Sunday, February 15, 2015

Selection of Tray Type (Tower Internal)

Tower Internal

Selection of Tray Type

The principal factors to consider when comparing the performance of bubble-cap, sieve and valve trays are: cost, capacity, operating range, efficiency and pressure drop.

1.    Cost


Bubble-cap trays are appreciably more expensive than sieve or valve trays. The relative cost will depend on the material of construction used; for mild steel the ratios, bubble-cap: valve: sieve, are approximately 3.0:1.5:1.0. However, comparative quotations over the last few years show the relative costs in dollars per square foot of tray area to be: bubble-cap tray, 20; flexitray, 14; Uniflux, 10; sieve, 10; and turbo grid, 10. These are costs before installation.

2.    Capacity


There is little difference in the capacity rating for the three types (the diameter of the column required for a given flow-rate); the ranking is sieve, valve, and bubble-cap.

3.    Operating range


This is the most significant factor. By operating range is meant the range of vapour and liquid rates over which the plate will operate satisfactorily (the stable operating range). Some flexibility will always be required in an operating plant to allow for changes in production rate, and to cover start-up and shut-down conditions. The ratio of the highest to the lowest flow rates is often referred to as the "turn-down" ratio. Bubble-cap trays have a positive liquid seal and can therefore operate efficiently at very low vapour rates.

Sieve trays rely on the flow of vapour through the holes to hold the liquid on the tray and cannot operate at very low vapour rates, but, with good design, sieve trays can be designed to give a satisfactory operating range; typically, from 50 per cent to 120 per cent of design capacity.

Valve trays are intended to give greater flexibility than sieve trays at a lower cost than bubble-caps.

4.    Efficiency


The Murphree efficiency of the three types of trays will be virtually the same when operating over their design flow range and no real distinction can be made between them.

5.    Pressure Drop


The pressure drop over the trays can be an important design consideration, particularly for vacuum columns.  The trays pressure drop will depend on the detailed design of the tray but, in general, sieve plates give the lowest pressure drop, followed by valves, with bubble-caps giving the highest.
Summary


Sieve trays are the cheapest and are satisfactory for most applications.Valve trays should be considered if the specified turn-down cannot be met with sieve trays. Bubble-caps should only be used where very low vapor (gas) rates have to be handled and a positive liquid seal is essential at all flow-rates

Types of Trays (Tower Internal)

Tower Trays

Types of Trays:

Fractional distillation requires mass and heat transfer between vapor and liquid flowing counter currently through a fractionating tower. A large number of devices to ensure a more or less thorough contact between the rising vapors and down-coming liquid had been developed. Bubble-cap trays, valve trays, sieve trays, and grid trays are examples of devices.

A. Trays Having Separate Liquid Down comers

The great majority of commercial fractionations are carried out in columns where the liquid flows horizontally across each tray. The liquid contacts the rising vapor and is separated from the vapor before flowing through down comers onto the tray below. In nearly all cases, the down comers are segmental parts of the column, and are provided with a liquid-overflow weir to assure a minimum height of liquid on each tray. Inlet weirs for the liquid entering onto a tray are used in some designs. Various types of trays with separate liquid down comers which are in more common use today are illustrated.

Bubble-Cap Trays are so widely used in the petroleum and chemical industries that they are generally considered to be "the standard." All new types of trays are compared with "a bubble-cap tray,"

The outstanding characteristic of a will designed bubble-cap tray is probably its ability to perform satisfactorily over wide ranges of liquid and vapor rates. In which the vapor passes up through short pipes, called risers, covered by a cap with a serrated edge, or slots. The bubble-cap tray is the traditional, oldest type of cross-flow tray, and many different designs have been developed. Standard cap designs would now be specified for most applications.

The most significant feature of the bubble-cap is that the use of risers to ensure that a level of liquid is maintained on the tray at all vapours flow-rates.

Although there are many styles and dimensions of caps (Figure 3.4) in use, the round bell shaped bubble-cap is quite practical and efficient (Figure 3.5).

Dimensions, it is available in sizes of 3,4,5,6 and 7 inches, but the most popular and most adaptable size is about 4 inches O.D. The 3-inch and 6-inch are also in common use for the smaller and larger diameter towers.

Slots are the working part of the cap. Slots are usually rectangular of trapezoidal in shape. The rectangular slots give slightly greater capacity while the trapezoidal slots gives slightly better performance at low vapor rates.

Shroud Ring, it is recommended to give structural strength to the prongs or ends of the cap.



Sieve or Perforated have been in use longer than bubble-cap trays but have not received the same wide acceptance.  This is partly because of inadequate performance data with respect to liquid and vapor capacities. Recently more attention has been given to sieve trays, and it appears as though they will find increased use by industry.  The vapor passes up through perforations in the tray and the liquid is retained on the tray by the vapor flow. There is no positive vapor liquid seal, and at low flow rates liquid will "weep" through the holes, reducing the tray efficiency.  The perforations are usually small holes, but larger holes and slots are used.

Valve Trays (Floating Cap) Valve trays are proprietary designs.  They are essentially sieve trays with large diameter holes covered by movable flaps, which lift as the vapor flow increases.

As the area for vapor flow varies with the flow rate, valve trays can operate efficiently at lower flow rates than sieve trays the valves closing at low vapour rates. Is somewhere between a bubble-cap and a sieve tray in operating principle. It is a bubble-cap tray where the vapor, makes one 90-degree turn to enter the liquid horizontally, there are no risers, and the caps have no teeth. It can also be considered as a modified sieve tray where the vapor emerges horizontally into the liquid instead of vertically, and the perforations have variable area.

Float-Valve Trays is a recent development worthy of consideration, although there is very little published information about its operation. It is a valve-type tray with floating rectangular caps positioned by end-brackets. One edge, the heavy edge, of each cap is turned upward 90 degrees. At low vapor rates the light edge of each cap opens first, and at higher vapor rates the heavy edge opens. Like the Flexitray, it can be considered as somewhere between a bubble-cap and a sieve tray in operating principle.

Uniflux Trays is a third newcomer to the field.  It has had considerable industrial use already, but there is very little published information about its operation. It is a bubble-cap tray, modified so as to reduce fabrication costs considerably and to have possible other advantages. The tray is made of a number of S-sections, with the vapor making a 180-degree turn between the riser and the cap, and then emerging from one side (the downstream side) of the cap, after a 90-degree turn through the cap slots. In this way the vapor emergence should help the liquid flow across the tray, reducing hydraulic gradient.




B. Trays Having No Liquid Down comers


Traditionally, fractionating columns that have no liquid down comers have been packed columns, where the ascending vapor contacted the descending liquid in true countercurrent action. Recent developments have substituted perforated trays, where the liquid and vapor both pass through the same openings, for the continuous packing. There is not the same degree of differential contacting here as for the continuously packed columns, but there are many possible advantages for this modified "packing," compared with either conventional packed columns or the conventional tray columns.

Turbo grid Trays consists of a flat grid of parallel slots extending over the entire cross sectional of the column. The slots can be stamped perforations in a flat metal plate, or can consist of the spaces between horizontal bars. Liquid level on each tray is maintained by dynamic balance of liquid and vapor rates. The Turbo grid tray has had considerable industrial applications already, but there is little published information about its operation.

Ripple Trays is the latest arrival in the field of liquid-vapor contacting devices.  It is made by corrugating a conventional sieve plate into sinusoidal waves. The perforations extend over the entire cross sectional area of the column. Liquid level is maintained on each tray by a dynamic balance of the fluid flows, being a very recent development, there is little published information about its use and operation.







Choice of Trays or Packed Tower

 The choice between a tray and backed tower for a particular application can only be made with complete assurance by costing each design.  However, this will not always be worthwhile, or necessary, and the choice can usually be made, on the basis of experience by considering main advantages and disadvantages of each type; which are listed below:

  1. Plate towers can be designed to handle a wider range of liquid and gas flow-rates than packed towers.
  2. Packed towers are not suitable for very low liquid rates.
  3. The efficiency of a tray can be predicted with more certainty than the equivalent term for packing (HETP or HTU).
  4. Plate towers can be designed with more assurance than packed towers. There is always some doubt that good liquid distribution can be maintained throughout a packed tower under all operating conditions, particularly in large towers. 
  5. It is easier to make provision for the withdrawal of side-streams from tray towers; coils can be installed on the trays. 
  6. It is easier to make provision for the withdrawal of side streams from tray towers.
  7. If the liquid causes fouling, or contains solids, it is easier to make provision for cleaning in a tray tower; man ways can be installed on the trays. With small diameter towers it may be cheaper to use packing and replace the packing when it becomes fouled.
  8. For corrosive liquids a packed tower will usually be cheaper than the equivalent plate tower.
  9. The liquid hold-up is appreciably lower in a packed tower than a plate tower. This can be important when the inventory of toxic or flammable liquids needs to be kept as small as possible for safety reasons.
  10. Packed towers are more suitable for handling foaming systems.
  11. The pressure drop per equilibrium stage (HETP) can be lower for packing than plates; and packing should be considered for vacuum towers.
  12. Packing should always be considered for small diameter towers, say less than 0.6m, where trays would be difficult to install, and expensive.

Biomass-to-liquids (BTL)

Biomass-to-liquids (BTL)

Biomass-to-liquids (BTL) is a process used to convert waste biomass, for example from the processing of wood, corn, sugar or other agricultural or municipal waste into high quality liquid fuels that are compatible with current fuelling infrastructure.
BTL fuels offer substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and in some cases are able to deliver lifecycle carbon reductions of up to 90% (dependent on the feedstock) compared with conventional fuels.
The BTL process involves two main operations: production of a synthesis gas (syngas), a mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide, using a gasifier, followed by the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process. The resulting product can then be upgraded to produce a wide range of high quality finished products including ultra-clean diesel and jet fuel that offer better performance than their petroleum-based equivalents.
Because biomass feedstock is not very dense, it is not economic to transport it over long distances to centralised production facilities. Velocys' FT microchannel technology provides a practical, economical and environmentally-friendly option for producing ultra-clean liquid biofuels.
Velocys technology was successfully demonstrated in a BTL environment in 2010 in Güssing, Austria. The microchannel FT reactor successfully operated despite fluctuating conditions and repeated upsets of the gasifier.
Reference

Gas-to-liquids (GTL)

Gas-to-liquids (GTL)

The gas-to-liquids (GTL) process involves two main operations: the conversion of natural gas into a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen known as syngas via processes such as steam methane reforming (SMR) or autothermal reforming (ATR), followed by the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process to convert the syngas into paraffinic hydrocarbons. The products of the FT process can be blended with naturally occurring crude oil to provide an economic route to market, or upgraded to produce a wide range of high quality finished products including ultra-clean diesel, kerosene (jet fuel), naphtha, bases for synthetic lubricants and waxes. Products of the FT process offer significantly better performance than their petroleum-based equivalents.

GTL
Conventional GTL versus smaller scale GTL
In conventional GTL plants the Fischer-Tropsch (FT) process is carried out in very large fixed-bed or slurry-bed reactors. These are designed to work on a very large scale. They require a capital investment of $3 billion or more, and are only economically viable for plants producing at least 30,000 barrels per day (bpd). Only about 6% of the world's known gas fields are large enough to sustain a GTL plant of this size.
Smaller scale GTL, enabled by Velocys technology, provides a cost-effective way to take advantage of smaller scale and remote gas resources. Our technology makes it possible to build GTL plants that process 150 – 1500 million m3 per year (15 – 150 million cubic feet per day) of gas, producing 1,500 – 15,000 bpd of liquid fuels. Capital costs, operating costs and plant size are all significantly reduced relative to conventional GTL. The success of Velocys' smaller scale GTL technology lies in the combination of our microchannel reactors and our super-active catalysts that together, significantly intensify the FT process.
Microchannel reactor
Benefits of smaller scale GTL
Smaller scale GTL is suitable for use at many more locations and on many more gas fields than conventional GTL. It offers an attractive way to improve the economics and unlock production of a range of unconventional gas resources including shale gas and stranded gas located far from existing pipeline infrastructure and markets. For refiners, it can provide diversity and security of supply, and can be used to make more valuable products.
Smaller scale GTL also provides an alternative to the flaring of associated gas, thereby unlocking oil production in fields that would otherwise be constrained by the regulation or taxation of flaring.
Thanks to their modular construction methods, plants based on the use of microchannel reactors are very flexible, and can be easily scaled to match the size of the resource. The modules are of a standardised designed and are shop-fabricated in skid-mounted units, making them easier to transport to remote locations or to integrate with existing facilities on refinery or gas-processing sites. This construction approach reduces the costs and risks associated with building plants in remote locations.

Reference

Friday, February 13, 2015

Water Treatment

We may organize water treatment technologies into three general areas: Physical
Methods, Chemical Methods, and Energy Intensive Methods. Physical methods of
Wastewater treatment represents a body of technologies that we refer largely to as
Solid-liquid separations techniques, of which filtration plays a dominant role.
Filtration technology can be broken into two general categories - conventional and
Non-conventional. This technology is an integral component of drinking water and
Wastewater treatment applications. It is, however, but one unit process within a
Modern water treatment plant scheme, whereby there are a multitude of equipment
And technology options to select from depending upon the ultimate goals of
Treatment. To understand the role of filtration, it is important to make distinctions
Not only with the other technologies employed in the cleaning and purification of
Industrial and municipal waters, but also with the objectives of different unit
Processes.
Chemical methods of treatment rely upon the chemical interactions of the
Contaminants we wish to remove from water, and the application of chemicals that
Either aid in the separation of contaminants from water, or assist in the destruction
Or neutralization of harmful effects associated with contaminants. Chemical
Treatment methods are applied both as stand-alone technologies, and as an integral
Part of the treatment process with physical methods.
Among the energy intensive technologies, thermal methods have a dual role in
Water treatment applications. They can be applied as a means of sterilization, thus
Providing high quality drinking water, and/or these technologies can be applied to the processing of the solid wastes or sludge, generated from water treatment
Applications. In the latter cases, thermal methods can be applied in essentially the
Same manner as they are applied to conditioning water, namely to sterilize sludge
Contaminated with organic contaminants, and/or these technologies can be applied
To volume reduction. Volume reduction is a key step in water treatment operations, because ultimately there is a tradeoff between polluted water and hazardous solid waste.
Energy intensive technologies include electrochemical techniques, which by and
Large are applied to drinking water applications. They represent both sterilization
And conditioning of water to achieve a palatable quality.
 All three of these technology groups can be combined in water treatment, or they
May be used in select combinations depending upon the objectives of water
Treatment. Among each of the general technology classes, there is a range of both
Hardware and individual technologies that one may select from. The selection of not only the proper unit process and hardware from within each technology group, but the optimum combinations of hardware and unit processes from the four groups depends upon such factors as:
  1. How clean the final water effluent from our plant must be.
  2. The quantities and nature of the influent water we need to treat.
  3. The physical and chemical properties of the pollutants we need to remove Or render neutral in the effluent water.
  4. The physical, chemical and thermodynamic properties of the solid wastes Generated from treating water.
  5. The cost of treating water, including the cost of treating, processing and Finding a home for the solid wastes.

If we start with the first technology group, then filtration should be thought of as
Both a unit process and a unit operation within a water treatment facility. As a
Separate unit process, its objective is quite clear: namely, to remove suspended
Solids. When we combine this technology with chemical methods and apply
Sedimentation and clarification (other physical separation methods), we can extend
The technology to removing dissolved particulate matter as well. The particulate
Matter may be biological, microbial or chemical in nature, as such, the operation
Stands alone within its own block within the overall manufacturing train of the
Plant. Examples of this would be the roughening and polishing stages of water
Treatment. In turn, we may select or specify specific pieces of filtration equipment
For these unit processes.

The following are some of the major contaminants that are of concern in water purification applications, as applied to drinking water sources, derived from groundwater:

Heavy Metals - Heavy metals represent problems in terms of groundwater
Pollution. The best way to identify their presence is by a lab test of the water. There are concerns of chronic exposure to low levels of heavy metals in drinking water.

Turbidity - Turbidity refers to suspended solids, i.e. muddy water, is very turbid.
Turbidity is undesirable for three reasons:
  •          aesthetic considerations,
  •         solids may contain heavy metals, pathogens or other contaminants
  •          turbidity decreases the effectiveness of water treatment techniques by Shielding pathogens from chemical or thermal damage, or in the case of UV (ultra violet) treatment, absorbing the UV lights itself.
Organic Compounds - Water can be contaminated by a number of organic
Compounds, such as chloroform, gasoline, pesticides, and herbicides from a variety of industrial and agricultural operations or applications. These contaminants must be identified in a lab test. It is unlikely groundwater will suddenly become contaminated, unless a quantity of chemicals is allowed to enter a well or penetrating the aquifer. One exception is when the aquifer is located in limestone.
Not only will water flow faster through limestone, but the rock is prone to forming
Vertical channels or sinkholes that will rapidly allow contamination from surface
Water. Surface water may show great variations in chemical contamination levels
Due to differences in rainfall, seasonal crop cultivation, and industrial effluent
Levels. Also, some hydrocarbons (the chlorinated hydrocarbons in particular) form
A type of contaminant that is especially troublesome. These are a group of
Chemicals known as dense nonaqueous phase liquids, or DNAPLs. These include
Chemicals used in dry cleaning, wood preservation, asphalt operations, machining,
And in the production and repair of automobiles, aviation equipment, munitions, and electrical equipment. These substances are heavier than water and they sink quickly into the ground.
This makes spills of DNAPLs more difficult to handle than spills of petroleum products. As with petroleum products, the problems are caused by groundwater dissolving some of the compounds in these volatile substances. These compounds can then move with the groundwater flow. Except in large cities, drinking water is rarely tested for these contaminants.
 Disposal of chemicals that have low water solubility and a density greater than water result in the formation of distinct areas of pure residual contamination in soils and groundwater. These chemicals are typically solvents and are collectively referred to as Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs). Because of their relatively high density, they tend to move downward through soils and groundwater, leaving small amounts along the migratory pathway, until they reach an impermeable layer where they collect in discrete pools.
 Once the DNAPLs have reached an aquitard they tend to move laterally under the influence of gravity and to slowly dissolve into the groundwater, providing a long-term source for low level contamination of groundwater.
 Because of their movement patterns DNAPL contamination is difficult to detect, characterize and remediate.

Pathogens - These include protozoa, bacteria, and viruses. Protozoa cysts are the
largest pathogens in drinking water, and are responsible for many of the waterborne disease cases in the U.S. Protozoa cysts range is size from 2 to 15 µm, but can squeeze through smaller openings. In order to insure cyst filtration, filters with an absolute pore size of l µm or less should be used.

The two most common protozoa pathogens are Giardia Zamblia (Giardia) and Cryptosporidium (Crypto). Both organisms have caused numerous deaths in recent years in the U.S. and Canada, the deaths occurring in the young and elderly, and the sick and immune compromised.

Bacteria are smaller than protozoa and are responsible for many diseases, such as
Typhoid fever,' cholera, diarrhea, and dysentery. Pathogenic bacteria range in size
From 0.2 to 0.6 µm, and a 0.2 µm filter is necessary to prevent transmission.
Contamination of water supplies by bacteria is blamed for the cholera epidemics,
Which devastate undeveloped countries from time to time.

Viruses are the 2nd most problematic pathogen, behind protozoa. As with protozoa, most waterborne viral diseases don't present a lethal hazard to a healthy adult.
Waterborne pathogenic viruses range in size from 0.020-0.030 µm, and are too
Small to be filtered out by a mechanical filter. All waterborne enteric viruses
Affecting humans occur solely in humans, thus animal waste doesn't present much
Of a viral threat. At the present viruses don't present a major hazard to people
Drinking surface water in the U.S., but this could change in a survival situation as
The level of human sanitation is reduced. Viruses do tend to show up even in remote areas, so a case can be made for eliminating them now.

 INTRODUCING THE PHYSICAL TREATMENT METHODS

The following technologies are among the most commonly used physical methods
Of purifying water:

Heat Treatment - Boiling is one way to purify water of all pathogens. Most experts feel that if the water reaches a rolling boil it is safe. A few still hold out for
Maintaining the boiling for some length of time, commonly 5 or 10 minutes, plus
An extra minute for every l000 feet of elevation. One reason for the long period of
Boiling is to inactivate bacterial spores (which can survive boiling), but these spore are unlikely to be waterborne pathogens. Water can also be treated at below boiling temperatures, if contact time is increased. Commercial units are available for
Residential use, which treat 500 gals of water per day at an estimated cost of
$1/1000 gallons for the energy. The process is similar to milk pasteurization, and
Holds the water at 161˚ F for 15 seconds. Heat exchangers recover most of the
Energy used to warm the water. Solar pasteurizers have also been built that can heat three gallons of water to 65 ˚C and hold the temperature for an hour. A higher temperature could be reached, if the device was rotated east to west during the day to follow the sunlight. Regardless of the method, heat treatment does not leave any form of residual to keep the water free of pathogens in storage.

Reverse Osmosis - Reverse osmosis forces water, under pressure, through a
Membrane that is impermeable to most contaminants. The membrane is somewhat
Better at rejecting salts than it is at rejecting non-ionized weak acids and bases and
Smaller organic molecules (molecular weight below 200). In the latter category are
Undissociated weak organic acids, amines, phenols, chlorinated hydrocarbons, some pesticides and low molecular weight alcohols. Larger organic molecules and all pathogens are rejected.
Of course, it is possible to have an imperfection in the membrane that could allow molecules or whole pathogens to pass through. Using reverse osmosis to desalinate seawater requires considerable pressure (1000 psi) to operate.
Reverse osmosis filters are available that will use normal municipal or private water pressure to remove contaminate from water. The water produced by
Reverse osmosis, like distilled water, will be close to pure H2O.
Therefore mineral intake may need to be increased to compensate for the normal mineral content of water in much of the world.

Distillation - Distillation is the evaporation and condensation of water to purify
Water. Distillation has two disadvantages:
1)    A large energy input is required.
2)    If simple distillation is used, chemical contaminants with boiling points below
Water will be condensed along with the water. Distillation is most commonly used
To remove dissolved minerals and salts from water.

Micro filters - Micro filters are small-scale filters designed to remove cysts,
Suspended solids, protozoa, and, in some cases, bacteria from water. Most filters
Use a ceramic or fiber element that can be cleaned to restore performance as the
Units are used. Most units and almost all made for camping use a hand pump to
Force the water through the filter. Others use gravity, either by placing the water
To be filtered above the filter (e.g. the Katadyn drip filter), or by placing the filter
In the water, and running a siphon hose to a collection vessel located below the
Filter (e.g. Katadyn siphon filter).
Microfilters are the only method, other than boiling, to remove Cryptosporidia. Microfilters do not remove viruses. Despite this, the Katadyn microfilter has seen considerable use around the world by NATO-member militaries, and other aid organizations.
Microfilters share a problem with charcoal filter in having bacteria grow on the filter medium. Some handle this by impregnating the filter element with silver, such as the Katadyn,
Others advise against storage of a filter element after it has been used. Many
Microfilters may include silt prefilters, activated charcoal stages, or an iodine resin.
Most filters come with a stainless steel prefilter, but other purchased or improvised
Filters can be added to reduce the loading on the main filter element. Allowing time for solids to settle, and/or prefiltering will also extend filter life.
 Iodine matrix filters will kill viruses that will pass through the filter, and if a charcoal stage is used it will remove much, of the iodine from the water. Charcoal filters will also remove other dissolved natural or manmade contaminates. Both the iodine and the charcoal stages do not indicate when they reach their useful life, which is much shorter than the filter element.

Slow Sand Filter - Slow sand filters pass water slowly through a bed of sand.
Pathogens and turbidity are removed by natural die-off, biological action, and
Filtering. Typically the filter will consist of a layer of sand, then a gravel layer in
Which the drain pipe is embedded. The gravel doesn't touch the walls of the filter,
So that water can't run quickly down the wall of the filter and into the gravel.
Building the walls with a rough surface also helps. A typical loading rate for the
Filter is 0.2 meters /hour day (the same as 0.2 m3/m2 of surface area). The filter can be cleaned several times before the sand has to be replaced. Slow sand filters
Should only be used for continuous water treatment. If a continuous supply of raw
Water can't be insured (say, using a holding tank), then another method should be chosen. It is also important for the water to have as low turbidity (suspended solids) as possible. Turbidity can be reduced by changing the method of collection (for example, building an infiltration gallery, rather than taking water directly from a creek), allowing time for the material to settle out (using a raw water tank),
Prefiltering or flocculation (adding a chemical, such as alum to cause the suspended material to floc together.) The SSF filter itself is a large box. The walls should be as rough as possible to reduce the tendency for water to run down the walls of the filter, bypassing the sand. The bottom layer of the filter is a gravel bed, in which a slotted pipe is placed to drain off the filtered water.

Activated Charcoal Filter - Activated charcoal filters water through adsorption;
Chemicals and some heavy metals are attracted to the surface of the charcoal, and
Are attached to it. Charcoal filters will filter some pathogens, though they will
Quickly use up the filter adsorptive ability, and can even contribute to
Contamination, as the charcoal provides an excellent breeding ground for bacteria
And algae. Some charcoal filters are available impregnated with silver to prevent
This, though current research concludes that the bacteria growing on the filter are
Harmless, even if the water wasn't disinfected before contacting the filter. Activated charcoal can be used in conjunction with chemical treatment. The chemical (iodine or chlorine) will lull the pathogens, while the carbon filter will remove the treatment chemicals. In this case, as the filter reaches its capacity, a distinctive chlorine or iodine taste will be noted. The more activated charcoal in a filter, the longer it will last. The bed of carbon must be deep enough for adequate contact with the water.

Production designs use granulated activated charcoal (effective size or 0.6 to 0.9 mm for maximum flow rate). Home or field models can also use a compressed carbon block or powered activated charcoal (effective size 0.01) to increase contact area.
Powered charcoal can also be mixed with water and filtered out later. As far as life of the filter is concerned, carbon block filters will last the longest for a given size, simply due to their greater mass of carbon. A source of pressure is usually needed with carbon block filters to achieve a reasonable flow rate.

CHEMICAL TREATMENT

CHLORINE

Chlorine has a number of problems when used for field treatment of water. When chlorine reacts with organic material, it attaches itself to nitrogen containing compounds (ammonium ions and amino acids), leaving less free chlorine to continue disinfection. Carcinogenic trihalomethanes are also produced, though this is only a problem with long-term exposure. Trihalomethanes can also be filtered out with a charcoal filter, though it is more efficient to use the same filter to remove organics before the water is chlorinated. Unless free chlorine is measured, disinfection can not be guaranteed with moderate doses of chlorine.
One solution is super chlorination, the addition of far more chlorine than is needed.
This must again be filtered through activated charcoal to remove the large amounts
Of chlorine, or hydrogen peroxide can be added to drive the chlorine off. Either
Way there is no residual chlorine left to prevent recontamination. This isn't a problem, if the water is to be used at once.
Chlorine is sensitive to both the pH and temperature of the treated water.
Temperature slows the reaction for any chemical treatment, but chlorine treatment
Is particularly susceptible to variations in the pH as at lower pHs, hypochlorous
Acid is formed, while at higher pHs, it will tend to dissociate into hydrogen and
Chlorite ions, which are less effective as a disinfectant. As a result, chlorine
Effectiveness drops off when the pH is greater than 8.

Calcium Hypochlorite, also known as High Test Hypochlorite (HTH) is supplied
In crystal form; it is nearly 70% available chlorine. One product, the Sanitizer
(Formally the Sierra Water Purifier) uses these crystals to superchlorinate the water
To insure pathogens were killed off, then hydrogen peroxide is added to drive off
The residual chlorine. This is the most effective method of field chlorine treatment.

IODINE

Iodine's use as a water purification method emerged after World War 2, when the
U.S. military was looking for a replacement for Halazone tablets. Iodine was found
To be in many ways superior to chlorine for use in treating small batches of water.
Iodine is less sensitive to the pH and organic content of water, and is effective in
Lower doses. Some individuals are allergic to iodine, and there is some question
About long term use of iodine. The safety of long-term exposure to low levels of
Iodine was proven when inmates of three Florida prisons were given water
Disinfected with 0.5 to 1.0 ppm iodine for 15 years. No effects on the health or
Thyroid function of previously healthy inmates was observed. Of 101 infants born
To prisoners drinking the water for 122- 270 days, none showed detectable thyroid
Enlargement.

Iodine is normally used in doses of 8 PPM to treat clear water for a 10 minute contact time. The effectiveness of this dose has been shown in numerous studies. Cloudy water needs twice as much iodine or twice as much contact time. In cold water (Below 41˚ F or 5˚ C) the dose or time must also be doubled. In any case doubling the treatment time will allow the use of half as much iodine. These doses are calculated to remove all pathogens (other than cryptosporida) from the water. Of these, giardia cysts are the hardest to kill, and are what requires the high level of iodine. If the cysts are filtered out with a microfilter (any model will do since the cysts are 6 µm), only 0.5 ppm is needed to treat the resulting water.

Water treated with iodine can have any objectionable taste removed by treating the
Water with vitamin C (ascorbic acid), but it must be added after the water has stood for the correct treatment time. Flavored beverages containing vitamin C will accomplish the same thing. Sodium thiosulfate can also be used to combine with
Free iodine and either of these chemicals will also help remove the taste of chlorine as well. Usually elemental iodine can't be tasted below 1 ppm, and below 2 ppm the taste isn't objectionable. Iodine ions have an even higher taste threshold of 5 ppm. Note that removing the iodine taste does not reduce the dose of iodine
Ingested by the body.

Average American iodine intake is estimated at 0.24 to 0.74 mg/day, higher than the RDA of 0.4 mg/day. Due to a recent National Academy of Science recommendation that iodine consumption be reduced to the RDA, the EPA discourages the use of iodized salt in areas where iodine is used to treat drinking water.

SILVER

Its use is currently out of favor due to the EPA's establishment of a 50 ppb MCL (Maximum Contaminate Level) limit on silver in drinking water.
This limit is set to avoid argyrosis, a cosmetic blue/gray staining of the skin, eyes,
And mucous membranes. As the disease requires a net accumulation of 1 g of silver in the body, one expert calculated that you could drink water treated at 50 ppb for 27 years before accumulating 1 g. Silver has only be proven to be effective against bacteria and protozoan cysts, though it is quite likely also effective against viruses. Silver can be used in the form of a silver salt, commonly silver nitrate, a colloidal suspension, or a bed of metallic silver.
Electrolysis can also be used to add metallic silver to a solution. Some evidence has suggested that silver deposited on carbon block filters can kill pathogens without adding as much silver to the water.

POTASSIUM PERMANGANATE

Potassium permanganate is no longer commonly used in the developed world to kill pathogens.
It is much weaker than the other alternatives cited, more expensive, and leaves a
Objectionable pink or brown color. Still, some underdeveloped countries rely on it,
Especially in home-use applications. If it must be used, 1 gram per liter would
Probably be sufficient against bacteria and viruses (no data is available on it
Effectiveness against protozoan cysts). Hydrogen Peroxide can be used to purify
Water if nothing else is available. Studies have shown of 99 percent inactivation of
Poliovirus in 6 hr with 0.3 percent hydrogen peroxide and a 99% in-activation of
Rhinovirus with a 1.5% solution in 24 minutes. Hydrogen Peroxide is more
Effective against bacteria.

COAGULATION/FLOCCULATIONA GENTS

While flocculation doesn't kill pathogens, it will reduce their levels along with
Removing particles that could shield the pathogens from chemical or thermal
Destruction and organic matter that could tie up chlorine added for purification. 60-98% of coliform bacteria, 65-99% of viruses, and 60-90% of giardia will be
Removed from the water, along with organic matter and heavy metals.
Some of the advantages of coagulation/flocculation can be obtained by allowing the particles to settle out of the water with time (sedimentation), but it will take a while for them to do so. Adding coagulation chemicals, such as alum, will increase the rate at which the suspended particles settle out by combining many smaller particles into larger floc, which will settle out faster. The usual dose for alum is 10-30 mg/liter of water. This dose must be rapidly mixed with the water, then the water must be agitated for 5 minutes to encourage the particles to form flocs. After this at least 30 minutes of settling time is need for the flocs to fall to the bottom, and them the clear water above the flocs may be poured off.
Most of the flocculation agent is removed with the floc, nevertheless, some question the safety of using alum due to the toxicity of the aluminum in it. There is little to no scientific evidence to back this up. Virtually all municipal plants in the US dose the water with alum. In bulk water treatment, the alum dose can be varied until the idea dose is found. The needed dose varies with the pH of the water and the size of the particles. Increase turbidity makes the flocs easier to produce not harder, due to the increased number of collisions between particles.

ENERGY INTENSIVE TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES

OZONE

Ozone is used extensively in Europe to purify water. Ozone, a molecule composed
Of 3 atoms of oxygen rather than two, is formed by exposing air or oxygen to a
High voltage electric arc. Ozone is much more effective as a disinfectant than chlorine, but no residual levels of disinfectant exist after ozone turns back into 0,.
(One source quotes a half life of only 120 minutes in distilled water at 20 ˚C).

Ozone is expected to see increased use in the U.S. as a way to avoid the production
And formation of trihalomethanes, and while ozone does break down organic
Molecules, sometimes this can be a disadvantage as ozone treatment can produce
Higher levels of smaller molecules that provide energy source for
Microorganisms. If no residual disinfectant is present (as would happen if ozone
Were used as the only treatment method), these microorganisms will cause the water quality to deteriorate in storage. Ozone also changes the surface charges of
Dissolved organics and colloidially suspended particles. This cause
Microflocculation of the dissolved organics and coagulation of the colloidal
particles.

UV LIGHT

Ultraviolet light has been known to kill pathogens for a long time. A low pressure
Mercury bulb emits between 30 to 90 % of its energy at a wave length of 253.7 nm, right in the middle of the UV band. If water is exposed to enough light, pathogens will be killed. The problem is that some pathogens are hundreds of times less sensitive to UV light than others. The least sensitive pathogens to UV are protozoan cysts. Several studies show that Giardia will not be destroyed by many commercial UV treatment units. Fortunately, these are the easiest pathogens to filter out with a mechanical filter. The efficiency of  treatment is very dependent on the turbidity of the water. The more opaque the water is, the less light that will be
Transmitted through it.
The treatment units must be run at the designed flow rate to insure sufficient
Exposure, as well as insure turbulent flow rather than plug flow. Another problem
With UV treatment is that the damage done to the pathogens with UV light can be
Reversed if the water is exposed to visible light (specifically 330-500 nm) through
A process known as photoreactivation. UV treatment, like ozone or mechanical
Filtering, leaves no residual component in the water to insure its continued
Disinfection.
The US EPA explored UV light for small scale water treatment plants and found
It compared unfavorably with chlorine due to
 1) Higher costs.
 2) Lower reliability.

 3) Lack of a residual disinfectant.