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 11
(With 4 mg/L Alum)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-22
_ 4
D
£ 3
n-
-n-
2 3
Time (hrs)
. Influent —•— EffI. 1 EffI. 2
Figure 3-5. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 12
(With 4 mg/L Alum)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-23
• IN
-Out 1
Out 2
Figure 3-6. Headloss in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 8 (Without Chemical
Coagulant)
345
Time (hour)
-IN
-Out 1
Out 2
Figure 3-7. Headloss in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 9 (Without Chemical
Coagulant)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-24
100
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
0 0.5
• IN —•—Out 1 Out 2
Figure 3-8. Headless in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 10 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
120
100
0.5
1.5 2
Time (hours)
2.5
3.5
-H^ir
vl — •— Out 1
Out 2
Figure 3-9. Headless in R3f Filter during Turbidity Challenge 11 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-25
100
2 3
Time (hours)
• IN
• Out 1
Out 2
Figure 3-10. Headless in R3f Filters during Turbidity Challenge 12 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
7
~. 5
I-
E. 4
13
10
Time (hour)
15
20
• Influent
• Effluent
Figure 3-11. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in Multimedia Filter during Turbidity
Challenge 8 (Without Chemical Coagulant)
-------
12
10
5 8
£ 6
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-26
Time (hour)
• Influent
• Efflluent
Figure 3-12. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in Multimedia Filter during Turbidity
Challenge 9 (Without Chemical Coagulant)
4.5
3.5
2.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
Time (hours)
• Influent
• Effluent
2.5
Figure 3-13. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in Multimedia Filter during Turbidity
Challenge 10 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
-------
6
5
S. 4
I 3
0.5
1.5 2 2.5
Time (hours)
> Influent
— • — Eff luent
3.5
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-27
Figure 3-14. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in Multimedia Filter during Turbidity
Challenge 11 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
5. 4
1 3
0.5
1.5 2 2.5
Time (hours)
3.5
• Influent •
• Effluent
Figure 3-15. Influent and Effluent Turbidity in Multimedia Filter during Turbidity
Challenge 12 (With 4 mg/L Alum)
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-28
Table 3-13. Summary of TOC and DOC Results of R3f System during Evaluation of
System Performance
Test No.
TOC/DOC (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent 1
Effluent 2
Overall %
Removal
TOC; Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.42
2.41
4.35
2.38
4.33
2.39
0.46
0.81
DOC; Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.47
2.37
4.29
2.23
4.28
2.26
4.3
4.6
TOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
-
32
-
-
1.38
-
-
1.33
-
-
1.33
3.6
DOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
-
-
1.46
-
-
1.30
-
-
1.32
-
-
9.6
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-29
Table 3-14. Summary of TOC and DOC Results of Multimedia System during Evaluation
of System Performance
Test No.
TOC/DOC (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
TOC; Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.42
2.41
4.32
2.45
2.26
0.00
DOC: Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
4.47
2.37
4.29
2.25
4.00
5.10
TOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32
-
-
1.30
-
-
1.44
-
-
0.0
DOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L)
30
31
32
-
-
1.34
-
-
1.29
-
-
3.7
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-30
Table 3-15. Summary of TOC and DOC Results of Post-filters during Evaluation
System Performance
of
Test No.
TOC/DOC (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
TOC; Without Chemical Coagulant
8a
9b
4.33
2.39
4.30
2.35
0.69
1.67
DOC; Without Chemical Coagulant
8a
9b
4.28
2.26
4.29
2.42
0.00
0.00
TOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32C
-
-
1.33
-
-
1.28
-
-
3.8
DOC; With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
32C
-
-
1.32
-
-
1.31
-
-
0.8
aTest conducted on Rosedale bag filter
bTest conducted on Nanoceram bag filter
"Test conducted on LTF system
Table 3-16. Summary of HPC Results of Garnet-Garnet R3f System during Evaluation of
System Performance
Test No.
HPC/mL
Influent
Effluent 1
Effluent 2
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
7.5 x 104
2.1 x io5
7.8 x 104
6.2 x 104
6.1 x io4
4.7 x IO4
18.7
77.6
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L)
30
31
32
-
1.9 x 105
9.9 x 104
-
5.7 x 104
7.7 x 104
-
2.6 x IO4
5.1 x io4
-
86.3
48.5
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-31
Table 3-17. Summary of HPC Results of Multimedia System during Evaluation of System
Performance
Test No.
HPC/mL
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
7.5 x 104
2.1 x 105
1.29 x 105
5.2 x 104
0.0
75.2
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L)
30
31
32
-
1.41 x io5
3.00 x 104
-
2.20 x 104
2.10 x 104
-
84.4
30
Table 3-18. Summary of HPC Results of Polishing Filters during Evaluation of System
Performance
Test No.
HPC/mL
Influent
Effluent
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8a
9a
9b
6.1 x 104
9.0 x 104
4.0 x 103
7.4 x 104
6.0 x 104
4.0 x 103
0.0
33.3
0.0
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31C
32C
-
2.6 x 104
5.1 x 104
-
2.1 x 103
5.7x 103
-
91.9
88.8
aTest conducted on Rosedale bag filter
bTest conducted on Nanoceram bag filter
"Test conducted on LTF unit
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-32
Table 3-19. Summary of Particle Counts (2-5 um) Results of Garnet-Garnet R3f System
during Evaluation of System Performance
Test No.
Particle Counts/mL
Influent
Effluent 1
Effluent 2
Overall %
Removal
Without Chemical Coagulant
8
9
>20000
>20000
1200
2321
925
1632
>95.4
>91.8
With Chemical Coagulant (4 mg/L Alum)
30
31
>20000
>20000
1000
820
445
485
>97.8
>97.4
3.2 PSL Bead Challenges
A total of eleven PSL bead challenges - eight on the R3f system and three on the multimedia
system - were conducted without chemical coagulants during the test period. Of the eight PSL
bead challenges conducted on the R3f system, two challenges were conducted to differentiate the
performance of the lead and lag filters. For the PSL bead challenges, a suspension of the beads
was prepared by adding 1 mL of 2.83 |im size PSL beads to 500 mL of 0.01% Tween-20 in a 1-L
glass beaker. A 1 mL sub-sample was collected and analyzed for determining the total
concentration of the injected beads. The 500 mL suspension and the additional 500 mL rinseate
were added to the influent stream of the R3f and multimedia system using a peristaltic pump.
The total injection time for both systems was 40 minutes. The system was run for an additional
3-4 hours to flush out any residual PSL beads from the systems. The effluent from the R3f
system was passed through an additional polishing filter (Rosedale or Nanoceram) filter prior to
discharge to drain. The effluent from the conventional multimedia filter was directly discharged
to drain. A slip stream of the effluent was diverted through a 1 |im membrane in a manifold
membrane system to collect the beads from the effluent. The beads were then extracted from the
membrane using a squeegee followed by rinsing with 0.01% Tween-20 and analyzed to
determine the total bead counts in the effluent. The membrane sampling technique was used to
keep the analytical method consistent with the previous bead samples analysis. Log removal
performance was evaluated by comparing the total effluent bead count with the total challenge
bead count. All the tests were conducted at 5.0 gpm using dechlorinated potable water. Table 3-
20 presents the results of the PSL bead challenges conducted on the R3f, post-filters and
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-33
multimedia systems. Table 3-21 presents the results of the two PSL bead challenges conducted
on the R3f system for evaluating differential performance of the lead and lag filters.
The R3f system performed effectively in removing 3.0 |im PSL beads with an average log
removal of 3.40 achieved in six challenge runs. The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as the final
polishing filter for the R3f effluent (Challenges 10 and 12) achieved complete removal of the
remaining PSL beads from the effluent of the garnet system with an average log removal of
greater than 5.65 (based on the influent total bead concentration). The total log removal value
achieved by the R3f system followed by the Rosedale PS 740 bag filter was 9.05 (based on the
influent total bead concentration).
A Nanoceram filter was tested as the final polishing filter in Challenge 14 and 19. No noticeable
removal of PSL beads was observed in Challenge 14 conducted on the Nanoceram cartridge. A
poor seal between the cartridge and the housing was suspected of causing the poor removal of
PSL beads. A new cartridge with a revised seal was installed and challenged with PSL beads
(Challenge 19b). These results also showed no noticeable removal of PSL beads.
A UF unit was tested as the final polishing filter in Challenges 37 and 38. The UF system
achieved complete removal of PSL beads; the average log removal value was 5.51 (based on the
influent total bead concentration). The total log removal value achieved by the R3f and the UF
filter series combination was 8.91 (based on the influent total bead concentration). During the
analyses of PSL bead effluent samples, visible amounts of garnet media were observed in the
concentrated samples indicating that some media was escaping the system during different
challenges. This observation was supported by a pressure build-up of 70 psi in the UF post-filter
after treating approximately 5500 gallons of water.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing 3.0 jim PSL beads. The average
log removal achieved in three challenges was 0.20.
Table 3-21 shows that, based on Challenges 39 and 40, the average log removal values achieved
by the lead and lag R3f filters were 3.17 and 0.74, respectively. These results indicate that a
single R3f filter is capable of satisfying the LT1ESWTR requirement (2.0 log) (U.S. EPA, 2004)
for Cryptosporidium removal.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-34
Table 3-20. Summary of PSL Bead Test Results for R3f, Rosedale, Nanoceram, UF
Multimedia Systems
and
Test No.
Total Beads
Influent
Effluent
Log Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
Garnet-Garnet R3f System
10
12
14
19
37
38
1.68 x 109
1.55 x 109
2.41 x 109
1.99 x 109
1.48 x 109
1.30 x 109
2.41 x 105
8.31 x 105
2.51 x 106
1.61 x 106
2.87 x 105
3.80x 105
3.84
3.27
2.99
3.10
3.70
3.52
3.40
Rosedale PS 740/Nanoceram Filter/UF Filter
10a
12a
14b
19b
37C
38C
2.41 x 105
8.31 x 105
2.51 x 106
1.61 x 106
2.87 x 105
3.80x 105
0
0
2.39 x 106
2.14 x 106
0
0
5.38
5.92
0.02
0
5.45
5.57
5.65
0.01
5.51
Multimedia Filter
11
13
15
1.90 x 109
1.26 x 109
1.56 x 109
1.30 x 109
5.17 x 108
1.46 x 109
0.17
0.39
0.03
0.20
"Rosedale PS 740
bNanoceram
CLTF Filter
Table 3-21. Summary of PSL Bead Test Results for Garnet-Garnet R3f Lead and Lag
Filters
Test No.
39
40
Total Beads
Influent
1.50 x 109
1.79 x 109
Effluent
Lead
Filter
1.90 x 106
6.61 x 105
Effluent
Lag Filter
4.70 x 105
8.52 x 104
Log Removal
Lead
Filter
2.90
3.43
Lag Filter
0.60
0.88
Total Log
Removal
3.50
4.31
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-35
3.3 Bacillus subtilis Challenge Tests
A total of ten B. subtilis challenges - seven on the R3f system and three on the conventional
multimedia system - were conducted without chemical coagulants during the test period. For the
R3f system, three challenges were conducted using the membrane sampling technique and four
challenges were conducted using the grab sampling method. A suspension of the B. subtilis
spores was prepared by adding 1 mL of B. subtilis stock to 500 mL of 0.01% Tween-20 in a 1-L
glass beaker. A 1 mL sub-sample was collected and analyzed to determine the total injected B.
subtilis concentration. The 500 mL suspension and an additional 500 mL rinseate were added to
the influent stream of the R3f and multimedia system using a peristaltic pump. The total
injection time for both systems was 40 minutes.
According to the membrane sampling protocol, it was recommended that the systems run for an
additional 3 to 4 hours after the completion of injection to flush out any remaining spores from
the systems. However, it was not possible to run any of the systems for this recommended
period due to clogging in the fine (0.4 jim) sampling membrane. The R3f followed by the
Rosedale system could be operated for a total of 1.5 to 2 hours and the multimedia system for
only 40 minutes prior to clogging of the membrane. The effluent from the multimedia filter was
discharged directly to drain. A slip stream of the effluent was diverted through a 0.40 jim
membrane in a manifold membrane system to collect the B. subtilis spores from the effluent.
The spores were then extracted from the membrane using a squeegee followed by rinsing with
0.01% Tween-20 and analyzed for determining the total B. subtilis concentrations in the effluent.
Log removal performance was evaluated by comparing the total effluent B. subtilis count with
the total challenge B. subtilis count. Table 3-22 presents the results of B. subtilis challenges
conducted on the R3f and multimedia filter systems using the membrane sampling technique.
According to the grab sampling technique, 100 mL samples were collected from the influent and
effluent streams at specific time intervals during the test and the performance of the system was
evaluated by comparing the influent and effluent B. subtilis concentrations. Tables 3-23 to 3-26
present the results of B. subtilis challenges conducted using the grab sampling method.
The R3f system did not perform adequately in removing B. subtilis spores. The average log
removal value achieved in three B. subtilis challenges conducted using membrane sampling
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-36
technique was 0.44. The average log removal value achieved in the four challenges conducted
using the grab sampling method was 0.72.
The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as the final polishing filter contributed an additional 2.12
log removal of the remaining B. subtilis from the effluent of the R3f system. The effluent from
the R3f system was used as the influent B. subtilis concentration (total) for the Rosedale PS 740
bag filter. No B. subtilis challenge was conducted on the Nanoceram bag filter.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing B. subtilis achieving only
negligible removal (log removal of 0.11) as shown in Table 3-22.
As shown in Tables 3-23 and 3-24, the UF filter did not perform adequately during B. subtilis
Challenge Nos. 7 and 8. The filter was taken out of the housing and was found to be deformed
(Figure 3-16). This was attributed to the high pressure (maximum 62 psi) development during
the turbidity challenges. Two additional tests (B. subtilis Challenge Nos. 9 and 10) were
conducted on a new UF unit and a much higher log removal value of 3.5 was achieved as shown
in Figures 3-25 and 3-26.
Table 3-27 shows the summary of differential performance of the lead and lag R3f filter during
B. subtilis challenges. Results of Test Nos. 33 and 34 show similar performance between the
lead and lag filters. However, results of the last two tests (Test Nos. 35 and 36) are not
consistent with the previous two tests, potentially indicating that B. subtilis spores were being
washed out of the filters.
Figure 3-16. Deformed UF Filter
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-37
Table 3-22. Summary of Six B. subtilis Test Results Using Membrane Sampling Technique
for R3f, Rosedale/Nanoceram and Multimedia Systems
Test No.
Total B. subtilis Cone. (No. of Cells/100 mL)
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f system
23
24
27
6.00 x 108
7.30 x 108
7.30 x 108
1.23 x 108
3.67x 108
3.30x 108
0.68
0.30
0.35
0.44
Rosedale PS 740 Filter
23
24
27
1.23 x 108
3.67 x 108
3.30 x 108
1.78 x 106
2.19 x 106
1.60 x 108
1.84
2.22
2.31
2.12
Multimedia Filter
25
26
28
7.50 x 108
1.15 x 109
1.10 x 109
7.10 x 108
6.80 x 108
9.00 x 108
0.02
0.22
0.09
0.11
Table 3-23. Results of B. subtilis Challenge 7 Using Grab Sampling Technique in R3f and
UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
33
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
1.4 x 105
1.6 x 105
1.6 x 105
2.4 x 104
5
3.2 x 104
3.0 x 104
2.4 x 104
9.0 x 103
N/A
0.64
0.73
0.82
0.42
0.65
UF System
33
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
5
3.2 x 104
3. Ox 104
2.4 x 104
9.0 x 103
15
2.9 x 103
3.0 x 103
5.0 x 103
6.2 x 102
N/A
1.04
1.00
0.68
1.16
0.97
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-38
Table 3-24. Results of B. subtilis Challenge 8 Using Grab Sampling Technique in R3f and
UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
34
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
150
1.5 x 105
1.4 x 105
1.2 x 105
6.0 x 104
1030
2.4 x 104
2.9 x 104
3.3 x 104
2.3 x 104
N/A
0.80
0.68
0.56
0.42
0.62
UF System
34
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
1030
2.4 x 104
2.9 x 104
3.3 x 104
2.3 x 104
140
6.0 x 103
5.4 x 103
6.4 x 103
8.0 x 102
N/A
0.60
0.73
0.71
1.45
0.87
Table 3-25. Results of B. subtilis Challenge 9 Using Grab Sampling Technique in R3f and
UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
35
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
190
1.4 x 105
1.6 x 105
1.6 x 105
4.0 x 104
150
1.5 x 104
3.0 x 104
2.5 x 104
-
N/A
0.97
0.72
0.80
N/A
0.83
UF System
35
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
150
1.5 x 104
3. Ox 104
2.5 x 104
-
0
10
10
20
25
N/A
3.17
3.48
3.10
N/A
3.25
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-39
Table 3-26. Results of B. subtilis Challenge 10 Using Grab Sampling Technique in R3f and
UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
36
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
510
1.2 x 105
1.1 x 105
1.2 x 105
5.8 x 104
680
2.5 x 104
2.4 x 104
2.5 x 104
6.7 x 103
N/A
0.68
0.66
0.68
0.93
0.78
UF System
36
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
680
2.5 x 104
2.4 x 104
2.5 x 104
6.7 x 103
0
10
10
0
0
3.40
3.38
4.40
3.83
3.75
Table 3-27. Summary of B. subtilis Test Results for R3f Lead and Lag Filters
Test No.
33
34
35
36
No. of Cells/1 00 mL
Influent
1.2 x 105
1.2 x 105
1.5 x 105
1.1 x 105
Effluent
Lead Filter
5.5 x 104
6.8 x 104
5.7 x 103
7.6 x 103
Effluent Lag
Filter
2.4 x 104
2.8 x 104
2.3 x 104
2.1 x 104
Avg. Log Removal
Lead Filter
0.34
0.25
1.42
1.16
Lag Filter
0.36
0.39
0.00
0.00
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-40
3.4 E. co/i Challenges
A total of seven E. coli challenges - five on the R3f system and two on the conventional
multimedia system - were conducted without chemical coagulants during the test period. For
these challenges, a suspension of E. coli was prepared by adding 1 mL of E. coli stock to 500 mL
of 0.01% Tween-20 in a 1-L glass beaker. For the purpose of analysis, a 1 mL sub-sample was
collected to determine the injection concentration. The 500 mL suspension and an additional
500 mL rinseate were added to the influent stream of the R3f filter and multimedia system using
a peristaltic pump. The total injection time for both systems was 40 minutes. The effluent from
the R3f system was passed through an additional polishing filtration stage using a Rosedale or
Nanoceram filter prior to discharge to drain. The effluent from the multimedia filter was directly
discharged to drain. Grab samples were collected from the influent and effluent streams at 0
(TO), 5 (T5), 10 (T10), 20 (T20) and 40 (T40) minutes after the start of the injection. A
duplicate sample was collected at the T10 sampling event during Challenges 1 and 2.
Tables 3-28, 3-29, and 3-30 present the results of three E. coli challenges conducted on the R3f
system and two polishing filters (Rosedale and Nanoceram filters). Table 3-31 presents the
results of two E. coli challenges conducted on the conventional multimedia filter. Tables 3-32
and 3-33 present the results of two E. coli challenges conducted on the R3f and UF systems.
The R3f system achieved a log removal range of 0.65 to 1.36 for E. coli. The effluent
concentrations of E. coli from the R3f system were considered as the influent concentrations for
the Rosedale or Nanoceram filter. As the final polishing filter, the Rosedale bag filter
contributed an additional log removal of 0.78 to 0.90 for E. coli. A single test conducted on the
Nanoceram filter demonstrated an additional 2.10 log removal of E. coli. As the final polishing
filter, the UF filter contributed an additional log removal of 4.05 to 4.40 for E. coli as shown in
tables 3-32 and 3-33.
As shown in Table 3-31, the multimedia filter demonstrated 0.42 to 0.52 log removal ofE. coli.
Table 3-34 shows the summary of differential performance of lead and lag R3f filter during E.
coli challenges. Results showed that the lead filter contributed more than the lag filter in
removing E. coli.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-41
Table 3-28. Results of E. c0//Challenge 1 in R3f and Rosedale System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
16
TO
T5
T10
TlODup
T20
T40
0
4.80 x 105
5.00 x 105
4.70 x 105
1.00 x 105
2.00 x 103
0
4.45 x 104
1.00 x 105
1.00 x 105
4.20 x 104
7.00 x 102
N/Aa
1.03
0.70
0.67
0.40
0.45
0.65
Rosedale PS 740 Filter
16
TO
T5
T10
TlODup
T20
T40
0
4.45 x 104
1.00 x 105
1.00 x 105
4.20 x 104
7.00 x 102
0
2.40 x 103
1.40 x 104
2.10 x 104
2.00 x 104
3.70 x 103
N/Aa
1.30
0.85
0.68
0.30
N/Aa
0.78
' Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-42
Table 3-29. Results of E. c0//Challenge 2 in R3f and Rosedale System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
17
TO
T5
T10
TlODup
T20
T40
20
3.90 x 105
4.00 x 105
4.20 x 105
4.00 x 105
4.80 x 104
60
9.00 x 104
l.lOx 105
9.00 x 104
5.20 x 104
3.60 x 104
N/Aa
0.64
0.56
0.67
0.89
0.13a
0.69
Rosedale PS 740 Filter
17
TO
T5
T10
TlODup
T20
T40
60
9.00 x 104
1.10 x 105
9.00 x 104
5.20 x 104
3.60 x 104
0
6.00 x 103
1.45 x 104
1.65 x 104
1.20 x 104
3.10x 103
N/Aa
1.18
0.89
0.74
0.64
1.06
0.90
' Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-43
Table 3-30. Results of E. coli Challenge 3 in R3f and Nanoceram System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
18
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
10
5.00 x 105
5.20 x 105
6.00 x 105
1.40 x 105
90
1.00 x 104
6.20 x 104
7.50 x 104
4.10 x 104
N/Aa
1.70
0.92
0.90
0.53
1.01
Nanoceram Filter
18
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
90
1.00 x 104
6.20 x 104
7.50 x 104
4.10 x 104
100
600
500
200
120
N/Aa
1.22
2.09
2.57
2.53
2.10
a Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
Table 3-31. Results of Two E. coli Challenges in Multimedia Filter
Test No.
20
21
Sampling
Time (Min)
T0a
T5a
T10
TlODup
T20
T40a
T0a
T5a
T10
TlODup
T20
T40a
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
0
6.0 x 105
8. Ox 105
9.0 x 105
8. Ox 105
2.0 x 104
0
8.5 x 105
9.5 x 105
9.0 x 105
1.2 x 106
7.0 x 104
Effluent
0
6.0 x 105
2.7 x 105
3.1 x io5
3.8x IO5
1.2 x 105
600
2.0 x 103
2.9 x 105
2.8 x 105
3.6 x 105
8.0 x 104
Log
Removal
NA
NA
0.47
0.46
0.32
NA
NA
2.62
0.52
0.51
0.52
NA
Avg. Log
Removal
0.42
0.52
a Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-44
Table 3-32. Results of E. coli Challenge 6 in R3f and UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
41
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40a
0
6.3 x 105
6.1 x 105
6.3 x 105
1.0 x 104
0
4.2 x 104
3.9 x 104
4.3 x 104
1.2 x 103
N/A
1.20
1.22
1.16
0.67
1.19
UF System
41
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40a
0
4.2 x 104
3.9x 104
4.3 x 104
1.2 x 103
0
0
5
10
0
4.62
3.89
3.63
3.10
4.05
a Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
Table 3-33. Results of E. coli Challenge 7 in R3f and UF System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
42
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40a
0
5.2 x 105
5.7x 105
6.4 x 105
1.3 x 104
0
2.4 x 104
2.4 x 104
2.8 x 104
9.0 x 102
N/A
1.34
1.38
1.36
1.16
1.36
UF System
42
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40a
0
2.4 x 104
2.4 x 104
2.8 x 104
9.0 x 102
0
0
0
0
0
4.38
4.38
4.45
2.95
4.40
' Not considered for performance evaluation due to inconsistency with other results.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-45
Table 3-34. Summary of E.coli Test Results for R3f Lead and Lag Filters
Test No.
41
42
No. of Cells/1 00 mL
Influent
6.1 x 105
5.8 x 105
Effluent
Lead Filter
7.6 x 104
5.8 x 104
Effluent Lag
Filter
4.1 x 104
2.5 x 104
Avg. Log Removal
Lead Filter
0.90
1.00
Lag Filter
0.26
0.37
3.5 Cryptosporidium Challenge
A single Cryptosporidium challenge was conducted on the R3f system to examine equivalency
with the PSL Beads tests. For this challenge, a suspension of the Cryptosporidium oocysts was
prepared by adding 1 mL of the oocysts to 500 mL of 0.01% Tween-20 in a 1-L glass beaker. A
1 mL sub-sample was collected and analyzed for determining the total concentration of the
injected oocysts. The 500 mL suspension and the additional 500 mL rinseate were added to the
influent stream of the R3f system using a peristaltic pump. The total injection time was 40
minutes. The system was run for an additional 3 to 4 hours to flush out any remaining oocysts
from the system. The effluent from the R3f system was passed through an additional polishing
filtration stage using the Rosedale filter prior to discharge to drain. A slip stream of the effluent
was diverted through a 1 |im membrane in a manifold membrane system to collect the oocysts
from the effluent. The oocysts were then extracted from the membrane using a squeegee
followed by rinsing with 0.01% Tween-20 and analyzed to count the total oocysts in the effluent.
Log removal performance was evaluated by comparing the total effluent oocysts count with the
total challenge oocysts count. The test was conducted at 5 gpm using dechlorinated tap water.
Table 3-35 presents the results of this Cryptosporidium challenge test. The R3f system showed
an average log removal of 3.47 for Cryptosporidium. The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as the
final polishing filter contributed to the complete removal of the remaining oocysts from the
effluent of the R3f system (a calculated average log removal of 5.50 based on the total influent
oocysts concentration). The performance of the R3f garnet and Rosedale PS 740 bag filter in
removing Cryptosporidium oocysts is similar to the performance of the systems in removing 3.0
|im PSL beads.
Table 3-35. Summary of Cryptosporidium Test Results for R3f and Rosedale Bag Filter
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-46
Test No.
Total Cryptosporidium oocysts/mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Removal
Avg. Log
Removal
R3f System
29
9.34 x 108
3.14 x 105
3.47
3.47
Rosedale PS 740 Filter
29
3.14x 105
0
5.50
5.50
3.6 MS2 Bacteriophage Challenges
A total of three MS2 bacteriophage challenges were conducted without chemical coagulants on
the R3f system. Similar tests were not conducted on the multimedia filter since there was no
expectation that the very small sized (20 nm) MS2 bacteriophage would be removed by this
system. For these challenges, a suspension of MS2 was prepared by adding 1 mL of MS2 stock
to 500 mL of 0.01% Tween-20 in a 1-L glass beaker. For the purpose of analysis, a 1 mL sub-
sample was collected to determine the injection concentration. The 500 mL suspension and an
additional 500 mL rinseate were added to the influent stream of the R3f and multimedia system
using a peristaltic pump. The total injection time for both systems was 40 minutes. The effluent
from the R3f system was passed through additional polishing filtration stages using a UF filter
and UV system prior to discharge to drain. Grab samples were collected from the influent and
effluent streams at 0 (TO), 5 (T5), 10 (T10), 20 (T20) and 40 (T40) minutes after the start of the
injection.
Tables 3-36, 3-37 and 3-38 present the results of three MS2 bacteriophage challenges conducted
on the R3f system and the polishing units (UF filter and UV system). The R3f system achieved
negligible removal of MS2 bacteriophage with an average log removal between 0 and 0.22. The
UF unit removed little MS2 bacteriophage with an average log removal value between 0.29 and
1.23. The UV unit performed adequately in inactivating MS2 bacteriophage with average log
removal values during the three challenges that varied between 2.09 and 2.26. The overall log
removal values of the R3f, UF system and UV unit series in combination varied between 2.71
and 3.33.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-47
Table 3-36. Results of MS2 Bacteriophage Challenge 1 in R3f, UF and UV System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Inactivation
Avg. Log
Inactivation
R3f System
43
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
1.55 x 105
1.75 x 105
N/A
4.27 x 104
0
8.90 x 104
1.54 x IO5
1.79 x IO5
2.00 x IO4
N/A
0.24
0.06
N/A
0.35
0.22
UF System
43
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
8.90 x 104
1.54 x 105
1.79 x 105
2.00 x 104
0
4.31 x IO4
3.34x IO4
4.37 x IO4
4.20 x IO3
N/A
0.31
0.66
0.61
0.65
0.56
UV System
43
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
4.31 x io4
3.34 x 104
4.37 x 104
4.20 x 103
0
4.13 x IO2
3.23 x IO2
3.80x IO2
19
N/A
2.02
2.02
2.07
2.35
2.12
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-48
Table 3-37. Results of MS2 Bacteriophage Challenge 2 in R3f, UF and UV System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Inactivation
Avg. Log
Inactivation
R3f System
44
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
8.6 x 104
1.12 x 105
1.34 x 105
2.06 x 104
20
2.92 x 105
3.14x 105
2.92 x 105
9.53 x 104
0
0
0
0
0
0.00
UF System
44
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
20
2.92 x 105
3.14 x 105
2.92 x 105
9.53 x 104
15
1.73 x 104
2.69 x 104
2.44 x 104
2.58 x 103
N/A
1.23
1.07
1.08
1.56
1.23
UV System
44
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
15
1.73 x 104
2.69 x 104
2.44 x 104
2.58 x 103
0
2.00 x 102
2.06 x 102
2.03 x 102
15
N/A
1.93
2.11
2.08
2.23
2.09
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 3-49
Table 3-38. Results of MS2 Bacteriophage Challenge 3 in R3f, UF and UV System
Test No.
Sampling
Time (Min)
No. of Cells/100 mL
Influent
Effluent
Log
Inactivation
Avg. Log
Inactivation
R3f System
45
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
0
3.04 x 105
1.96 x 105
3.13 x 105
1.16 x 105
-
1.98 x 105
2.24 x 105
2.74 x 105
5.42 x 104
N/A
0.19
0
0.06
0.39
0.16
UF System
45
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
-
1.98 x 105
2.24 x 105
2.74 x 105
5.42 x 104
-
1.13 x 105
1.20 x 105
1.19x 105
2.80 x 104
N/A
0.24
0.27
0.36
0.29
0.29
UV System
45
TO
T5
T10
T20
T40
-
1.13 x 105
1.20 x 105
1.19 x 105
2.80 x 104
-
6.50 x 102
2.52 x 102
1.14x 103
2.30 x 102
N/A
2.24
2.68
2.02
2.09
2.26
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 4-1
4.0 Summary and Conclusions
The major regulations governing small drinking water systems that use surface water are the
LT1ESWTR and the LT2ESWTR. These regulations rely on turbidity and challenge testing to
demonstrate the efficiency of filtration in removing contaminants such as Cryptosporidium from
drinking water. The LT1ESWTR requires the effluent turbidity of a single filtration device to be
less than 0.3 NTU and demonstrate a 2.0 log removal for Cryptosporidium. The LT2ESWTR
requires increasingly higher treatment efficiency based on the results of monitoring for
Cryptosporidium in the source water supply to the drinking water system. Thus, all filtration
devices intended for small drinking water systems are benchmarked according to their ability to
meet a turbidity level of 0.3 NTU and a 2-log Cryptosporidium removal. The LT2ESWTR also
specifies that challenge testing may be conducted to establish the log removal credit for a
filtration device or a combination of filtration devices. At the T&E Facility, PSL beads and B/
subtilis are typically used as challenge surrogates for Cryptosporidium to evaluate filtration
performance. In addition, filtration devices may also be evaluated for their ability to remove
bacteria (as represented by B. subtilis and E. coif) and viruses (using MS2 Bacteriophage as a
surrogate).
The tests performed on the R3f system were intended to evaluate the system for its ability to
meet the requirements of the LT1ESWTR and LT2ESWTR. They were also aimed at verifying
vendor claims that, unlike most multimedia filters, the system has the ability to meet these
filtration requirements without the use of chemical coagulants while operating at a headloss
similar to that of existing downflow and upflow multimedia bed systems but with cost and
footprint requirements that are 20% to 50% less than a typical multimedia system. Thus, parallel
tests were performed on a multimedia filter using the same challenge protocols. The R3f unit
was also tested as a pre-treatment unit for the bulk of turbidity removal prior to polishing filters
that can meet the LT1ESWTR and LT2ESWTR requirements but would be quickly blinded by
high turbidity levels. Lastly, a UV unit was also tested as final microbial barrier to form a
complete treatment system.
The R3f system was first evaluated for its ability to meet the LT1ESWTR turbidity level of 0.3
NTU. Tests were conducted at 10 gpm and 5 gpm using feed water with 10 NTU and 5 NTU
turbidity on two media types (glass beads and garnet beads) in various sizes until one
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 4-2
configuration consistently produced effluent water with a turbidity <1 NTU. This configuration
used a fine garnet media (0.33 micron) in both the lead and the lag filter. Once established as the
optimal configuration, all subsequent challenge tests were performed using this media. The
average effluent turbidity from the R3f unit ranged between 0.50 NTU and 0.91 NTU, depending
on the influent turbidity and the length of operation. All the tests for optimization of the R3f
system were conducted without the use of chemical coagulants.
Under similar operating conditions, the best effluent quality produced by the multimedia filter
without chemical coagulants was 1.92 NTU. To improve this performance, the multimedia filter
media configuration was re-designed to increase the total L/D (media depth to media size) ratio.
However, this re-designed multimedia filter showed comparable turbidity results (1.95 NTU)
and, thus, it appears that the multimedia filter is unable to produce acceptable effluent water
quality (<1 NTU) without the use of coagulants. The R3f unit was able to achieve low turbidity
levels (<0.5 NTU) without the use of coagulants or other filtration aids for an influent feed water
with a turbidity level of 5 NTU and at a flow rate of 5 gpm.
Addition of alum as a chemical coagulant with a dosage of 4 mg/L improved the performance of
the R3f system to an average effluent turbidity of 0.24 NTU from the final filter when challenged
with an influent feed turbidity of 4.9 NTU at 5 gpm. The average effluent turbidity of the lead
filter was 0.43 NTU. Addition of 4 mg/L alum as a chemical coagulant to the multimedia filter
produced an effluent quality of 0.35 NTU which is comparable to the effluent from the R3f unit.
Four polishing filters were tested on the R3f effluent to improve the effluent quality. The units
tested were the Rosedale PS740, the Nanoceram cartridge filter, the Harmsco cartridge filter, and
a low-cost UF filter. Both the Rosedale PS740 and Harmsco post-filtration units produced
effluent water consistently with a turbidity of less than 0.5 NTU during the challenge tests
conducted at 5.0 gpm using feed water with a target turbidity of 5.0 NTU without chemical
coagulant. The effluent turbidity for the both the Rosedale and Harmsco filters was more than
0.5 NTU during the challenge conducted at 5.0 gpm using feed water with a higher turbidity
(10.0 NTU). However, the Nanoceram filter which was only tested during this challenge,
produced effluent with turbidity less than 0.5 NTU. The UF filter produced effluent with 0.15
NTU during the turbidity challenge tests conducted at 5.0 gpm using feed water with a turbidity
of 4.9 NTU and 4 mg/L alum as chemical coagulant.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 4-3
Neither the R3f filter nor the multimedia filter showed any appreciable removal of TOC or DOC
with or without the use of alum. The polishing filters (Rosedale, Nanoceram, Harmsco, and UF
filter) also did not show any appreciable removal of TOC or DOC. TOC and DOC may be of
importance in surface water systems that use chlorine disinfection because of their propensity to
form regulated disinfection byproducts (DBFs).
Challenge testing on the R3f system using 3.0 jim PSL beads as a non-biological surrogate for
Cryptosporidium showed an average log removal in three challenges of 3.40 which satisfies the
2.0-log removal requirement in the LT1ESWTR. The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter as a polishing
filter completely removed any remaining PSL beads in the R3f system effluent. Based on the
influent PSL beads concentration, the average log removal by the Rosedale bag filter was 5.65,
which satisfies the 5.5 log removal standard in the LT2ESWTR for source waters in Bin 4. The
UF unit tested as the final polishing filter also showed complete removal of PSL beads and the
average log removal based on influent PSL beads concentration was 5.51, which also satisfied
the 5.5 log removal criteria under LT2ESWTR for Bin 4 systems. The Nanoceram filter
demonstrated poor removal of PSL beads which was attributed to poor seal between the cartridge
and the housing which could not be repaired despite several attempts.
One test with Cryptosporidium oocysts was performed on the R3f system to validate the
representativeness of PSL beads as a surrogate. The test showed a log removal of 3.47 which is
slightly more conservative than the average log removal value of 3.40 achieved using PSL beads.
The Rosedale PS 740 bag filter used as the final polishing filter again completely removed all
remaining oocysts from the effluent of the R3f system.
Two PSL bead challenges were conducted to differentiate the performance of the lead and lag
R3f filters. The lead filter showed an average log removal of 3.17 while the lag filter showed a
log removal of 0.74 (which reflects the low inlet beads concentration following the high removal
in the lead filter). These results indicate that a single R3f filter is capable of satisfying the 2.0-
log Cryptosporidium LT1ESWTR criteria.
The multimedia filter did not perform adequately in removing 3.0 |im PSL beads without
chemical coagulants. The average log removal achieved in three challenges was 0.20. The
multimedia filter was not tested with Cryptosporidium oocysts.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 4-4
Neither the R3f system nor the multimedia system was very effective in removing HPC,
achieving approximately 75% removal. This suggested that both systems would not be very
effective in removing bacteria and this was confirmed by tests conducted using B. subtilis spores
and E. coli. The R3f system showed an average log removal value of 0.44 from three B. subtilis
challenges conducted using the membrane sampling technique and 0.72 from four challenges
conducted using the grab sampling method. At these low removal values, there is little
difference between the two sampling methods. The Rosedale PS 720 bag filter used as the final
polishing filter contributed an additional 2.03 log removal of the remaining B. subtilis. The UF
filter did not perform adequately during the two initial challenges and the unit was found to be
damaged, probably due to excessive pressure development during turbidity challenges.
However, the same damaged UF unit had continued to produce low turbidity effluent water
during the turbidity challenge tests. This highlights the importance of biological challenge tests
to evaluate the integrity of filtration treatment systems. Two additional tests were performed
after a new UF unit was installed and the results showed an average log removal of 3.5 for B.
subtilis. B. subtilis challenge tests were not conducted on the Nanoceram and Harmsco bag
filters.
The multimedia filter achieved a log removal value of only 0.12 in two B. subtilis challenges
The R3f system achieved a log removal range of 0.65 to 1.36 for E. coli while the multimedia
filter demonstrated 0.42 to 0.52 log removal of E. coli. The Rosedale bag filter contributed an
additional 0.78 to 0.90 log removal of E. coli. The results of a single test conducted on the
Nanoceram filter demonstrated an additional 2.10 log removal of E. coli. The UF filter
contributed an additional log removal of 4.05 to 4.40 for El. coli.
The R3f system achieved negligible removal of MS2 bacteriophage. The performance of the UF
unit was also very poor in removing MS2 bacteriophage (with a best performance of 1.23 log
removal). The UV unit showed an average log inactivation value of 2.2 from three challenge
tests.
Backwash volumes for the R3f filter ranged from 75 gallons or 1.7% of the total production for
the 5 NTU test to 75 gallons or 3.7% of the total production for the 10 NTU test during the
turbidity challenges conducted without chemical coagulant. In both cases, the pressure drop
across the lag filter was low and did not require backwashing. This indicates that the backwash
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 4-5
volumes required may be even lower since only the lead filter may require backwashing
frequently, with the lag filter requiring only infrequent backwashing. It was later observed that a
single backwashing cycle was not enough for the proper cleaning of the system as evidenced by
the rapid buildup of pressure with continued operation.
The multimedia filter showed a headloss of only 0.2 psi and did not require backwashing. This
is reflective of lower solids buildup due to the poor removal performance of the unit.
Backwash volumes for the R3f filter increased to 150 gallons or 15 - 26% of the total production
for the 5 NTU tests during the turbidity challenges conducted with 4 mg/L alum as a chemical
coagulant. Thus, the improved effluent turbidity due to the addition of the coagulant was
compromised by quicker development of headloss and higher backwash volumes when
compared to the tests conducted without the coagulant. The multimedia filter did not develop
any pressure loss, and thus did not require backwashing during turbidity challenges conducted
with 4 mg/L alum as the chemical coagulant.
SDI15 test results had to be estimated due to early blockage of the 0.45 jim membrane in the SDI
test apparatus. The SDI 10 values after 10 minutes for influent, effluent from the lead filter and
effluent from the lag filter were 8.63, 8.15, and 8.13, respectively. The estimated SDI15 values
calculated from these SDI10 values are 5.75, 5.43, and 5.41, respectively.
-------
Final Report
R3f Filtration Studies
January 30, 2009
Page 5-1
5.0 References
EPA. "The Long Term 1 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT1ESWTR)
Implementation Guidance," EPA 816-R-04-008., 2004.
EPA. "The Long Term 2 Enhanced Surface Water Treatment Rule (LT2ESWTR)
Implementation Guidance," EPA 816-F-06-005., 2006.
Shaw. "Quality Assurance Project Plan for Glass Bead R3f and Multimedia Systems," EPA QA
ID: 627-Q-10-0, 2007.
Shaw. "Quality Assurance Project Plan Addendum for Glass Bead R3f and Multimedia
Systems," EPA QA ID: 627-Q-10-1, 2009
-------
Appendix A
Raw Data for Different Parameters During Turbidity Challenges
-------
Date: 11/08/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 1
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (140-230 um)
Target flow: 10 gpm
Target feed water turbidity: 10 NTU
Glass bead (70-100 um)
Table Al: Turbidity Results during Challenge 1
Date & Time
11/08/05; 10:58
11/08/05; 12:45
11/08/05; 14:05
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
6.80
7.27
7.0
Effluent 1
3.81
2.15
1.50
Effluent 2
2.09
1.30
1.15
Blank
0.13
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
69.3
82.1
83.6
Table A2: Particle Count (2-5 um) Results during Turbidity Challenge 1
Date & Time
11/08/05; 10:58
11/08/05; 12:45
11/08/05; 14:05
Particle Counts (2-5 um)/ mL
Influent
> 20,000
> 20,000
> 20,000
Effluent 1
> 20,000
> 20,000
> 20,000
Effluent 2
6700
4211
3400
Overall %
Removal
66.5
78.9
83.0
Table A3: Operational Parameters during Turbidity Challenge 1
Date & Time
11/08/07; 09:50
11/08/07; 10:58
11/08/07; 11:33
11/08/07; ll:41a
11/08/07; 12:45
11/08/07; 13:07b
11/08/07; 14:05
Pressure (psi)
In
76
76
76
42
44
43
44
Outl
72
67
65
27
25
32
32
Out 2
64
58
58
18
18
30
29
API
4
9
11
15
19
11
12
AP2
8
8
7
9
7
2
3
Flow
(gpm)
10
10
10
10.2
10.0
5.5
5.2
Totalizer
(gallons)
16538
17205
17579
17671
18250
18460
18761
Total
Flow
(gallons)
0
667
374
92
579
210
301
2223
"Operational pressure reset
bFlow rate reset
-------
Date: 11/21/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 2
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (140-230 um)
Target flow: 10 gpm
Target feed water turbidity: 10 NTU
Glass bead (70-100 um)
Table A4: Turbidity Results during Challenge 2
Date & Time
11/21/07; 11:50
11/21/07; 12:50
11/21/07; 13:50
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
14.0
11.0
10.5
Effluent 1
7.3
6.50
6.90
Effluent 2
2.1
1.90
1.60
Blank
0.14
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
85.0
82.7
84.7
Table AS: Operational Parameters during Turbidity Challenge 2
Date & Time
11/21/07; 11:50
11/21/07; 12:50
11/21/07; 14:00
11/21/07; 14:00
11/21/07; 14:15
Pressure (psi)
In
50
56
90
Outl
40
39
69
Out 2
23
19
6
API
10
17
20.5
AP2
17
20
63
Flow
(gpm)
10.2
10.0
4.0
Totalizer
(gallons)
23330
23881
24520
Flow
(gallons)
0
551
639
Backwashed the system using approximately 60 gallon of clean water
47
o o
38
11
9 | 27
12.0
24638
Total
118
1308
Date: 11/29/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 3
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 um)
Target flow: 10 gpm
Target feed water turbidity: 10 NTU
Garnet (33 um)
Table A6: Turbidity Results during Challenge 3
Date & Time
11/29/07; 11:10
11/29/07; 12:10
11/29/07; 13:10
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
10.00
9.50
9.50
Effluent 1
5.00
4.80
5.20
Effluent 2
1.90
1.80
1.80
Blank
0.14
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
81.0
81.0
81.0
Table A7: Operational Parameters during Turbidity Challenge 3
Date&
Time
11/29/07;
11:10
11/29/07;
12:10
11/29/07;
14:10
Pressure (psi)
In
60
62
66
Outl
48
42
40
Out 2
33
28
25
API
12
20
26
AP2
15
14
15
Flow
(gpm)
10.0
10.0
9.2
Totalizer
(gallons)
25807
26330
27003
Total
Flow
(gallons)
0
523
673
1196
-------
Date: 12/04/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 4
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 um)
Target flow: 10 gpm
Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU
Garnet (33 um)
Table A8: Turbidity Results during Challenge 4
Date & Time
12/04/07; 12:40
12/04/07; 13:40
12/04/07; 14:40
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.80
4.80
4.60
Effluent 1
3.80
3.30
3.20
Effluent 2
2.10
1.60
1.30
Blank
0.12
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
56.3
66.7
71.7
Table A9: Operational Parameters during Turbidity Challenge 4
Date & Time
12/04/07; 12:40
12/04/07; 13:40
12/04/07; 14:40
Pressure (psi)
In
64
64
66
Outl
51
48
48
Out 2
31
30
28
API
13
16
18
AP2
20
18
20
Flow
(gpm)
10.0
9.0
9.0
Totalizer
(gallons)
30003
30458
31117
Total
Flow
(gallons)
0
455
659
1114
Date: 12/06/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 5
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (120-200 um)
Target flow: 10 gpm; 5 gpm
Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU
Garnet (33 um)
Table A10: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 5
Date & Time
12/06/07; 14:45
12/06/07; 16:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.60
5.00
Effluent 1
3.30
2.50
Effluent 2
1.20
0.9
Blank
0.13
-
Overall %
Removal
73.9
82.0
Table All: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Turbidity Challenge 5
Date & Time
12/06/07; 14:45
12/06/07; 16:45
Pressure (psi)
In
65
64
Outl
51
48
Out 2
28
36
API
14
16
AP2
23
12
Flow
(gpm)
9.2
5.0
Totalizer
(gallons)
-
-
Flow
(gallons)
-
-
Table A12: Turbidity Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 5
Date & Time
12/06/07; 14:45
12/06/07; 16:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.6
4.6
Effluent
2.3
2.3
Blank
0.13
-
Overall %
Removal
50.0
50.0
-------
Table A13: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Turbidity Challenge 5
Date & Time
12/06/07; 14:45
12/06/07; 16:45
Pressure (psi)
In
0.7
0.7
Out
0.0
0.0
API
0.7
0.7
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
Date: 12/12/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 6
Filter Configuration: Glass bead (70-100 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU
Table A14: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 6
Date & Time
12/12/07; 14:00
12/12/07; 15:00
12/12/07; 16:00
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
6.00
5.00
5.00
Effluent 1
3.40
2.40
2.30
Effluent 2
1.20
1.20
1.20
Blank
0.13
-
0.13
Overall %
Removal
80.0
76.0
76.0
Table A15: Turbidity Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 6
Date & Time
12/12/07; 14:00
12/12/07; 15:00
12/12/07; 16:00
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
6.00
5.00
5.00
Effluent
2.6
2.6
2.5
Blank
0.13
-
0.13
Overall %
Removal
56.7
48.0
50.0
Table A16: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Turbidity Challenge 6
Date & Time
12/12/07; 14:00
12/12/07; 15:00
12/12/07; 16:00
Pressure (psi)
In
54
55
57
Outl
44
44
44
Out 2
40
40
40
API
10
11
13
AP2
4
4
4
Flow
(gpm)
5.0
5.0
4.9
Totalizer
(gallons)
-
-
-
Flow
(gallons)
-
-
-
Date: 12/21/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 7
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU
Table A17: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 7
Date & Time
12/21/07; 11:30
12/21/07; 12:30
12/21/07; 13:30
12/21/07; 14:30
12/21/07; 15:30
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
5.4
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.0
Effluent 1
1.38
0.80
0.78
0.82
0.84
Effluent 2
0.68
0.58
0.56
0.60
0.62
Blank
0.14
-
0.15
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
87.4
80.0
86.3
85.0
84.5
-------
Table A18: Turbidity Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 7
Date & Time
12/21/07; 11:30
12/21/07; 12:30
12/21/07; 13:30
12/21/07; 14:30
12/21/07; 15:30
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
5.4
4.0
4.1
4.0
4.0
Effluent
3.0
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.6
Blank
0.14
-
0.15
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
44.5
57.5
58.5
60.0
60.0
Table A19: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Turbidity Challenge 7
Date&
Time
12/21/07;
11:30
12/21/07;
12:30
12/21/07;
13:30
12/21/07;
14:30
12/21/07;
15:30
Pressure (psi)
In
54
56
63
68
74
Outl
42
40
36
32
26
Out 2
38
35
32
28
22
API
12
16
27
36
48
AP2
4
5
4
4
4
Flow
(gpm)
5.0
4.9
4.4
4.0
3.9
Totalizer
(gallons)
657
998
1290
1532
1785
Total
Flow
(gallons)
0
341
292
242
253
1128
Table A20: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Turbidity Challenge 7
Date & Time
12/21/07; 11:30
12/21/07; 12:30
12/21/07; 13:30
12/21/07; 14:30
12/21/07; 15:30
Pressure (psi)
In
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
Out
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
API
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.8
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-------
Date: 01/22/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 8
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5 NTU
Table A21: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 8
Date & Time
01/22/08; 16:00
01/22/08; 17:00
01/22/08; 18:00
01/23/08; 10:00
01/23/08; 10:30
01/23/08; 11:30
01/23/08; 12:30
01/23/08; 13:30
01/23/08; 14:30
01/23/08; 15:30
01/23/08; 16:30
01/23/08; 17:30
01/23/08; 18:30
01/24/08; 13:00
01/24/08; 14:00
01/24/08; 15:00
01/24/08; 16:00
01/24/08; 17:00
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.1
4.3
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
5.5
5.7
4.5
4.3
5.0
4.9
5.0
5.0
Effl. 1
1.70
1.70
1.60
0.90
0.80
0.77
0.72
0.69
0.66
0.65
0.63
0.61
0.61
0.6
0.56
0.58
0.56
0.6
Effl. 2
1.15
0.94
0.9
0.76
0.64
0.60
0.60
0.55
0.54
0.53
0.51
0.50
0.50
0.5
0.48
0.48
0.44
0.44
Blank
0.13
-
0.13
0.14
-
0.13
-
0.13
0.14
-
0.14
-
0.14
0.14
-
0.14
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
72.0
78.2
78.0
81.0
85.0
85.0
86.3
86.5
91.2
90.8
91.2
88.9
88.4
90.4
90.2
91.2
91.2
Table A22: Turbidity Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 8
Time
01/22/08; 16:00
01/22/08; 17:00
01/22/08; 18:00
01/23/08; 10:00
01/23/08; 10:30
01/23/08; 11:30
01/23/08; 12:30
01/23/08; 13:30
01/23/08; 14:30
01/23/08; 15:30
01/23/08; 16:30
01/23/08; 17:30
01/23/08; 18:30
01/24/08; 13:00
01/24/08; 14:00
01/24/08; 15:00
01/24/08; 16:00
01/24/08; 17:00
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.10
4.30
4.10
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
6.00
5.50
5.70
4.50
4.30
5.00
4.90
5.00
5.00
Effluent
1.60
2.20
2.30
2.10
2.00
2.00
2.00
2.10
2.00
2.20
2.20
2.20
.85
.75
.75
.70
.60
.62
% Removal
61.0
48.9
43.9
47.5
50.0
50.0
50.0
47.5
50.0
65.0
60.0
61.4
58.9
59.3
65.0
65.3
68.0
67.6
-------
Table A23: Turbidity Results for Bag Filters during Challenge 8
Time
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
Effluent-Final
Overall % Removal
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 urn)
01/22/08; 16:00
01/22/08; 17:00
01/22/08; 18:00
01/23/08; 10:00
01/23/08; 10:30
01/23/08; 11:30
01/23/08; 12:30
01/23/08; 13:30
01/23/08; 14:30
01/23/08; 15:30
01/23/08; 16:30
01/23/08; 17:30
01/23/08; 18:30
1.15
0.94
0.90
0.76
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.55
0.54
0.53
0.51
0.51
0.50
0.48
0.48
0.50
0.60
0.35
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.40
0.38
0.38
0.38
58.3
48.9
44.5
21.0
41.7
33.3
33.3
27.3
25.9
24.5
25.5
25.5
24.0
Harmsco (1 um)
01/24/08; 13:00
01/24/08; 14:00
01/24/08; 15:00
01/24/08; 16:00
01/24/08; 17:00
0.50
0.48
0.48
0.44
0.44
0.44
0.38
0.42
0.42
0.41
12.0
20.8
12.5
4.5
7.3
Table A24: Operational Parameters for the R3f System during Challenge 8
Date & Time
01/22/08; 15:24
01/22/08; 16:24
01/22/08; 17:24
01/23/08; 18:24
01/23/08; 10:15
01/23/08; 11:15
01/23/08; 12:15
01/23/08; 13:15
01/23/08; 14:15
01/23/08; 15:15
01/23/08; 16:15
01/23/08; 17:15
01/23/08; 18:15
01/24/08; 12:35
01/24/08; 13:35
01/24/08; 14:35
01/24/08; 15:35
01/24/08; 16:35
01/24/08; 17:35
Pressure (Psi)
In
60
60
62
64
64
66
67
68
70
71
71
73
75
75
76
77
78
79
80
Outl
52
50
50
50
50
51
51
51
50
50
50
48
46
54
51
50
49
48
46
Out 2
48
48
47
46
43
43
43
43
42
41
40
36
34
44
42
41
40
39
38
API
8
10
12
14
14
15
16
17
20
21
21
25
29
21
25
27
29
31
34
AP2
4
2
3
4
7
8
8
8
8
9
10
12
12
10
9
9
9
9
8
Flow
(gpm)
5
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.9
4.8
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
Totalizer
(gallon)
2482
2776
3080
3390
3587
3860
4161
4466
4732
4973
5230
5490
5740
5815
6060
6300
6526
6755
6990
Total
Flow
(gallon)
0
294
304
310
197
273
301
305
266
241
257
260
250
75
245
240
226
229
235
4508
-------
Table A25: Operational Parameters for the Multimedia System during Challenge 8
Time
01/22/08; 15:24
01/22/08; 16:24
01/22/08; 17:24
01/23/08; 18:24
01/23/08; 10:15
01/23/08; 11:15
01/23/08; 12:15
01/23/08; 13:15
01/23/08; 14:15
01/23/08; 15:15
01/23/08; 16:15
01/23/08; 17:15
01/23/08; 18:15
01/24/08; 12:35
01/24/08; 13:35
01/24/08; 14:35
01/24/08; 15:35
01/24/08; 16:35
01/24/08; 17:35
Pressure (Psi)
In
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
Out
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
API
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Table A26: Operational Parameters for the Bag Filter during Challenge 8
Time
Pressure (Psi)
In
Out-Pre
Out-Final
API
AP2
Flow
(gpm)
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 um)
01/22/08; 15:24
01/22/08; 16:24
01/22/08; 17:24
01/23/08; 18:24
01/23/08; 10:15
01/23/08; 11:15
01/23/08; 12:15
01/23/08; 13:15
01/23/08; 14:15
01/23/08; 15:15
01/23/08; 16:15
01/23/08; 17:15
01/23/08; 18:15
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
8
5
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.9
4.8
4.6
4.6
4.4
4.2
4.1
4.0
Harmsco (Ijim)
01/24/08; 12:35
01/24/08; 13:35
01/24/08; 14:35
01/24/08; 15:35
01/24/08; 16:35
01/24/08; 17:35
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.0
4.0
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.9
-------
Table A27: TOC/DOC Results for the R3f System during Challenge 8
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effl. 1
Effl. 2
% Removal
Filter 1
Filter 2
Overall
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.39
4.45
4.36
4.33
4.33
4.33
0.7
2.7
0.7
0
1.4
2.7
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.48
4.45
4.32 1 4.34
4.25 | 4.21
3.5
4.5
0
0.9
3.5
5.4
Table A28: TOC/DOC Results for the Multimedia System during Challenge 8
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
% Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.39
4.45
4.33
4.30
1.4
3.4
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.48
4.45
4.38
4.25
2.3
4.5
Table A29: TOC/DOC Results for Bag Filters during Challenge 8
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent-pre
Effluent-Final
Overall %
Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.33
4.33
4.32
4.27
0.2
1.4
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
4.34
4.21
4.31
4.27
0.7
0
Table A30: HPC Results for R3f System during Challenge 8
Time
01/23/08;
12:00
01/23/08;
13:00
HPC/mL
Influent
1.0 x 105
4.9 x 104
Effluent 1
1.0 x 105
5.6 x 104
Effluent 2
>7.4 x 104
4.8 x 104
% Removal
Filter 1
-
-
Filter 2
-
-
Overall
0
2%
Table A31: HPC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 8
Time
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
HPC/mL
Influent
1.0 x 105
4.9 x 104
Effluent
1.7 x 105
8.8 x 104
% Removal
0
0
-------
Table A32: HPC Results for Bag Filters during Challenge 8
Time
01/23/08; 12:00
01/23/08; 13:00
HPC/mL
Influent
>7.4 x 104
4.8 x 104
Effluent
>7.4 x 104
5.1 x 104
% Removal
0
0
Table A33: Particle Counts (2-5 urn) Results for R3f System during Challenge 8
Time
01/23/08; 14:00
01/23/08; 15:30
Particle Counts/ mL
Influent
> 20000
> 20000
Effl. 1
960
1440
Effl. 2
750
1100
% Removal
Filter 1
>95.2
>92.8
Filter 2
21.9
23.6
Overall
>96.3
>94.5
Table A34: SDI10 Results for R3f System during Challenge 8
Time
01/25/08; 15:00
Silt Density Index 10 (SDI 10)
Influent
8.63
Effluent 1
8.15
Effluent 2
8.13
ASDI1
0.48
A SDI 2
0.02
Date: 01/29/07
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 9
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 10.0 NTU
Table A35: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 9
Date & Time
01/29/08; 14:14
01/29/08; 15:14
01/29/08; 16:14
01/29/08; 17:14
01/29/08; 18:14
01/30/08; 13:45
01/30/08; 14:45
01/30/08; 15:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
9.00
9.10
9.90
9.40
9.60
10.80
9.80
9.60
Effl. 1
1.20
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.10
1.10
1.10
1.10
Effl. 2
0.90
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.86
0.9
0.9
0.9
Blank
0.14
-
0.14
-
0.14
0.13
-
0.14
Overall %
Removal
90.0
89.0
90.4
90.4
91.0
91.7
90.8
90.6
Conducted Backwashing
01/31/08; 14:45
01/31/08; 15:45
01/31/08; 16:45
01/31/08; 17:30
6.50
6.50
6.30
6.30
0.80
0.75
0.70
0.70
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.14
-
0.14
-
91.3
91.3
91.0
91.0
-------
Table A36: Turbidity Results for the Multimedia System during Challenge 9
Time
01/29/08; 14:14
01/29/08; 15:14
01/29/08; 16:14
01/29/08; 17:14
01/29/08; 18:14
01/30/08; 13:45
01/30/08; 14:45
01/30/08; 15:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
9.00
9.10
9.90
9.40
9.60
10.80
9.80
9.60
Effluent
3.0
3.1
3.2
3.1
3.3
2.7
2.3
2.1
% Removal
66.7
66.0
67.7
67.0
65.6
75.0
76.5
78.2
Test Continued with Lower Feed Water Turbidity
01/31/08; 14:45
01/31/08; 15:45
01/31/08; 16:45
01/31/08; 17:30
6.50
6.50
6.30
6.30
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.2
78.5
81.5
81.0
81.0
Table A37: Turbidity Results for the Bag Filters during Challenge 9
Time
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
Effluent
Overall % Removal
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 jim)
01/29/08; 14:14
01/29/08; 15:14
01/29/08; 16:14
01/29/08; 17:14
01/29/08; 18:14
01/30/08; 13:45
01/30/08; 14:45
01/30/08; 15:45
0.90
1.00
0.95
0.90
0.86
0.90
0.90
0.90
0.48
0.60
0.60
0.60
0.58
0.56
0.60
0.62
46.7
40.0
36.8
33.3
32.6
37.8
33.3
31.1
Nanoceram
01/31/08; 14:45
01/31/08; 15:45
01/31/08; 16:45
0.57
0.57
0.57
0.25
0.45
0.44
56.1
21.0
22.8
Harmsco (Ijim)
01/31/08; 17:30
0.57
0.55
3.50
-------
Table A38: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Challenge 9
Date & Time
Pressure (Psi)
IN
01/29/08; 14:00
01/29/08; 15:00
01/29/08; 16:00
01/29/08; 17:00
01/29/08; 18:00
01/30/08; 13:40
01/30/08; 14:40
01/30/08; 15:40
01/30/08; 16:15
56
58
60
64
68
72
76
77
78
Outl
42
42
40
39
36
46
44
40
36
Out 2
38
38
36
34
31
42
39
35
32
API
14
16
20
25
32
26
32
37
42
AP2
4
4
4
5
5
4
5
5
4
Flow
(gpm)
5.0
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.2
4.8
4.4
4.1
3.9
Totalizer
(gallon)
7775
8080
8364
8639
8900
9126
9395
9650
9790
Flow
(gallon)
0
305
284
275
261
226
269
255
140
Conducted Backwashing
01/31/08; 14:25
01/31/08; 15:30
01/31/08; 16:30
01/31/08; 17:30
52
55
58
60
38
36
34
34
32
31
30
29
14
19
24
26
6
5
4
5
5.0
4.8
4.5
4.4
10036
10390
10666
10890
Total
246
354
276
224
3115
Table A39: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Challenge 9
Time
01/29/08; 14:00
01/29/08; 15:00
01/29/08; 16:00
01/29/08; 17:00
01/29/08; 18:00
01/30/08; 13:40
01/30/08; 14:40
01/30/08; 15:40
01/30/08; 16:15
Pressure (Psi)
In
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
Out
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
API
1.2
1.4
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.6
1.6
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Test Continued with Lower Feed Water Turbidity
01/31/08; 14:25
01/31/08; 15:30
01/31/08; 16:30
01/31/08; 17:30
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
0
0
0
0
1.4
1.4
1.6
1.6
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-------
Table A40: Operational Parameters for Bag Filters during Challenge 9
Time
Pressure (Psi)
In
Out-Pre
Out-Final
API
AP2
Flow
(gpm)
Rosedale PS 740 (0.5 um)
01/29/08; 14:00
01/29/08; 15:00
01/29/08; 16:00
01/29/08; 17:00
01/29/08; 18:00
01/30/08; 13:40
01/30/08; 14:40
01/30/08; 15:40
01/30/08; 16:15
7
8
8
8
9
10
10
11
11
7
8
8
8
9
10
10
11
11
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
8
8
8
9
10
10
11
11
5.0
5.0
4.8
4.6
4.2
4.8
4.4
4.1
3.9
Nanoceram
01/31/08; 14:45
01/31/08; 15:45
01/31/08; 16:45
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
5.0
4.8
4.5
Harmsco (Ijim)
01/31/08; 17:30
0
0
0
0
0
4.4
Table A41: TOC/DOC Results for R3f System during Challenge 9
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effl. 1
Effl. 2
% Removal
Filter 1
Filter 2
Overall
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
2.37
2.44
2.41
2.35
2.45
2.32
0
3.70
0
1.3
0
4.9
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
2.50
2.23
2.21
2.24
2.29
2.22
11.6
0
0
0.5
8.4
0.5
Table A42: TOC/DOC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 9
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
% Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
2.37
2.44
2.52
2.37
0
2.9
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
2.50
2.23
2.31
2.18
7.6
2.24
Table A43: TOC/DOC Results for Bag Filters during Challenge 9
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
% Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
01/30/08; 14:00a
01/31/08; 16:30b
2.45
2.32
2.44
2.26
0.4
2.6
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
01/30/08; 14:00a
01/31/08; 16:30b
2.29
2.22
2.26
2.58
1.3
0
aRosedale Filter
bNanoceram Filter
-------
Table A44: HPC Results for R3f System during Challenge 9
Time
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
HPC/mL
Influent
4.0 x 105
1.7 x 104
Effluent 1
1.2 x 105
4.0 x 103
Effluent 2
9.0 x 104
4.0 x 103
% Removal
Filter 1
70
76.5
Filter 2
25
0
Overall
77.5
76.5
Table A45: HPC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 9
Time
01/30/08; 14:00
01/31/08; 16:30
HPC/mL
Influent
4.0 x 105
1.7 x 104
Effluent
1.0 x 105
4.0 x 103
% Removal
75
76.5
Table A46: HPC Results for Bag Filter during Challenge 9
Time
01/30/08; 14:00a
01/31/08; 16:30b
HPC/mL
Influent
9.0 x 104
4.0 x 103
Effluent
6.0 x 104
4.0 x 103
% Removal
33.3
0
aRosedale Filter
bNanoceram Filter
Table A47: Particle Counts (2-5 urn) Results for R3f System during Challenge 9
Time
01/31/08; 16:00
01/31/08; 17:00
Particle Counts/mL
Influent
> 20000
> 20000
Effl. 1
2332
2309
Effl. 2
1794
1770
% Removal
Filter 1
>88.3
>88.5
Filter 2
23.0
23.3
Overall
>91.0
>91.2
Date: 08/19/08
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 10
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5.0 NTU
Chemical Coagulant: 4 mg/L Alum
Table A48: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 10
Date & Time
08/19/08; 14:20
08/19/08; 15:20
08/19/08; 16:20
08/19/08; 17:20
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.68
5.87
4.91
4.52
Effl. 1
1.26
1.26
0.25
0.39
Effl. 2
0.44
0.33
0.18
0.30
Blank
0.20
-
-
0.16
Overall %
Removal
90.6
94.4
96.3
93.4
-------
Table A49: Turbidity Results for the Multimedia System during Challenge 10
Time
08/20/08; 12:30
08/20/08; 13:20
08/20/08; 14:20
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
3.44
4.09
2.80
Effluent
0.30
0.26
0.45
% Removal
91.3
93.6
83.9
Table A50: Turbidity Results for the UF system during Challenge 10
Time
08/19/08; 14:20
08/19/08; 15:20
08/19/08; 16:20
08/19/08; 17:20
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
0.44
0.33
0.18
0.30
Effluent
0.15
0.16
0.14
0.14
Overall % Removal
65.9
51.5
22.2
53.3
Table A51: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Challenge 10
Date & Time
08/19/08; 13:55
08/19/08; 15:20
08/19/08; 16:20
08/19/08; 17:20
Pressure (Psi)
In
64
72
78
94
Outl
52
57
40
40
Out 2
46
46
40
40
API
12
15
38
54
AP2
6
11
2
0
Flow
(gpm)
4.7
3.5
3.3
4.0
Totalizer
(gallon)
25864
26156
26346
26616
Total
Flow
(gallon)
0
292
190
270
752
Table A52: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Challenge 10
Time
08/20/08; 12:00
08/20/08; 12:30
08/20/08; 13:20
08/20/08; 14:20
Pressure (Psi)
In
6.9
6.9
6.6
5.9
Out
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
API
1.9
1.9
1.6
0.9
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Table A53: Operational Parameters for UF system during Challenge 10
Time
08/19/08; 13:55
08/19/08; 15:20
08/19/08; 16:20
08/19/08; 17:20
Pressure (Psi)
In
42
42
36
36
Out
0
0
0
0
AP
42
42
36
36
Flow (gpm)
4.7
3.5
3.3
4.0
Table A54: Particle Counts (2-5 urn) Results for R3f System during Challenge 10
Time
08/19/08; 16:20
08/19/08; 17:20
Particle Counts/mL
Influent
> 20000
> 20000
Effl. 1
1060
940
Effl. 2
450
440
% Removal
Filter 1
>94.7
>95.3
Filter 2
57.5
53.2
Overall
>97.8
>97.8
-------
Date: 08/27/08
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 11
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5.0 NTU
Chemical Coagulant: 4 mg/L Alum
Table ASS: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 11
Date & Time
08/27/08; 12:30
08/27/08; 13:15
08/27/08; 14:15
08/27/08; 14:50
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
5.43
5.98
5.53
5.42
Effl. 1
0.25
0.22
0.28
0.18
Effl. 2
0.20
0.19
0.24
0.18
Blank
0.20
-
0.18
-
Overall %
Removal
96.3
96.8
95.7
96.7
Table ASS: Turbidity Results for the Multimedia System during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08; 15:00
08/27/08; 16:00
08/27/08; 17:00
08/27/08; 18:00
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
5.45
5.41
5.31
6.40
Effluent
0.30
0.26
0.29
0.30
% Removal
94.5
95.2
94.5
95.3
Table A56: Turbidity Results for the UF system during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08; 12:30
08/27/08; 13:15
08/27/08; 14:15
08/27/08; 14:50
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
0.20
0.19
0.24
0.18
Effluent
0.15
0.18
0.16
0.17
Overall % Removal
25.0
5.3
33.3
5.6
Table A57: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Challenge 11
Date & Time
08/27/08; 12:15
08/27/08; 13:15
08/27/08; 14:15
08/27/08; 15:15
Pressure (Psi)
In
70
74
79
96
Outl
60
56
38
28
Out 2
56
52
35
28
API
10
18
41
68
AP2
4
4
3
0
Flow
(gpm)
4.6
3.8
2.9
2.4
Totalizer
(gallon)
27376
27597
27805
27948
Total
Flow
(gallon)
0
221
208
143
572
Table ASS: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08; 15:00
08/27/08; 16:00
08/27/08; 17:00
08/27/08; 18:00
Pressure (Psi)
In
6.2
4.3
8.6
7.3
Out
5.0
2.0
7.0
5.0
AP
1.2
2.3
1.6
2.3
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
-------
Table A59: HPC Results for R3f System during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08;
14:15
HPC/mL
Influent
1.9 x 105
Effluent 1
5.7 x 104
Effluent 2
2.6 x 104
% Removal
Filter 1
70.0
Filter 2
54.4
Overall
86.3
Table A60: HPC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 11
Time
09/11/08; 16:20
HPC/mL
Influent
1.41 x 105
Effluent
2.2 x 104
% Removal
84.4
Table A61: HPC Results for UF filter during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08; 14:15
HPC/mL
Influent
2.6 x 104
Effluent
2.1 x 103
% Removal
91.9
Table A62: Particle Counts (2-5 urn) Results for R3f System during Challenge 11
Time
08/27/08; 14:15
08/27/08; 15:15
Particle Counts/mL
Influent
> 20000
> 20000
Effl. 1
840
800
Effl. 2
520
450
% Removal
Filter 1
>95.8
>96.0
Filter 2
38.1
43.8
Overall
>97.4
>97.8
Date: 09/11/08
Test ID: Turbidity Challenge 12
Filter Configuration: Garnet (33 um) + Garnet (33 um)
Target flow: 5 gpm for R3f and 3.0 gpm for Multimedia System
Target feed water turbidity: 5.0 NTU
Chemical Coagulant: 4 mg/L Alum
Table A63: Turbidity Results for R3f System during Challenge 12
Date & Time
09/11/08; 13:45
09/11/08; 14:45
09/11/08; 15:45
09/11/08; 16:45
09/11/08; 16:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
4.80
4.50
4.0
3.9
3.9
Effl. 1
0.24
0.26
0.26
0.27
0.33
Effl. 2
0.21
0.21
0.20
0.21
0.28
Blank
0.16
0.16
0.16
Overall %
Removal
95.6
95.3
95.0
94.6
94.6
Table A64: Turbidity Results for the Multimedia System during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08; 14:45
09/11/08; 15:45
09/11/08; 16:45
09/11/08; 17:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
6.1
6.0
6.6
6.6
Effluent
0.53
0.35
0.40
0.40
% Removal
91.3
94.2
93.9
93.9
-------
Table A65: Turbidity Results for the UF system during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08; 13:45
09/11/08; 14:45
09/11/08; 15:45
09/11/08; 16:45
09/11/08; 16:45
Turbidity (NTU)
Influent
0.21
0.21
0.20
0.21
0.28
Effluent
0.16
0.17
0.15
0.17
0.17
Overall % Removal
23.8
19.0
25.0
19.0
39.3
Table A66: Operational Parameters for R3f System during Challenge 12
Date & Time
09/11/08; 13:30
09/11/08; 14:30
09/11/08; 15:30
09/11/08; 16:30
09/11/08; 17:45
Pressure (Psi)
In
60
72
75
84
90
Outl
50
57
58
63
62
Out 2
45
52
58
62
62
API
10
15
17
21
28
AP2
5
5
0
1
0
Flow
(gpm)
5.2
4.6
4.0
3.8
3.4
Totalizer
(gallon)
28226
28535
28792
29044
29222
Total
Flow
(gallon)
0
309
257
252
178
996
Table A67: Operational Parameters for Multimedia System during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08; 14:15
09/11/08; 15:45
09/11/08; 16:45
08/27/08; 17:45
Pressure (Psi)
In
6.6
9.1
8.1
8.0
Out
5.5
7.0
6.0
6.0
AP
1.1
2.1
2.1
2.0
Flow (gpm)
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
Table A68: Operational Parameters for UF system during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08; 13:30
09/11/08; 14:30
09/11/08; 15:30
09/11/08; 16:30
09/11/08; 17:45
Pressure (Psi)
In
40
50
56
62
62
Out
0
0
0
0
0
AP
40
50
56
62
62
Flow (gpm
5.2
4.6
4.0
3.8
3.4
Table A69: HPC Results for R3f System during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08;
16:20
HPC/mL
Influent
9.9 x 104
Effluent 1
7.7 x 104
Effluent 2
5.1 x 104
% Removal
Filter 1
22.2
Filter 2
33.8
Overall
48.5
Table A70: HPC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 12
Time
09/11/08; 16:20
HPC/mL
Influent
3.0 x 104
Effluent
2.1 x 104
% Removal
30.0
Table A71: HPC Results for UF filter during Challenge 12
Time
08/19/08; 16:20
HPC/mL
Influent
5.1 x 104
Effluent
5.7x 103
% Removal
88.9
-------
Table A72: TOC/DOC Results for R3f System during Challenge 12
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effl. 1
Effl. 2
% Removal
Filter 1
Filter 2
Overall
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.38
1.33
1.33
3.6
0
3.6
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.46
1.31 | 1.32
10.3
0
9.6
Table A73: TOC/DOC Results for Multimedia System during Challenge 12
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
% Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.30
1.44
0
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.34
1.29
3.7
Table A74: TOC/DOC Results for Bag Filters during Challenge 12
Time
Concentration (mg/L)
Influent
Effluent
% Removal
Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.33
1.28
3.6
Dissolved Organic Carbon (DOC)
09/11/08; 16:20
1.32
1.31
0.80
-------