...
If this is the case, then a floc blanket consisting of precipitated coagulant could be an efficient reactor for arsenic removal.
Current Research
An important first task A critical aspect for this research is to develop a reliable and sensitive method to measure for dissolved As (atomic absorption using graphite furnace atomization may be one option if we have a suitable lamp, inductively coupled plasma may be another option if you can get free help from someone with this instrument). There are some in the samples. Options include a Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometer (GFAAS), inductively coupled plasma and wet chemical methods (see Hach), but their sensitivity may not be adequate. Without an analytical tool we won't be able to verify the efficacy of any treatment scheme tested. Measuring dissolved As will require a phase separation from As adsorbed to suspended solids that does not alter the dissolved As concentration. Centrifugation is a good option (filtration probably will not work well). Uptake of dissolved As (adsorption) onto solids will likely depend on pH and ionic strength (as well as the concentration of suspended solids and dissolved As). pH control will be particularly important and it will be difficult to reproduce results if this is not part of the experimental protocol.. The best available method with high sensitivity in our lab is the GFAAS and a lot of work has been done to verify the efficacy at very low Arsenic concentrations.
In Spring 2013, the team set up a safety protocol to prevent hazards in the AguaClara lab. Additionally, it was In Spring 2013, we determined that aluminum coagulants may be just as effective as iron salts for arsenic removal. We also have researched the lab safety protocols for dealing with arsenic in the AguaClara lab, and believe we can begin testing coagulants next semester. Below is a list of questions we suggest next semester's team continue researching. We've also included a task list in our final report detailing how to get the lab arsenic ready and a potential experimental setup to test arsenic coagulation.
In Fall 2013, we began laboratory testingthe team arranged its laboratory space and begun bench experiments. The team initially began by preparing prepared the lab area for hazardous chemicals with the proper personal protective equipment and appropriate signagewarnings. Then we went on to collect it collected all pertinent testing equipment such as the tube tumbler, test tubes, and gathered the appropriate chemicals. We had to order tubes which had a filter insert so that we could test our small scale filtration process. There were also several chemicals which we needed to purchase to create our test groundwater. Once all of our the materials were collected we were able to begin testing our process of the team begun testing sedimentation and filtration in a small scale reactor. Our The GFAAS machine is was not fully operational at the time; there are a few tubes which need repairing, but once this is complete, we are confident that we will be able to read concentrations of arsenic which are below five parts per billion.
Future Research
- Which coagulant, Fe(Cl)3, alum, or PACl is better at removing arsenic?
- Is arsenic removal limited by the mass transfer of arsenic to a precipitated coagulant surface, or by capture of the precipitated coagulant by plate settlers and filters?
- Would a floc blanket formed from coagulant precipitate enhance arsenic removal?
- Does addition of a small amount of clay enhance flocculation and arsenic removal?
- How can we reduce the amount of coagulant loss to the reactor walls? (contact chamber, clay)
- What is arsenic removal correlated with? What is the limiting factor?
- Due to the geometry of arsenic flocs, should we consider a coagulation-filtration system rather than attempting flocculation and sedimentation?
...
.
During Spring 2014, the team was ready to proceed with a prototype. A sand filter was assembled using a 1.6 cm diameter PVC pipe of 1.2 m length. This design would allow continuous flow experiments with minimal amounts of contaminated effluent water. Simultaneously, progress on the GFAAS was made, first to make it work and further on to evaluate the sensitivity of the machine and obtain accurate readings down to < 10 ppb concentrations of Arsenic. The final achievement of this team were the experimental results of the continuously flow experiment which proved that a very high efficiency of Arsenic removal using filtration/coagulation is feasible.
Future Research
The primary goal for the proceeding continuous flow experiments is to evaluate which method of coagulant addition, pretreatment or co-treatment is more significant for removal. This should provide more insight about the pattern of coagulant distribution in the filter and suggest different schemes to optimize efficiency, Additionally, through further experiments the goal is to obtain insight about the mechanism by which coagulant removes Arsenic.
Future experiments will evaluate Arsenic removal with respect to the following parameters:
- Co-treatment dosage
- Pretreatment only
- Pretreatment & co-treatment method
- No treatment
- Coagulant saturation over time
- Arsenic influent concentration
- pH (range 6.5-8.5)
- Contact time
- Ferric vs Aluminum coagulant
The overall goal is to design a compact, low-energy filter that can remove relatively high concentrations of Arsenic to safe drinking standards with minimal operational difficulties and for long duration. We believe in the feasibility of the project but need to further elucidate the following factors:
- The optimal coagulant treatment and dosage
- The volume of water it can treat
- Backwash: process and fate
- The sensitivity of Arsenic removal at different environmental conditions.
...
Members
...
| Column |
|---|
...
Documents
...
| Column |
|---|
| Section |
|---|
| Column |
|---|