Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Dr.Howard Dryden
Abstract
Media
bed
mechanical
sand
filtration
systems
comprise
gravity
flow,
pressure
and
moving
bed
continuous
backwash
filtration
systems.
In
all
cases
the
most
common
mechanical
filtration
media
is
quartz
silica
sand.
The
quality
of
quartz
sand
is
a
variable
depending
upon
the
country
and
the
location
of
the
deposit.
There
is
a
requirement
for
a
consistent
quality
of
filter
media
for
all
industries
using
media
bed
filtration
in
order
to
standardise
and
optimise
the
filtration
process.
This
aspect
becomes
more
important
for
filters
that
have
a
pressure
gradient
across
the
bed
such
as
horizontal
filters,
or
filters
that
have
not
been
installed
on
a
perfectly
level
base.
The
performance
of
seven
different
types
of
filtration
media
were
physically
evaluated
by
IFTS
(1)
one
of
the
leading
independent
accredited
laboratories
in
Europe
for
the
evaluation
of
products
used
in
the
water
industry.
Introduction
History
Sand
has
been
used
for
over
200
years
in
Europe
as
a
means
of
filtering
Drinking
water.
A
company
in
Scotland
in
1804
was
the
first
documented
report
of
a
company
using
sand
in
a
slow
bed
sand
filter
(2).
Slow
bed
sand
filters
typically
operate
at
water
flow
velocity
of
0.1m/hr
and
use
a
coarse
grade
of
sand
and
gravel.
The
filters
depend
on
maturation
of
the
sand
as
a
biological
filter
before
they
provide
adequate
mechanical
water
filtration.
Flowrates
Slow
bed
sand
filters
provide
excellent
water
quality
and
are
still
used
for
the
treatment
of
drinking
water.
Approximately
20%
of
all
water
supplies
in
the
UK
currently
use
slow
bed
filters,
but
they
are
being
phased
out
in
favour
of
RGF
(Rapid
Gravity
Filters)
and
pressure
sand
filters
in
order
to
save
space.
RGF
filters
for
drinking
water
operate
at
water
flow
velocity
of
6m/hr
whereas
pressure
filters
typically
operate
at
12m/hr.
The
water
flow
velocities
of
RGF
and
pressure
filters
are
therefore
60
to
120
times
faster
than
slow
bed
filters.
The
higher
water
velocities
change
the
bio-‐
dynamics
of
the
filtration
process
which
impacts
on
filter
performance
leading
to
bio-‐instability
and
transient
wormhole
channelling
of
unfiltered
water
through
the
filter
bed.
The
performance
of
any
media
bed
will
be
inversely
proportional
to
the
flow
velocity,
which
is
a
function
of
the
filter
diameter,
its
surface
area
and
bed
depth
(Darcy’s
Law)(3).
The
slower
the
filter
flow
velocity
the
higher
the
performance,
the
relationship
is
exponential
but
the
coefficient
depends
on
the
media
characteristics
and
particle
size
used
for
performance
evaluation.
One
of
the
key
issues
in
the
drinking
water
industry
is
ability
to
remove
a
parasite
called
Cryptosporidium,
which
is
almost
completely
resistant
to
chlorine
and
only
measures
4
microns
in
size.
If
sand
filters
are
operated
at
water
flows
in
excess
of
12m/hr
it
becomes
increasingly
difficult
to
ensure
adequate
water
quality
and
the
removal
of
these
parasites.
Aquaculture
and
aquarium
systems
tend
to
operate
at
much
higher
water
flow
rates
in
order
to
save
space
and
reduce
capital
cost.
Given
that
filtration
performance
is
related
to
surface
area,
U.S.
systems
in
particular
often
use
stacked
horizontal
filters
in
order
to
save
space
and
optimise
surface
area.
Bed
depth
is
however
reduced
thereby
reducing
the
adsorption
capacity
for
small
particles.
Also,
differing
pressure
gradient
across
different
areas
of
the
bed
will
reduce
performance
when
compared
to
vertical
filters
that
have
a
consistent
pressure
gradient
and
a
deep
bed.
For
marine
hatcheries
filtration
velocity
should
be
the
same
as
drinking
water
systems
at
less
than
12m/hr.
Ideally
vertical
filters
should
be
used
and
the
design
should
be
in
compliance
to
a
formal
standard
such
as
the
German
DIN
specification,
which
states
a
1200mm
bed
depth
and
nozzle
distribution
plate
as
a
basic
requirement.
For
ongrowing
systems
and
aquaria,
filtration
velocities
may
be
increased
to
20m/hr.
The
systems
will
still
achieve
good
performance
because
the
water
is
being
recycled.
From
experience
and
observation
filtration
velocities
beyond
30m/hr
give
very
poor
mechanical
performance.
Pressure differential
During
the
run-‐phase
large
solids
will
accumulate
on
the
top
of
the
filter
bed
and
small
solids
will
penetrate
the
bed.
Small
particles
attracted
by
electrical
(Van
der
Waals)
forces
may
become
trapped
on
the
surface
of
the
media.
Sand
and
most
media
carry
a
negative
charge
or
Zeta
Potential.
In
water
treatment
phosphate
sequesters
such
as
Lanthanum
chloride,
PAC
(polyaluminium
chloride)
or
polyelectrolytes
may
be
applied
to
drop
the
zeta
potential,
increase
coagulation
and
flocculation
as
well
as
increasing
electrical
attraction.
In
aquarium
systems
however
the
use
of
chemicals
would
not
be
advisable.
Reduction
of
zeta
potential
and
coagulation
can
nevertheless
be
achieved
by
the
rapid
movement
of
water,
use
a
static
mixers
such
as
a
ZPM
(Zeta
potential
Mixer)
or
by
slightly
increasing
redox
potential
by
application
of
ozone.
In
addition
to
mechanical
and
electrical
attraction,
there
will
also
be
some
degree
of
molecular
sieve
filtration.
This
will
be
the
case
with
activated
carbon,
and
to
a
lesser
extent
with
new
sand.
The
ability
of
sand
to
adsorb
is
a
function
of
the
silicon
to
aluminium
ratio
and
how
the
molecules
are
configured.
An
example
of
natural
ion
exchange
molecular
sieve
sand
is
the
zeolitic
sand
clinoptilolite
(4)(5).
Zeolites
are
used
in
aquaculture
and
aquaria
systems
as
a
mechanical
filtration
media
and
also
as
an
ion
exchange
mineral
for
the
selective
removal
of
ammonium
from
freshwater.
Zeolites
cannot
be
used
for
this
application
in
marine
systems
because
the
competing
cations
will
prevent
ion
exchange
of
ammonium.
In
freshwater
systems
zeolites
provide
a
good
substrate
for
the
growth
of
autotrophic
nitrifying
bacteria,
a
characteristic
that
is
likely
due
to
the
adsorption
of
ammonium
into
the
mineral
and
its
availability
to
be
metabolised
by
autotrophic
species
such
as
Nitrosomonas
spp.
Clinoptilolite
initially
provides
very
good
filtration
for
aquaculture,
but
the
media
rapidly
biofouls,
especially
at
high
water
temperatures
(above
20oC)
in
nutrient
rich
water.
In
closed
system
eel
Anguilla
anguilla
cultivation
at
28oC
the
clinoptilolite
filter
bed
blocked
within
2
hours
when
operated
at
10m/hr
filtration
velocity
(6).
Blockage
was
due
to
collected
solids
as
well
as
growth
of
heterotrophic
bacteria
on
the
filter
media.
The
rapid
growth
rate
of
bacteria
and
the
production
of
bacterial
alginate
exopolysaccharides
cause
coagulation
of
the
filter
bed
(6)
which
leads
to
transient
wormhole
channelling.
The
alginates
are
actually
advantageous
in
slow
bed
filters
(7)
and
can
improve
filtration
performance,
in
rapid
gravity
and
pressure
sand
filters
the
alginates
lead
to
blockage
and
bio-‐instability
of
sand
beds.
Back-‐washing
will
not
remove
biofilm
or
prevent
biofouling,
indeed
continuously
fluidised
sand
beds
make
excellent
biofilters
for
bacterial
nitrification
(8).
Proper
back-‐washing
is
very
important.
Under
DIN
standards
the
bed
should
be
fluidised
and
expanded
by
20%
bed
for
a
period
of
5
minutes
duration.
The
velocity
of
the
water
required
to
achieve
bed
expansion
is
a
function
of
the
bulk
bed
density
of
the
media,
particle
size,
shape
as
well
as
the
temperature
and
density
of
the
water.
Sand
with
a
PSD
(particle
size
distribution)
between
0.5
and
1.0mm
requires
a
flow
velocity
the
region
of
55m/hr
at
28oC
for
freshwater.
For
a
marine
system
due
to
the
higher
density
of
water
at
35ppt,
the
back-‐wash
flow
velocity
may
be
reduced
to
40m/hr.
Back-‐washing
is
critical,
any
solids
or
organic
matter
remaining
in
the
filter
bed
after
a
back-‐wash
will
simply
act
as
a
food
source
for
the
growth
of
more
bacteria
and
exopolysaccharides.
However
we
know
that
even
sand
beds
fluidised
100%
of
the
time
make
very
good
biofilters
(8),
so
back-‐washing
of
sand
is
never
100%
effective.
Organic
matter
and
particles
will
become
embedded
in
the
alginate
and
will
remain
after
a
back-‐wash
and
will
continue
to
feed
heterotrophic
bacteria.
Gradually
the
filter
biofilm
will
mineralise
with
calcium
and
phosphate
to
form
calcites
or
struvite
with
magnesium,
ammonium
and
phosphate.
The
biofilm
becomes
more
stable,
alginate
production
increases
and
filtration
performance
gradually
decreases
until
a
point
when
a
media
change
is
required.
Glass
is
an
aluminosilcate
manufactured
from
silica
sand
or
from
the
re-‐melt
of
glass
bottles.
It
has
a
similar
chemical
composition
to
sand,
but
may
contain
metal
oxides
such
aluminium,
or
ferric
to
make
amber
glass
or
manganese
and
chromium
for
green
glass.
Glass
as
a
filter
media
was
used
in
1984
by
Dr
Howard
Dryden
as
an
alternative
to
the
zeolite
clinoptilolite
as
a
means
of
filtering
water
in
a
RAS
(Recirculating
Aquaculture
System)
for
eels
and
Atlantic
salmon.
The
glass
was
initially
used
as
a
feedstock
for
the
manufacture
of
synthetic
zeolites.
The
glass
was
subsequently
used
as
a
substrate
and
the
surface
of
the
glass
was
change
by
a
solgel
process
to
give
it
a
hydrophilic
high
surface
area
to
avoid
biofouling
while
still
acting
as
a
molecular
sieve
similar
to
clinoptilolite
for
the
adsorption
of
organics.
The
manufacture
of
filter
media
provides
an
opportunity
to
make
a
filter
media
with
a
specific
tailored
performance.
The
performance
can
then
be
quantified
and
compared
against
other
filter
media.
Such
an
investigation
has
never
been
conducted
for
sand.
Given
that
sand
is
used
to
treat
more
than
99%
of
our
drinking
water
supply,
it
is
rather
surprising
that
there
has
been
no
detailed
comparison
of
sand
media
performance
from
different
deposits
or
different
countries.
IFTS.
The
Institut
de
la
Filtration
et
des
Techniques
Séparatives
is
recognised
as
being
the
leading
institute
in
Europe
for
the
testing
of
water
filter
technology.
As
part
of
the
development
of
a
new
International
ISO
14034
standard
for
ETV
(Environmental
Technology
Verification)
of
product
performance
in
the
water
industry,
glass
media
from
different
manufactures
in
Europe
were
evaluated
by
IFTS(1).
Seven
different
types
of
glass
media
and
one
sand
media
were
tested.
The
sand
was
from
the
Leighton
Buzzard
deposit
in
England.
The
silica
sand
was
recognised
by
IFTS
to
be
one
of
the
best
in
Europe.
The
glass
media
was
provided
by
different
manufacturers
of
glass
granules
and
glass
beads
in
Europe.
The
run
phase
performance
test
involved
the
injection
of
particles
of
a
known
particle
size
directly
into
the
water
under
controlled
conditions.
Particle
size
analysers
were
fitted
to
the
test
rig
in
order
to
check
the
concentrations
and
confirm
the
performance.
Two
grades
of
AFM
were
tested,
grade
0
is
fine
grade
media
with
a
psd
from
0,25
to
0.50.
Grade
1
AFM
is
typical
of
most
filter
grade
media
with
a
psd
of
0.4
to
1.0.
The
psd
of
all
the
media
tested
approximated
to
a
standard
16
x
30
mesh
size.
ParFcle
size
removal
preformance
100.0
Percentage
removal
performance
90.0
80.0
afm
grade
0
70.0
afm
grade
1
60.0
sand
50.0
Garo
40.0
Astral
30.0
Bioma
20.0
EGFM
10.0
Vitrosphere
0.0
1
3
4
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Size
of
parFcles
in
Microns
The
test
was
performed
in
a
150mm
diameter
column
with
a
900mm
bed
depth
at
a
flow
velocity
of
20m/hr
and
temperature
23
deg
C.
At
5
micron
particle
size,
AFM
grade
1
was
removing
>97%
of
all
particles
and
sand,
72%.
Vitrosphere
filter
media
is
manufactured
from
glass
spheres
which
showed
zero
particle
removal
at
5
microns.
The
injected
mass
test
was
run
at
the
same
time
as
the
particle
size
removal
test.
The
differential
pressure
across
the
filter
bed
was
monitored.
The
data
should
be
viewed
in
conjunction
with
the
particle
size
removal
performance.
For
example,
Vitrosphere
did
not
show
any
increase
in
differential
pressure
against
injected
mass,
this
was
because
the
solids
were
simply
passing
through
the
filer
bed.
The
sand
produced
a
smooth
curve
and
predictable
performance,
AFM
tracked
the
sand
curve
but
at
a
slightly
higher
starting
differential
pressure.
Astral
and
EGFM
both
exhibited
slippage
or
discharge
of
solids
back
into
the
water,
but
in
the
case
of
EGFM
this
was
above
a
differential
of
0.7
bar.
Filter
beds
will
remove
particles
from
the
water.
Under
ideal
conditions,
as
solids
collect
in
the
bed
the
differential
pressure
will
increase
and
the
bed
will
block.
An
undesirable
feature
would
be
for
the
bed
to
discharge
collected
solids
back
into
the
water
such
as
in
the
case
of
the
Astral
filter
media.
Sand
and
glass
media
will
mechanically
remove
large
particles
from
the
water,
in
addition
small
particles
that
could
pass
through
the
filter
are
adsorbed
by
electrostatic
attraction.
There
will
be
a
finite
capacity
for
adsorption,
and
when
this
capacity
is
reached
the
filter
media
may
discharge
the
solids
back
into
the
water.
The
capacity
of
a
filter
bed
to
hold
onto
solids
is
a
function
of
the
filter
media,
water
flow
rates
and
differential
pressure.
It
is
therefore
desirable
to
operate
filters
at
as
slow
a
velocity
as
possible
and
not
to
exceed
a
differential
pressure
of
0.5
bar.
It
should
be
noted
that
the
tests
were
conducted
with
new
sand
and
new
glass
filter
media.
Sand
will
become
a
biofilter
and
both
mechanical
filtration
performance
as
well
as
electrostatic
attraction
will
decline
as
the
biofilm
develops.
Non-‐activated
glass
media
will
also
be
subjected
to
biofouling
and
will
deteriorate
albeit
at
a
slower
rate
than
sand.
AFM
was
the
only
activated
filter
media
tested.
Sand
and
crushed
glass
typically
has
a
surface
area
of
3000m2/tonne
with
a
PSD
of
0.5
to
1.0mm.
AFM
as
measured
by
nitrogen
gas
adsorption
has
a
surface
area
close
to
1,000,000m2
per
metric
tonne.
The
surface
area
is
300
times
greater
than
untreated
glass.
The
higher
surface
area
determines
the
ability
of
AFM
to
remove
small
particles
and
its
ability
to
hold
on
to
the
particles
during
the
run
phase.
A
mass
balance
was
conducted
on
the
data,
it
is
very
important
to
achieve
as
close
as
possible
to
a
100%
back-‐wash
efficiency.
Solids
and
organic
matter
remaining
in
the
filter
after
a
back-‐wash
will
act
a
food
source
for
the
growth
of
bacteria
and
production
of
alginates
leading
the
bed
coagulation
and
channelling
of
unfiltered
water
through
the
bed.
Sand
and
AFM
demonstrated
close
to
100%
back-‐wash
efficiency
and
almost
identical
back-‐wash
profile
curves.
All
of
the
non-‐activated
glass
filter
media
showed
a
reduced
back-‐wash
performance
Implications
of
filter
media
and
filter
design
in
Aquarium
LSS
The
performance
of
a
mechanical
filtration
system
will
depend
on
the
quality
of
the
filter
media,
design
of
the
filter
and
on
operating
criteria.
For
best
performance
and
water
clarity,
vertical
media
bed
filters
should
be
used,
the
run
phase
should
be
less
than
20m/hr
and
differential
pressure
should
never
exceed
0.4
bar.
It
is
also
best
to
back-‐wash
the
filters
at
least
once
a
week
at
a
water
flow
that
fluidises
the
bed
by
more
than
20%
for
a
period
of
5
minutes,
or
until
the
back-‐wash
water
runs
clear.
There
is
a
wide
choice
of
filter
media
available;
the
sand
tested
was
the
best
sand
available
for
pressure
or
gravity
flow
filters
and
the
best
performing
filter
media
as
shown
by
IFTS
data
was
AFM
activated
filter
media.
The
sand
was
new
sand,
the
media
will
gradually
become
a
biofiler
and
mechanical
filtration
performance
will
decline.
The
clarity
of
the
aquarium
water
is
a
function
of
the
Zeta
potential
of
all
particles
in
suspension.
As
redox
potential
increases,
zeta
potential
decreases,
when
zeta
potential
is
zero
you
have
the
lowest
turbidity.
Ozonation
systems
are
therefore
useful
to
achieve
good
water
clarity
and
low
turbidity
however
it
is
also
very
easy
to
use
too
much,
the
negative
zeta
potential
will
drop
to
zero
and
then
start
to
increase
again
as
more
ozone
is
applied,
this
will
simply
create
a
colloidal
suspension.
Ozone
is
a
very
useful
treatment
in
aquarium
LSS
systems
but
it
needs
to
be
balanced
in
combination
with
the
mechanical
filtration
and
biological
filtration
systems
for
the
best
results.
Conclusions
AFM
will
provide
close
to
100%
filtration
at
5
microns,
and
when
used
in
combination
with
zeta
potential
reduction
using
ZPM
static
mixers
with
ozone,
it
is
possible
to
achieve
micron
and
sub-‐
micron
filtration.
Water
clarity
is
very
important
for
most
applications;
it
is
a
primary
parameter
for
drinking
water,
it
is
regulated
in
the
pool
industry
in
Germany
where
is
should
be
under
0.1NTU.
For
Aquarium
systems
it
is
also
important
to
have
the
best
possible
water
clarity
so
this
means
turbidity
values
under
0.1ntu,
or
approaching
zero
turbidity
with
more
than
25m
of
good
visibility
that
can
only
be
achieved
by
operating
a
balanced
system.
In
this
context
it
is
important
to
have
pH
and
redox
redox
stability,
the
correct
divalent
cation
and
anion
concentration
and
a
low
concentration
of
surfactants
(bio-‐surfactants).
Dissolved
organics
and
small
particles
will
all
increase
the
zeta
potential
and
make
it
difficult
to
achieve
clear
water.
Biofiltration
and
ozone
will
reduce
their
concentration,
but
biofiltration
cannot
deal
with
all
organics
and
the
amount
of
ozone
required
to
deal
with
remainder
shifts
the
zeta
potential
to
the
negative
side
and
can
increase
turbidity.
The
key
is
to
have
a
dynamically
balanced
integrated
system,
mechanical
filtration
is
an
essential
component
used
in
conjunction
with
biofiltration,
ozonation
and
control
of
water
chemistry.
References
1.
IFTS
(2014) Institut
de
la
Filtration
et
des
Techniques
Séparatives,
Sièges
Social,
Adresse
de
livraison
,
Rue
Marcel
Pagnol
47510
FOULAYRONNES,
France
2.
WHO.
http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/ssf2.pdf
World
Health
Organization
3. H. Darcy (1856), Les Fontaines Publiques de la Ville de Dijon, Dalmont, Paris.
4.
Dryden,
H.
T.
and
L.
R.
Weatherley
(1987).
"Aquaculture
treatment
by
ion-‐exchange:
II.
Selectivity
studies
with
clinoptilolite
at
0.01N."
Agricultural
Engineering
6:
51-‐68.
5.
Dryden,
H.
T.
and
L.
R.
Weatherley
(1987).
"Aquaculture
water
treatment
by
ion-‐exchange:
I.
Capacity
of
Hector
clinoptilolite
at
0.01-‐0.05N."
Agricultural
Engineering
6:
39-‐50.
6.
Dryden
H.T.
(1984).
The
removal
of
ammonium
by
selective
ion
exchange
filtration
using
the
natural
zeolite
Clinoptilote.
PhD
1984
Heriot
Watt
University.
Dept
of
Chemical
Engineering
8. Thomas M. Losordo1 (April 1999), Michael P. Masser2 and James E. Rakocy. Recirculating
Aquaculture Tank Production Systems A Review of Component Options. SRAC Publication No. 453
Southern Region Aquaculture Centre.