Density and Strength of Deposits Formed During In-line Flocculation Filtration of Secondary Effluents

  • Haim Cikurel
  • Avner Adin
  • Menahem Rebhun
Conference paper


The purpose of this work was to evaluate filtration efficiency by deposit characterization, applying various pretreatments during in-line flocculation filtration of secondary effluents. Shallow bed laboratory filtration columns were used. Attachment and detachment constants and deposit densities (on the basis of volume and mass of accumulated matter) of aggregates formed by effluents treated with alum, alum-anionic polymer or different cationic polymers as primary coagulants during in-line filtration, were calculated. The floc size-density relationship coefficients “a” and “b” for polydispersed primary particles were calculated and compared with some other already published coefficients which are mainly based on homogeneous particles. The calculated values for the different “a” coefficients were around 1.0. The values for the “b” coefficients were (1.15–1.45). Based on the calculated deposit densities and attachment constants, and results obtained for turbidity and TSS removal efficiencies, it was shown that filtration without any treatment caused weak deposits. 10–20 mg/l alum doses, at natural pH values of the effluents used (7.3–8.5), produced deposits of relatively low attachment strength. The deposit density for the 10 mg/l dose was higher than that for the 20 mg/l dose. High molecular weight low anionic polymers strengthened the alum-particle bond. Medium cationic, high molecular weight polymers at 0.5 mg/l and high cationic medium molecular weight polymers at 7 mg/l performed equally or better than alum as primary flocculants and formed strong deposits with low deposit densities. High cationic low molecular weight polymers were not effective at doses up to 7 mg/l probably because of the low contact time.


Primary Particle Effective Porosity Deposit Density Floc Size Turbidity Removal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Adin, A., Rebhun, M.: A Model to Predict Concentration and Head-loss Profiles in Filtration. J. AWWA. 8 (1977) 444–451.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Boller, M.A., Kavanaugh, M.C.: Particle Characteristics and Head-loss Increase in Granular Media Filtration. Wat. Res. 29(4) (1995) 1139–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    Boller, M.: Flockungfiltration zur Reinigung von Abwasser. Diss. ETH Nr. 6748, Zürich 1980.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    Cikurel, H., Adin, A., Amirtharajah, A., Rebhun, M.: Wastewater Effluent Reuse by In-line Flocculation Filtration Process. Wat. Sci. Techn. 33(10-11) (1996) 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    Darby, J.L.: Depth Filtration: Measurements and Predictions of Particle-particle Interactions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1988.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Dharmappa, H.B., Verink, J., Fujiwara, O., Vigneswaran, S.: Optimization of Granular Bed Filtration Treating Polydispersed Suspension. Wat. Res. 26(10) (1992) 1307–1318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    Goodarz-Nia, I.: Floc Density, Porosity and Void Ratio in Colloidal Systems and Aerosols. J. Coll. Interf. Sci. 62 (1977) 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    Hunt, J.: The Accumulation of Solids within Deep Bed Filters. 6th World Filtration Congress, Nagoya 1993, Japan, pp. 236–239.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Ives, K.J.: Theory of Filtration. IWSA Congress, Vienna 1969.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    Mackie, R.I.: Numerical Solution of the Filtration Equations for Polydisperse Suspensions. 6th World Filtration Congress, Nagoya 1993, Japan, pp. 244–247.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Mintz, D.M.: Modern Theory of Filtration. International Water Supply Assoc, Seventh Congress Vol. 1. Special Subject No. 10, 1966.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    O’Melia, C.R., Ali, W.: The Role of Retained Particles in Deep Bed Filtration. Prog. Wat. Tech. 10(5/6) (1978) 167–182.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    Rebhun, M. et al.: Contact Flocculation-Filtration of Humic Substances. Wat. Res. 18(8) (1984) 963–970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    Rebhun, M.: Floc Formation and Breakup in Continuous Flow Flocculation and in Contact Filtration. In: Chemical Water and Wastewater Treatment, H.H. Hahn and R. Klute (Eds.). Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York 1990, pp. 117–126.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    Veerpaneni, S., Wiesner, M.R.: Role of Suspension Polydispersivity in Granular Media Filtration. J. Env. Eng. 119(1) (1993) 172–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    Vigneswaran, S., Chang, J.S.: Mathematical Modeling of the Entire Cycle of Deep Bed Filtration. Wat. Air Soil Pollut. 29 (1986) 155–164.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    Vigneswaran, S., Jing Song Chang: Experimental Testing of Mathematical Models Describing the Entire Cycle of Filtration. Wat. Res. 23(11) (1989) 1413–1421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. [18]
    Wiesner, M.R.: Calibration et Validation d’un Model de Filtration: Application a une étude a l’echelle pilote. L’eau, L’industrie, Les Nuisances, Paris, France 112 (1987) 39–44.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    Tambo, N., Watanabe, Y.: Physical Characteristics of Flocs. I. The Floc Density Function and Aluminum Floc. Wat. Res. 13 (1979) 409–419.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  • Haim Cikurel
    • 1
  • Avner Adin
    • 1
  • Menahem Rebhun
    • 2
  1. 1.Environmental Sciences Division Graduate School of Applied SciencesThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Environmental Engineering and Water ResourcesTechnion Institute of TechnologyHaifaIsrael

Personalised recommendations