Ion Exchange Design - Hand Calculation: Brian Windsor (Purolite International LTD)
Ion Exchange Design - Hand Calculation: Brian Windsor (Purolite International LTD)
Ion Exchange Design - Hand Calculation: Brian Windsor (Purolite International LTD)
Introduction
Before design programmes were introduced, every engineer had to calculate the design by hand using resin manufacturers data. Each engineer had their own way to carry out in their calculation. Before starting the design ideally you need to know some basic information: 1. Maximum / Average / Minimum flow rate and roughly how many hours per day the maximum flow rate is required (m 3/h). Daily requirement (m3/day) over how many hours. Design water analysis Cation regenerant (sulphuric or hydrochloric acid)
2. 3. 4.
Flow rate
1. If the maximum demand is for a short period, or if there is a wide range of operating flow rates, then you can design the plant on the average demand and include a larger treated water storage to cater for the maximum flow rate or variations in demand. 2. It is always to keep the plant in operation rather than operating on an on-off basis with lots of stopping and starting. 3. Resins can operate over a range of flow rates, but the design of ion exchange columns is often very basic and many cannot accommodate very low flow rates. Poor distribution / collection is often encountered at low flow rates leading to channelling and poor performance.
Design Analysis
1. Knowledge of the maximum and typical analysis is critical when choosing the cycle time. No point choosing short cycle time on the design analysis if the worst water has a much higher TDS. This will mean the time between regenerations is too short. 2. The analysis should balance i.e. The cations and anions expressed as mg/l CaCO3 or in meq/l should be very similar (within 5%) 3. You have to design the plant to cope with the worst water, but if that water is very infrequently seen then all design operating costs and design decisions need to be based on the typical water analysis.
Design analysis to go forward In addition we will assume a Reactive Silica of 5 mg/l as CaCO3. It is a ground water and contains negligible dissolved organics.
Degassing tower
The inclusion of a degassing tower to remove the bicarbonate after the cation, when it is converted to carbonic acid, has to be decided before the design is commenced. If the bicarbonate level is above 40 mg/l as CaCO3 then it is normally cost effective to include a degasser, this is particularly the case on engineered design where a neutral effluent is often required from the waste water produced and plant costs are greater. However, on small, low flow rate, standard plants many companies do not supply a degasser as the capital cost associated with the tower, degassed water pumps (stainless steel) makes the pay back period less attractive and here all the bicarbonate load is often removed by the anion stage. On this design with 150 mg/l bicarbonate we will have a degasser tower.
Design Approach
In all cases however you have to design from the back of the plant. If you have a cation anion mixed bed system then you start with mixed bed calculation, then anion and then the cation. This way you can calculate or estimate the waste water required which must pass through the preceding unit during the design. For this example I will assume a simple co-flow regenerated system of cation anion followed by a polishing mixed bed. Counter flow regeneration is a little more complicated as you have to estimate the additional treated water required for regenerant injection and slow rinses on the cation and anion beds.
Hence based on UK vessel sizing = 1219 mm diameter (1.16 m 2) Resin volume per unit = 0.6 m x 1.16 m2 = 0.696 m3 (696 litres) Rounded up to the nearest 25 litres = 700 litres of each component. Caustic applied at 65g/l regen level = 65g/l x 700 / 1000 = 45.5 Kg (as 100% NaOH). HCl applied at 63 g/l regen level = 63 g/l x 700 / 1000 = 44.1 Kg (as 100% HCl). (Metric Sizing 1200 mm diameter with 675 litres of each resin)
Co-flow plant regen levels tend to be between 55 and 80 g/l. However, regen levels are sometimes encountered outside this range.
For this co-flow regenerated design I have chosen a regeneration level of 60 g/l NaOH. From the resin engineering bulletin this gives a base working capacity of 0.75 eq/l. This is 37.5 g/l as CaCO3 (0.75 x 50)
Carbon Dioxide percentage in anion load 5 mg/l / 160 mg/l x 100 = 3.125%. From graph correction factor = 1.00 (no effect)
We will have a bed depth above 0.7 m. From graph correction factor = 1.00 (No effect)
Silica percentage equates to 3.1% of Anion load. If we assume regenerant temperature of 10 C then from graph correction factor = 0.965 If we now apply all these correction factors to the base capacity we will obtain the theoretical working capacity (Ignoring those which are 1.0 as they have no effect). Theoretical Working capacity = 37.5 g/l x 0.95 x 0.965 = 34.37 g/l as CaCO3
Therefore revised working capacity is now 34.37 0.96 = 33.41 g/l Depending on the design / actual knowledge of the water, and the engineering system being used, a smart engineer will now apply a design margin to ensure the resin manufacturers performance can be guaranteed for an operating plant for the warranty period.
The volume of water treated per cycle would be: (8 hours x 60 m) + Anion regen water + MB regen water (21 m 3) (Note: a co-flow anion normally uses between 10 and 12 BV of water per regen.) We will use 12 BV for the calculation, so with 2675 litres of resin per anion unit, it needs 12 x 2700 litres = 32100 litres (32.1 m 3)
For this co-flow regenerated design I have chosen a regeneration level of 66 g/l HCl. This corresponds from the cation engineering bulletin to a base working capacity of 1.14 eq/l. This is 57 g/l as CaCO3 (1.14 x 50)
Design water temperature 10 C (minimum water temp) From graph correction factor = 0.96
This graph applies to high TDS or high BV/h flow rates. In this design it does not apply as we are to the LHS of the graph where the factor is 1.0 (No effect).
133.250 Kg as CaCO3 80.160 Kg as CaCO3 184.800 Kg as 100% HCl 160.500 Kg as 100% NaOH
If we convert the chemicals applied to as CaCO3 we can establish the excess acid and caustic generated from a regeneration (Conversion factor for HCl is x 1.37 and for NaOH it is x 1.25).
Acid applied = 184.80 x 1.37 = 253.2 Kg. Therefore excess acid is the 253.2 133.25 = 119.95 Kg as CaCO3 Caustic applied = 160.5 x 1.25 = 200.62 Kg. Therefore excess acid is the 200.62 80.160 = 120.46 Kg as CaCO3 The two excesses are similar therefore neutral effluent!
I CHEATED
I did the calculation first before preparing the slides and this is why I selected a cation regen level of 66 g/l. I knew it gave me a neutral effluent for the calculation/presentation Otherwise this part of the hand calculation takes some time to resolve. You have to draw a graph on which you plot regeneration level against excess regenerant generated and regeneration level against resin volume. Based on this graph it is then possible to interpret the results to reach a neutral effluent but it takes some time! Probably the subject of a another presentation. THIS IS WHERE DESIGN PROGRAMMES HELP SO MUCH
Vessel Sizing
Using these parameters and the pressure drop curves for each resin the vessel size I would have selected the same vessel size for both columns: Metric 1600 mm diameter x 2250 mm i/s.
This corresponds to 1.40 m cation and 1.34 m anion bed depth (installed) and a service velocity of 30 m 3/m2/h (m/h) UK 5 feet diameter x 8.25 feet i/s
This corresponds to 1.54 m cation and 1.47 m anion bed depth (installed) and a service velocity of 33 m 3/m2/h (m/h)
If we assume the minimum water temperature is 10 C in the winter, we can now calculate the pressure drop from a single graph for each resin which is based on the.
Velocity
Water Temperature
Bed Depth
At a velocity of 30 m/h and temperature of 10 C (green line) we can read of the pressure drop. In this case the answer is 46 kPa/m. Our bed depth is 1.34 m so pressure drop across a clean, fully classified, not compacted bed is 46 x 1.34 = 61.64 Kpa. For my pump calculations I add a safety margin between 10 and 20% depending on how free of solids the water is, cycle length (compaction), resin ageing etc. Therefore pressure loss for pump is around 70 Kpa within limit.
Leakage from Resin Beds Cation Resin Example From the cation regen level selected, and the raw water analysis we can calculate the sodium leakage from the cation resin which allows us to establish the conductivity exit the anion. Reactive silica leakage from anion makes no contribution to the anion outlet conductivity. Similar to the capacity calculation the leakage starts with the base leakage based on the regeneration level. Then we apply factors. In this case the factors are: 1. The EMA present in the feed in meq/l. (EMA = Sulphate + Nitrate + Chloride) The % Sodium in the feed as CaCO3.
2.
Regen level selected 66g/l. From slide 9: Sodium % in feed 90/250 = 36% EMA level in meq/l 150 mg/l / 50 = 3.0 Sodium Leakage 7 mg/l x 0.35 x 0.75 = 1.83 mg/l Therefore average leakage 2 mg/l as Na
Leakage from Resin Beds Anion Resin From the anion regen level selected, and the raw water analysis we can calculate the reactive silica leakage from the anion resin. Similar to the cation calculation the leakage starts with the base leakage based on the regeneration level. Then we apply factors. In this case there are five factors which are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. The % Reactive Silica to Total Anions. Feed Water Temperature (Highest temp gives highest leakage correction). Regenerant Temperature (Highest temp gives lowest leakage correction). Sodium leakage from cation in mg/l Na. Silica end point.