Principles of Filtration

Index

1

Introduction

Notation

Filtration may be described as an operation in which solids (particles) present in a solid–fluid mixture are separated from the liquid by forcing the flow of the mixture through a supported mesh or cloth (Walker et al., 1937). The mixture is caused to flow by various forces: gravity, pressure, vacuum, or centrifugal force. The products of the separation consist of a fluid stream (filtrate) free or nearly free of particles, a solid phase with some entrained liquid and possibly a solid–fluid mixture with enhanced solid concentration (as in the case of crossflow cake filtration).

Giddings (1991) advanced the premise that separation of a mixture of several components is effected by the relative displacements of the various components present in the mixture. Earlier, King (1980) stated that the working of a separation process is accomplished by the application of a separating agent as shown in Fig. 1.1. The agent may be either energy or matter or both. Through the action of the agent, a feed is split into several streams of different compositions. Using King’s description or Gidding’s premise, filtration is a process employing energy (for the flow of the suspension to be treated) and matter (filter media) as separating agent, leading to a relative solid/fluid displacement from the flow of the suspension through the medium with particle retention at the surface of the medium, or particle deposition throughout the medium.

FIGURE 1.1 Representation of separation process.

Filtration may be applied to both gas/solid and liquid/solid suspensions. In the following sections, a brief discussion on its use in certain industrial applications is presented as background information.

1.1 Filtration as a Liquid–Solid Separation Technology

Liquid–solid separation technology, as the name implies, refers to a collection of processes for removing, separating, and recovering particles from liquid–solid mixtures. While the processes known as liquid–solid separation are too numerous to be cited individually, it is generally accepted that liquid–solid separation encompasses filtration, sedimentation, cycloning, thickening, flocculation, and expression. Tiller (1974) proposed a classification scheme based on liquid–solid separation functions (see Fig. 1.2), namely, liquid–solid separation may be viewed as a system consisting of one or more stages: pretreatment, solid concentration, solid separation, and post-treatment. According to this scheme, filtration is used in both the separation stage and post-treatment.

FIGURE 1.2 Stages of solid/liquid separation according to Tiller.

1.2 Classification of Filtration Processes

Over the years, for the purpose of describing the operation and/or specifying the type of medium used, a plethora of modifying terms have been added to filtration such as cartridge filtration, crossflow filtration, dead-end filtration, granular filtration, fabric filtration, centrifugal filtration, vacuum filtration, etc. While there are justifications for coining these terms, from the point of discussing the principles and analyses of filtration, one may classify filtration processes based on the mechanism of particle separation and the manner with which particle separation takes place. Generally speaking, separation of solids from liquid in filtration is effected through either the retention of particles at the surface of the filter medium or deposition of particles throughout the medium. Therefore, according to the manner of particle separation, filtration may be divided into two categories: cake filtration (or surface filtration) in which particles are retained at the media surface to form filter cakes and deep bed filtration (or depth filtration) in which particle removal is accomplished by particle deposition throughout the filter medium. With this classification scheme, granular filtration, cartridge filtration, and fibrous filtration are deep bed filtration, with their differences being the media used. On the other hand, dead-end filtration, crossflow filtration, fabric filtration, vacuum filtration, or any filtration process in which particle separation leads to the presence of growing filter cakes at media surface are cake (or surface) filtration. It also bears noticing that microfiltration, ultrafiltration, and nanofiltration are differentiated by the types of membranes used as filter media. However, they all belong to the cake filtration category.

Qualitatively speaking, occurrence of cake formation at medium surface vs. particle deposition throughout the medium is determined by the relative particle size to medium pore size. The empirical 1/3 law suggests cake formation if the particle size exceeds 1/3 of the pore size. While the value of 1/3 may not be exact, there is sufficient evidence indicating the occurrence of cake formation if particle size and pore size are of the same order of magnitude.

A schematic diagram illustrating the operating difference between deep bed filtration and cake filtration is shown in Fig. 1.3. For deep bed filtration, particle deposition takes place over the interior surface of the medium as the suspension flows through the medium. As a result, a filtrate free of particles (or with significantly reduced particle concentration) may be obtained. In cake filtration, the suspension to be tested may either flow through a medium or flow parallel to the medium with particle retention (and therefore cake formation) occurring at the upstream side of the medium. The mode of operation of the former may be described as dead end and that of the latter as crossflow.

FIGURE 1.3 Cake filtration (a) vs. deep bed filtration (b).

Conventional filter press and drum filters operate in the dead end mode. The so-called membrane filtration developed in more recent years operates mainly in the crossflow mode. For cake filtration in the crossflow mode, the feed stream to be treated split into three parts – filtrate, filter cake, and retentrate – with enhanced particle concentration if cake formation is significant.

For applications, cake filtration is used for treating suspensions with relatively high particle concentration. Deep bed filtration, on the other hand, is applied mainly for clarifying suspensions of low particle concentration. For example, in water treatment with sand filters, the allowable particle concentration of the feed stream is limited to less than 100 parts per million (vol/vol) in order to avoid cake formation at the medium surface (or inlet of deep bed filters). This concentration difference, however, has become blurred with the advent of crossflow membrane filtration in recent years. This point will be discussed in some detail in a later section.

The difference in particle retention mechanisms between cake filtration and deep bed filtration does not imply that these two processes embody totally different and exclusive physical phenomena. Particles present in a suspension often cover a wide size range. Therefore, during the initial stage of cake filtration, finer particles may penetrate into filter medium leading to their deposition in the medium interior. At late stage, filter cake formed may function as a deep bed filter. Similarly, for a deep bed filter after prolonged period of operating, built-up of deposited particles at filter bed inlet may ultimately cause the formation of particle cake at the inlet of the filter, which, in turn, requires filter bed regeneration by backwashing. Proper and optimum design of either filtration system requires the knowledge and understanding of both cake and deep bed filtration.

1.3 Laws of Filtration

Hermans and Bredee (1935) postulated the so-called laws of filtration which classifies filtration operations according to different particle retention mechanisms. A later version of Hermans–Bredee’s work was given by Hermia (1982). According to Hermia, four different particle retention mechanisms may be present in filtration: complete blocking (every retained particle acts to block a medium pore), intermediate blocking (there is a finite probability for a retained particle to block medium pores), standard blocking (particle retention taking place within medium resulting in a narrowing of medium pores), and cake filtration (particle retention results in cake formation and growth). It is clear that the standard blocking is the retention mechanism operative in deep bed filtration as discussed in 1.2 while complete blocking and intermediate blocking are present in the initial stage of cake filtration.

Using four assumed filtration rate expressions corresponding to each of the four retention mechanisms mentioned above, the dynamic behavior of filtration, according to the laws of filtration, may be expressed as

(1.3.1)¹

where V is the cumulative filtrate volume per medium surface area collected m³m−2 at time t under the condition of constant pressure. Both the coefficient K and exponent k are constant. In particular, the exponent k assumes the following values corresponding to the specific retention mechanism in operation:

According to the laws of filtration as expressed through Equation (1.3.1), there is a linear relationship between log(d² t/dV²) and log(dt/dV) with the slope of the line being the value of k. Therefore, based on constant pressure filtration data, a line or a series of line segments may be established by plotting the date present in the form of d² t/dV² vs. dt/dV on the logarithmic coordinates. The slope of the line or those of the linear segments may assume any one of the k values given above. Therefore, the operative retention mechanism may be identified.²

The conceptual simplicity of the laws of filtration has attracted much attention from a number of investigators in recent years. The use of the laws has been found in a large number of recent publications for the purposes of identifying retention mechanisms and data interpretation. What is overlooked is a rather simple fact that this identification is not based on direct observation, but upon agreement between filtration data and Equation (1.3.1) which, in turn, rests upon filtration rate expression proposed by Hermans and Bredee. Since these assumed rate expressions, in three cases, are incorrect or fail to agree with experimental data, the claim made regarding the value of the laws of filtration, therefore, cannot be justified. A more direct evidence of the lack of validity of the laws of filtration can also be seen from the simple fact that in many cases, the filtration data simply do not display the linearity between log(d² t/dV) and log(dt/dV) as required by Equation (1.3.1).

Wakeman and Tarleton (1999) pointed out that the validity of Equation (1) is limited only during the initial stage of filtration operation. Its use in design calculation is, therefore, limited. Based on a more general consideration, retention mechanism is largely dependent upon the relative particle to medium pore size. Considering the fact that both filter medium pores and suspended particles, generally speaking, are not uniform in size, but cover a range of values, it would be difficult to describe a given filtration process by a simple retention mechanism (Tien, 2006). Based on these considerations, the validity of and application of the laws of filtration are questionable if not fallacious.

Problem

1.1. Obtain expressions of V vs. t from Equation (1.3.1) for the four cases of filtration with n = 0, 1, 3/2, and 2.

References

1. Giddings RW. Unified Separation Science. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1991; pp. 11.

2. Hermans PH, Bredee HL. Zur Kennitnis der Filtrationgesetec. Rec Trav Chim Des Pays-Bas. 1935;54:680.

3. Hermia J. Constant pressure blocking filtration laws – applications to power law non-newtonian fluids. Trans Inst Chem Eng. 1982;60:183–187.

4. King CJ. Separation Processes. second ed New York: McGraw Hill, Inc.; 1980; pp. 18.

5. Tien C. Introduction to Cake Filtration: Analysis, Experiments, and Applications. Elsevier 2006.

6. Tiller FM. Chem Eng. 1974;:117.

7. Wakeman RJ, Tarleton ES. Filtration: Equipment Selection Modeling and Process Simulation. Elsevier Advanced Technologies 1999.

8. Walker WH, Lewis WK, McAdams WH, Gilliland ER. Principles of Chemical Engineering. third ed New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc.; 1937; pp. 323.

¹ The instantaneous filtration rate is given by dV/dt. Therefore, dt/dV is the reciprocal of the instantaneous filtration rate 1/(dV/dt). On the other hand, d² t/dV² can be shown to be −(d² V/dt²)/(dV/dt)³ or the negative of the ratio of the time rate change of the filtration rate to the third power of the filtration rate.

² It should be noted that the laws of filtration allow the transition from one retention mechanism to another but do not allow the simultaneous presence of more than one