AERATION SYSTEMS :

21st century design

PRESENTED BY: Tom Frankel and Eric Duden

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
 Table of Contents
DIFFUSED AERATION PRESENTATION

A. Introduction
B. Diffuser Types & Bubble Size
C. Design Considerations & Tips
D. Energy vs. Cost, OPEX vs. CAPEX
E. Testing and Guarantees
F. Research and Development
G. Failure Gallery
H. Conclusion, Q & A
2
 Notables
 Frost & Sullivan 2012 North American Customer Value
Enhancement Award Winner
 Diversity Business 2012 Award Winner, Top 100 NY State
Business
 Inc 5000 Fastest Growing US Small Companies List, 2007
 Top 5 Worldwide Diffuser Manufacturer by Sales Volume.
 Most Innovative Diffuser Company, as measured by
patents/year
 Large installed user base in major cities – Johannesburg,
Jeddah, Bangkok, Dallas/Ft. Worth, Phoenix, Washington
3
 Aeration

Influent Aerated Grit Tank EQ Tank Selector Aeration Tanks Post Aeration Effluent

Aerobic Digester WAS

Aeration is used in Aerated Grit Chambers, EQ tanks, Channels, Aeration

Tanks, Post Aeration tanks, Sludge Storage Tanks and Aerobic Digesters.
4
 Terms

 BOD – biochemical oxygen demand, mass or conc.

 COD – chemical oxygen demand, mass or conc.
 NH3-N – Ammonia nitrogen, mass or conc.
 AOR – Actual Oxygen Requirement, mass/time
 SOR – Standard Oxygen Requirement, mass/time
 α factor – alpha factor (kLapw/kLacw)
 αF – alpha fouling factor is alpha taking into
consideration diffuser fouling
 DWP – Dynamic Wet Pressure, diffuser headloss,
mbar
5
 Diffuser Types & Bubble Size

-Characteristics of each type

-Typical application
-Role of Depth and Density

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
Diffuser Types – Coarse Bubble

7
Diffuser Types- Fine Bubble

8
Fine Bubble System At Work

9
ENERGY ESTIMATES FOR VARIOUS
AERATORS

Aerator SAE Clean Alpha DO Conc. Avg. SAE,

Type Water High SRT Process
System Water
KgO2/kWh Mg/l KgO2/kWh
Coarse 1.8 0.65 2.0 0.9
Bubble
Fine 4.0 0.60 2.0 1.9
Bubble

10
 EFFECT OF BUBBLE SIZE

 The smaller the bubbles the larger the A / V ratio.

 The smaller the bubbles the slower the bubble rise rate.

Smaller bubbles have greater surface area and longer

residence time in the liquid, both of which increase the
clean water oxygen transfer.

11
 A / V* RATIO VS BUBBLE SIZE

AREA/VOLUME RATIO VS BUBBLE SIZE

180
160
AREA/VOLUME RATIO

140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

BUBBLE DIAMETER (MM)

12
 Whittier Narrows Clean Water, 1979
Coarse bubble vs Fine Bubble, US EPA

WHITTIER NARROWS CLEAN WATER TEST RESULTS AT THE 15 FT DEPTH

STANDARD OXYGEN TRANSFER EFFICIENCY VS DELIVERED POWER DENSITY

NORTON
40
KENICS

PENTECH
35
FMC TUBE
STANDARD OXYGEN TRANSFER EFF (%)

SANITAIRE
30
BAUER

ENVIREX
25
FMC CB

20

15

10

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

DELIVERED POWER DENSITY (HP/1000 FT3)

13
 BENEFITS OF HIGH DENSITY
LAYOUTS

 High density layouts operate at lower diffuser fluxes

 As the diffuser flux (airflow / unit area) is decreased
bubble size decreases.

 High density layouts reduce density gradients

 As diffuser density is increased vertical liquid velocities
are decreased.

14
 SOTE AS A FUNCTION OF DIFFUSER DENSITY
SOTE VS DIFFUSER DENSITY
AT 1.0 SCFM

36

34

32
SOTE

30

28

26

24
0 5 10 15 20 25 30

DENSITY (%)

15
Impact of Diffuser Density

16
 FINE BUBBLE GRID –
SOTE VS DIFFUSER FLUX AND DENSITY

FINE BUBBLE GRID - 15.O FT SWD

SOTE VS DIFFUSER FLUX
40% 24.6 DIFFUSER
DENSITY
16.7% DIFFUSER
DENSITY
35% 12.55% DIFFUSER
DENSITY
9.85% DIFFUSER
30% DENSITY
SOTE

25%

20%

15%

10%
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0
DIFFUSER FLUX (SCFM/FT2)

17
Aeration System Design Considerations:

-Aeration Design Parameters

-Process Design & Simulation
- Equipment Selection
-Hydraulic, Mechanical and
- Temperature Considerations

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
 Design Philosophy

 Design for EFFICIENCY at Average Conditions

 (AFD270, typically 2.0 Sm3/hr/disc!)

 Design for CAPACITY at Peak Conditions

19
 Aeration Design Parameters

 BOD (and/or COD) concentration and WW flow/P.E. or

BOD mass loading and NH3-N loading OR
 SOR (OC) or AOR (αOC)
 Drawings or tank dimensions
 Process type and feed locations
 Site specific information such as WW temp, industrial
component to flow, I + I, past test results and
experience with diffusers and materials.

20
Factors Affecting Aeration
Performance

21
 Process Conditions

 Translating or correcting non-standard process parameters

from the field to known standard conditions is the key job of
the consultant. Manufacturers of aeration systems can
advise, but cannot be held accountable for this key
engineering task.
 Most often, three empirical parameters are used for this
translation, called the alpha factor, beta factor and theta
factor.
 The alpha factor accounts for nearly all of the difference in
oxygen mass transfer in process water vs. clean water and is
defined by the client, often with advice from SSI. Alpha-F is
the alpha factor, including a factor for the reduced
performance of fouled diffusers.
22
 Typical Processes

 Conventional Process – Activated Sludge (AS)

 Batch Process – SBR/CASS (sequencing batch
reactor/
Cyclical activated sludge system)
 Extended Aeration
 BNR (biological nutrient removal)
 MBR (membrane bioreactor)
 MBBR (moving bed bioreactor)/IFAS (integrated fixed
film AS)
23
 BNR

 Extensively used and popular

processes, known by a variety of
names, i.e. Bardenpho, A2O, VIP, etc…
 High alpha factors are common
 Tapered aeration is common to achieve
passive air distribution

24
 Role of Selectors

 Almost all modern activated sludge designs include a

selector. In the past 15 years this innovation has
become a standard feature.

 Anoxic selectors denitrify and reduce the growth of

filamentous organisms

 In both cases, data show they improve alpha factors.

25
Impact of MCRT on Oxygen Transfer
Tank Length (feet)
0 250 500 750 1,000

20.0 Nitrifying MCRT > 10 days

Field Oxygen 16.0

Transfer
Efficiency 12.0
(Fouled
Diffusers)
8.0
Conventional MCRT
~ 2 days
4.0

0 100 200 300

Tank Length (m)
26
Rosso and Stenstrom (2007)
 SBR

 Require higher diffuser densities than

conventional processes
 Alpha factor changes during the
process
 Used extensively and popular today
 Disc diffusers are best choice
 Jets are a poor choice due to energy.
27
 MBR

 High MLSS suppresses alpha, resulting

in more diffusers and higher air
requirements.
 Anti-fouling technologies on
membranes are particularly interesting.

28
 MBBR/IFAS

 Fixed media type often use fine bubble

diffusers. Floating media typically use
coarse bubble.
 In tanks with floating media, a diffuser
is an engineered solution, preferable to
a perforated pipe.

29
 Process Simulation

Aides a diffuser manufacturer in estimating oxygen uptake rates and DO

carry-over, as a service to the consultant in their design process.
30
Right Sizing and Proper Selection of
Equipment Produces Large Energy
Savings

31
 These blowers
provide air
which follows
the path of
least
resistance.
What are the
32
implications?
DO Control & Flow Balancing

33
 Hydraulic Conditions

 Keep a clearance around influent pipes

34
CFD Modeling, Velocity Prediction

35
 Mechanical Considerations

 Keep a clearance between mixers and diffusers.

Hydraulics can be hard to predict.
 Calculate the velocity gradient.

36
 Velocity in this SBR, but where?

Arrows indicate catastrophic plastic pipe & support failure sites in previously
installed systems in this tank. SSI replaced with a stainless steel piping
System in 2013.
37
High Temperature Considerations
 Hot climates
 Deep tanks
 Industrial Applications

Agropur, QC Canada

Maturin, Venezuela Phoenix, AZ

Front Royal, VA Front Royal, VA

EPDM PTFE

Broward County, FL
38
Other System Design Considerations

 Cooling Pipes
 Moisture Purge System
 Acid Dosing/Cleaning Systems
 Pressure Monitoring Systems
 Common Air Main or Dedicated Blowers
 Membrane, Pipe and Support Material Selection
 Foul Air
 Diffuser Taper and Aspect Ratio
 Boosters
39
 Operating Considerations

 Passive Air Distribution or Throttle

 DO Control System
 Cleaning methods and frequency or run to fail
 Diffuser replacement schedule or run to fail
 Nitrification, selectors, alpha factor, SRT
 Moisture Purge Usage
 Telemetry

40
 Energy Consumption

-Design
-Whole Life Cost/NPV

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
WWTP Energy Usage by %

42
 Don’t Scrimp on Adding Equipment
that Will Optimize Energy at Average
Conditions

$2.3
Million

$100,000
250 hp Blower Energy
Capital Cost 43 (20 years)
 Cost of Inefficiency

 OPEX far exceeds CAPEX for diffused aeration

systems
 Albuquerque, New Mexico, 288,000 m3/day municipal
WWTP, saves $2,000,000 over 10 years by selecting
better quality membrane (multilayer PTFE coated
EPDM) almost exclusively as a result of energy cost
and maintenance of efficiency

44
 Net Present Value of PTFE system,
Albuquerque, 285,000 m3/day STP

Interest Rate 4%

Initial Capital Cost Conventional PTFE

estimated, 1 SCFM/diffuser $1,000,000 $1,100,000
at AVG airflow rate

Ownership cost, 10 yrs 8,224,137 6,156,225

Calculated by NPV function
at 4% interest rate
including acquisition cost

10 yr savings with PTFE $2,067,911

estimated 45
 Benchmarking KPIs

Don’t judge an aeration system’s efficiency by SOTE alone.

Membrane headloss is a frequently overlooked critical factor.

46
 Increase in Energy Consumption as a
function of SOTE reduction
Increase in Energy Consumption [%]

When SOTE

Increase in Headloss
decreases and
headloss increases
by modest amounts,
wire to water energy
consumption
can easily increase
30%+

Reduction in SOTE [%]

47
 Rate of Headloss Increase of EPDM
and Silicone Diffusers

Plan for a headloss

increase, however
Headloss [mbar]

PTFE coated EPDM

membranes have
shown promise in
reducing the
increase.

Weeks after Installation [-]

48
Maintenance cost of low CAPEX spend

 Wrong pipe, Wrong supports, Wrong joints, Wrong

membrane.

49
Not all plastic is the same

 Nearly all diffusers have a

plastic housing and black
membrane. Production of
most components are out-
sourced by major vendors.
 It looks easier to make a good
diffuser than it actually is.
 Does your manufacturer have
a quality system?

50
Need to Know, May Need to Ask

 Wire/water efficiency including diffuser headloss

 Method of membrane or diffuser replacement and/or
repair
 Support anchoring hardware included or not?
 Oxygen transfer results based on tests at similar TDS
concentration as wastewater or normalized to 1000 mg/l
TDS?
 Oxygen transfer results from a column or full scale ASCE
tank and is it independently certified?
 Does your vendor have a experienced process and mech.
engineers who can catch errors before they occur?

51
 Lifetime and Maintenance

-Predicted Lifetimes
-Creep

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
 Typical Product Lifetimes

 PVC piping – 15-20 years with nominal 5mm wall

thickness. Failure mode: brittle and/or deformed.

 Membranes – 10 years with EPDM in cold climate, 5

years in hot climate, 10-20 years with PTFE in any
climate. Failure mode: loss of efficiency, creep,
clogged, torn.

 Stainless steel piping and supports – indefinite in

many places however, caution with desalinated
drinking water or seaside locations. Failure mode:
pitting or crevice corrosion.
53
 The 5 Year Studies

 Chicago Fox Metro – AFD350 PTFE

 Tacoma Chambers Creek – AFD270 PTFE
 Dallas N. Texas Muni – AFD270 PTFE

 Maintenance of Efficiency
 Low rates of fouling
 Maintenance of physicals,
mass and uniform bubble pattern
 Like-New performance

54
 Creep Effect on SOTE
6% Creep results in >25% permanent loss of efficiency.

55
Creep Effect on SOTE, PTFE
In the absence of permanent physical changes, SOTE is restored to NEW

56
 Testing and Guarantees

-Shop SOTE/Column Test/Off Gas

-Forensic Diffuser Analysis

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
 Test Reports
Reputable manufacturers will quote ASCE/ATV standards and provide proof of performanc

Reputable testing firms will correct to

1000 mg/l TDS, not 2000 mg/l TDS

58
 Typical Testing Specs

 Material Properties, ASTM D412-06, D2240-05, D1784,

A-778
 ASCE 2006
 ATV M209
 ASCE 1996
 Uniform mixing
 Pilot testing
 Forensic Diffuser Analysis

59
Manufacturer’s Quality System,
Production ISO 9001:2008

60
Current Research and Development:

-Academia
-Manufacturers
- α and α F factor
-Telemetry

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
Researchers Active in Diffused Air

 David Redmon, Redmon Engineering, USA

 Prof. Mike Stenstrom, UCLA, USA
 Prof. Diego Rosso, UC Irvine, USA
 Prof. Dr.-Ing. Martin Wagner, TU Darmstadt
 Dr-Ing. Sylvie Gillot, IRSTEA, France
 Dr-Ing. Michaela Hunze, Flow-Concept, Germany
 SSI R & D Team, US/UK/KR

62
Example of Perfomance as a Function
of Diffuser Age &Cleaning

63
Range of Alpha Factors in Treatment
Plants

64
 Technology & Experience

 US Patents 8241549, 6811148, 7674514, 8376325,

7396499, multiple European Patents as well

 Pending patents related to a Telemetry System and a

new Tube Diffuser design.

 Wealth of experience and tribal knowledge within

SSI – very little turnover

65
 TYPICAL FAILURES

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems
Panel Diffuser Clogging – how do you
replace the membrane?

67
Plastic & Rubber Failure
SSI rescues competitor’s installation with PTFE membranes

68
Tube membranes in front need to be
changed

69
Mechanical connection failure

70
Silicone Failures

71
Poor quality membranes

72
Broken Piping – unpredictable
hydrualics

73
 Conclusion and Q & A

-Manufacturer as a partner
-Technology costs but pays returns
-The devil is in the details of design

SSI – Manufacturers of Fine Bubble and Coarse Bubble

Aeration Systems