Curb-inlet storm drain systems for filtering trash and hydrocarbons

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6231758
  • Patent Number
    6,231,758
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, August 22, 2000
    24 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 15, 2001
    23 years ago
Abstract
A modular insert for curb-inlet storm drains creates a composite collection system for trash and for oil or other hydrocarbons and related chemicals. A hopper contains a multitude of irregular, macroscopic fragments of a hydrophobic, compliant, oil-absorbent, copolymer material having high surface area. Preferably, the material is formed with a binder in a novel extrusion process. The fragments absorb and retain permanently a high quantity of oil and other chemicals passing through the hopper, while permitting a high water flow-through rate. The fragments are held in place by a removable bottom plate, which allows replacement of the filtering fragments, and an internal basket. Trash and debris are collected in the internal basket. The hopper is configured to be suspended in a storm drain adjacent to a curb inlet on a bracket and can be installed or serviced through a conventional manhole entry. The hopper has a side cutout that permit lateral overflow from one of the modular units to an adjacent one.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




This invention is in the field of systems and methods for separating trash and hydrocarbons from water that passes into storm drains, such as runoff from city streets.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




A large volume of trash, including leaves, twigs, plastic or paper cups, cigarette butts, and wrappers, and the like, pass into storm drains adjacent to paved surfaces such as streets and parking lots, such as through curb inlets.




Larger spills of oil can also flow into storm drains, such as from loading docks, gas stations, and the like. In addition, quantities of oil or other hydrocarbons are frequently spilled on the ground and subsequent water flow, such as from rain, can cause the oil to flow into storm drains. This is referred to as “non-point-source pollution.”




The volume of oil from non-point-source pollution in typical water runoff is surprisingly large. For example, a government study in one published article showed that storm water sampled from street sites contained an “event mean concentration” of 2.2 mg. of oil per liter of runoff water. Shepp, “Petroleum Hydrocarbon Concentrations Observed in Runoff from Discrete, Urbanized Automotive-Intensive Land Uses,” Watershed


96


. If one meter of rain per year falls on a street 10 meters wide, then at that observed mean rate, the annual runoff from each kilometer of street will contain about 275 liters of hydrocarbons. Moreover, other studies of non-point-source pollution have measured oil concentrations an order of magnitude higher at some locations. Spills can increase the volume of oil even more.




The result of such problems include enormous annual costs, both financial and environmental, by contaminating natural receiving waters.




Some known systems use a screen-type filter through which the water runoff passes. However, such systems are prone to becoming dogged with debris, thereby blocking the inlet to the storm drain. Also, such systems can collect only limited quantities of oil.




Other known systems use oil-absorbing materials, particularly cellulose-based ones, that can collect oil. However, those materials permit leaching of the absorbed oil back into the runoff water, because the absorbed oil is not encapsulated in the oil-absorbent material. In addition, those materials typically have small pores, creating a blocking effect that prevents long-term effectiveness in absorbing oil and limits the quantity of water runoff that can be passed through the material.




Other known systems are available for screening of oil runoff below grates, as in catchbasins. However, such systems are not suitable for the large number of curb-inlet storm drains that are installed already, and are continuing to be installed. Curb-inlet storm drains are used widely over catchbasins, in part because they suffer from fewer problems arising from the presence of standing water and residue sediments that are endemic to storm drains, and in part because they can handle high peak flows, such as during flash floods. Systems designed for screening oil runoff below grates or in catchbasins, therefore, are not generally suited to handle the problem of screening oil runoff into curb-inlet storm drains.




There has been a need for some time for trash and oil recovery systems for a curb inlet that would (1) contain oil quickly and permanently, (2) collect debris, (3) permit removal of trash and oil for disposal, and (4) permit collection over a long term and despite high peak flows.




Accordingly, it is a primary object of the present invention to achieve a more effective system for recovering trash and oil from water passing into curb-inlet storm drains or the like.




It is another object of the invention to provide an apparatus for effectively containing oil spills flowing into curb-inlet storm drains, over a wide range of flow rates.




It is another object of the invention to provide an apparatus for ameliorating oil spills by entrapping the oil in an oil-sorbent material.




It is another object of the invention to provide a means of improving the collection of spilled oil.




It is another object of the invention to provide collection systems that handle debris.




The present invention achieves the above and other objectives by use of a modular insert for curb-inlet storm drains having a composite collection system for trash and for oil or other hydrocarbons and related chemicals. A hopper contains a multitude of irregular, macroscopic fragments of a hydrophobic, compliant, oil-absorbent, copolymer material having high surface area. Preferably, the material is formed with a binder in a novel extrusion process. The fragments absorb and retain permanently a high quantity of oil and other chemicals passing through the hopper, while permitting a high water flow-through rate. The fragments are held in place by a removable bottom plate, which allows replacement of the filtering fragments, and an internal basket. Trash and debris are collected in the internal basket. The hopper is configured to be suspended in a storm drain adjacent to a curb inlet on a bracket and can be installed or serviced through a conventional manhole entry.




Other aspects of the invention will be appreciated by those skilled in the art after a reading of the detailed disclosure of the present invention below.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS





FIG. 1

is a perspective, cut-away view of a curb-inlet storm drain with an embodiment of the inventive system installed.





FIG. 2

is a perspective view of a central hopper module of an embodiment of the inventive system.





FIG. 3

is a perspective view of an end hopper module of the embodiment shown in FIG.


2


.





FIG. 4

is a cross-sectional side view of the inventive hoppers shown in

FIGS. 2

or


3


.





FIG. 5

is a bottom perspective view of the inventive hoppers shown in

FIGS. 1

,


2


, or


3


.





FIG. 6

is an outline of a sample copolymer fragment used in the inventive hoppers shown in

FIGS. 1

,


2


, or


3


.





FIG. 7

is a detail view of a section through a fragment such as the one shown in FIG.


6


.




Common numerals are used in the several figures to indicate similar elements.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION




The system includes the use of a quantity of appropriately formed fragments comprising copolymer-based materials that absorb and entrap crude or refined hydrocarbon products, including crude oil of any viscosity and gasoline or other refined fuels. For purposes of this application, the term “oil” refers to any hydrocarbon material. The materials can also absorb a variety of chemicals pollutants, such as benzene, carbon disulfide, and various chlorinated hydrocarbons.




The inventive system is designed to collect trash and oil or other pollutants spilled and flowing into a fluid receptacle such as curb-inlet storm drain


100


shown in FIG.


1


. Storm drain


100


can be part of a municipal sewer or waste water system or any private collection system, such as at a gas station.




Frequently, as shown in

FIG. 1

, storm drain


100


is of a sort placed under sidewalk


102


at the margin of street or roadway


104


. A grate (not shown) of vertical slats or bars may be placed in the gap


106


in the curb (not shown) connecting sidewalk


102


and the gutter of street


104


.




In the inventive system shown in

FIG. 1

, a flow consisting of water, pollutants, and trash (less larger trash items screened by the optional grate) enters storm drain


100


and falls into hopper


110


. Basket


120


screens trash remaining in the flow. As trash accumulates in basket


120


, the trash items thereby collected act as a secondary screen for new items in the mixed flow. Basket


120


is formed, in one embodiment, of non-corrosive expanded metal (steel) with diamond-shaped holes approximately 0.5×1.0 mm. in size. Basket


120


is secured, such as by welding, to front lip


112


and back lip


114


of hopper


110


.




A multitude of fragments


130


, of a type discussed below, are held between the outside of basket


120


and the inside of hopper


110


. The fragments


130


are irregularly shaped, and not closely packed, allowing the liquid runoff to flow through hopper


110


at a high rate relative to cellulose or other known systems. The fragments


130


are hydrophobic but absorb and hold oil and chemical pollutants, as explained in more detail below, and thereby extract those undesired materials from the storm flow.




After passing through fragments


130


, the runoff exits hopper


110


through a perforated steel bottom


140


, shown in more detail in connection with

FIG. 5

, and proceeds through the storm drain and into the sewer or other water-collection or outlet system.




Hopper


110


is removable from storm drain


100


. In the embodiment shown, hopper


110


hangs from a bracket


150


fastened to the side of storm drain


100


, such as just below curb inlet


106


. All elements of the hopper


110


are preferably manufactured of a noncorrosive material such as steel or other metals or high-density plastics.




A modular embodiment of hopper


110


is shown in

FIGS. 2 and 3

.

FIG. 2

shows a central module, with cutouts


116


,


117


near the top of side walls


118


,


119


. In this embodiment, basket


120


does not extend parallel to and inside side walls


118


,


119


, but rather terminates at the side walls. The central hopper of

FIG. 2

is placed directly under the curb inlet.





FIG. 3

shows a side module, with a matching cutout


117


near the top of matching side wall


119


. When side walls


119


of the central and side modules shown in

FIGS. 2 and 3

are placed together, cutouts


117


match as well.




Although the side module of

FIG. 3

is shown as adjoining wall


119


, it should be apparent without need for illustration that an opposite side module can adjoin wall


118


on the other side of the central module of FIG.


2


.





FIG. 4

shows a cross-sectional view of hopper


110


, of the sort shown in

FIGS. 2

or


3


, with cutout


116


shown on the top end of side wall


118


.

FIG. 4

shows an elongated hook


160


fastened to the front wall of hopper


110


(in an alternative embodiment not shown, hook


160


can be formed integrally with the front wall), which engages bracket


150


. In this fashion, each module can be individually handled for installation or servicing.




The modular design of this embodiment permits more effective screening even in high-flow situations. The geometry of the inventive hopper


110


is such that the flow-through rate is constrained by the smallest of (1) the area of perforations in bottom plate


140


, (2) the flow-through rate of fragments


130


, (3) the area of the holes in basket


120


, or (4) the flow-through rate of trash accumulated in basket


120


. However hopper


110


is dimensioned, there will be times when runoff is at a high enough level to exceed the flow-through rate of hopper


110


. In that situation, the water level in basket


120


will quickly rise.




In the modular embodiment shown in

FIGS. 2-4

, when the water level reaches the bottom of cutouts


116


,


117


, water and smaller, lighter trash items will overflow into the adjoining basket instead of falling into the storm drain itself. This arrangement hinders the possibility of collected trash being washed out of the collection basket


120


, and it will help screen more of the flow into the curb-inlet storm drain.




It should be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that any number of modules of the sort shown in

FIGS. 2 and 3

can be arranged in a row. The side module of

FIG. 3

is used for the end of a row, while an arbitrary number of central modules of

FIG. 2

are used at all places other than the end of a row.




The modules can extend even beyond the left or right end of curb inlet


106


, subject of course to the proviso that there is space in the storm drain, as it is not necessary that water flow directly into each of the hoppers


110


of each of the modules in a row. Rather, extra modules can be used at the end of a row to increase the capacity of the system to handle higher flow rates.




The relative dimensions of the cutouts


116


,


117


can be altered to adjust the flow rate at which overflow will occur. In an environment in which high flow levels are encountered often, it may be desired to lower the height of the bottom of cutouts


116


,


117


, to spread the incoming flow laterally along the row of modules when the flow exceeds a relatively low flow rate, thereby minimizing the chance that water will overflow the row of hoppers


110


and pass directly into the storm drain


100


. In an environment in which high flow levels are encountered less frequently, by contrast, it may be desired to keep the bottom of cutouts


116


,


117


relatively high, to avoid the necessity to change the filter media in the side modules frequently.




During storms surges or at other high-flow times, the flow through curb inlet


106


will be moving fast enough that much of the storm water will flow over hopper


110


and pass directly into storm drain


100


. This is not undesirable, however, because such bypass reduces the chance of damage to the equipment. The force of the runoff during high-flow times is so powerful that equipment damage would likely result from any attempt to screen the water. In addition, in real-world weather conditions, the flow rate usually builds up somewhat gradually, and the earlier, lower-flow water is likely to wash away a high proportion of the pollutants that can be carried into the storm drain. Thus, little additional oil or trash will be included in the main part of a storm surge. In any event, any such additional pollutants, which are washed away only by high-flow water, will be highly diluted in the extra water of a storm surge. Thus, screening excess water at the highest flow rates is not worth the effort.




At high flow rates, runoff passes from street


104


through curb inlet


106


(see

FIG. 1

) so quickly that the water enters storm drain


100


nearly horizontally, largely overflowing back lip


114


of hopper


110


. Back lip


114


is preferably designed with a slope (as best shown in FIG.


4


), so that high-speed water splashing against lip


114


at high flow rates will put a downward and clockwise force on hopper


110


, which will press the lower front end of hopper


110


against the wall of storm drain


100


and maintain a firm connection of hook


160


and bracket


150


. If back lip


114


were not so designed, the buffeting from high-pressure water directed against a flat inside back side of basket


120


could wash away some of the fragments


130


behind the screen of basket


120


and in extreme cases could cause hook


160


to disengage from bracket


150


. An optional rubber or plastic spacer or bumper can be secured to the lower part of the front side of the hopper


110


, to retain hopper


110


in a vertical position against the wall of the storm drain extending down from curb inlet


106


.




In a preferred embodiment, hopper


110


is rectangular, measuring about


60


cm. high at the back (below lip


114


), 35 cm. wide, and about 40 cm. deep. A hopper


110


so dimensioned holds about 8 kg. of oil-absorbent fragments


130


of the sort described below. Back lip


114


is set at a height slightly above front lip


112


and about equal to the bend in bracket


150


.




Although

FIGS. 1-4

show a generally rectangular hopper


110


, other configurations are also possible. Hopper


110


can be sized to fit a particular catchbasin. Alternatively, hopper


110


can be made in various widths, to accommodate different curb inlets


106


. In a the modular embodiment shown in

FIGS. 2 and 3

, however, such variety is not necessary.





FIG. 5

shows bottom plate


140


, which in the embodiment shown is removably fastened to hopper


110


. A multitude of round holes about 3 mm. across (only some of which are shown in the figure) allow water to pass through bottom plate


140


.




From time to time, fragments


130


can become oil-logged and it is desired to replace that oil-absorbent material with another quantity of new material. With the material discussed below, in the exemplary dimensions discussed, and with normal runoff levels, such replacement is expected to occur on the order of once a year or so. In addition, hopper


110


can be removed more frequently for the purpose of emptying trash basket


120


, without the need to replace fragments


130


each time.




During servicing, hopper


110


is lifted from bracket


150


from inside storm drain


100


and removed from storm drain


100


through a manhole. Hopper


110


is dimensioned in the preferred embodiment to fit through a standard manhole. One or more handles


144


can be optionally fastened to hopper


110


, to assist in easy installation and servicing.




Horizontal diffuser plates (not shown) can optionally be placed between layers of fragments


130


. Such plates can be formed of plastic, for example, and contain a multitude of holes or small slits. The purpose of a diffuser plate is to defeat the propensity of the liquid flowing through hopper


110


to collect in channels. The formation of channels is undesirable because much of the liquid in a channel will come into contact only with those of the fragments


130


that have previously absorbed oil.




When oil-water runoff passes through curb inlet


106


and comes into contact with the copolymer material of fragments


130


contained inside hopper


110


, the copolymer material will absorb and entrap the oil. Because the copolymer material is hydrophobic, however, it will not become water-logged, and excess water will pass into storm drain


100


. After suitable copolymer material has absorbed oil, subsequent runoff flowing therepast will not wash away the oil. Indeed, it has been found that the materials described herein can remain in contact with water continuously for at least several months, and perhaps indefinitely, without releasing the oil or allowing oil to emulsify.





FIG. 6

shows an example of a suitably formed copolymer fragment


130


, for use inside hopper


110


. The principal ingredient of fragment


130


is a copolymeric material that is known to sorb oil but not water. Preferably, the material is compliant or flexible.




As oil enters fragments


130


, they expand somewhat. Thus, it is preferred to avoid filling hopper


110


completely with fragment


130


, to prevent fragment


130


from pushing upwards into basket


120


as they expand.




Particularly suitable types of copolymers fall within the class of thermoplastic elastomers, such as styrene-butadiene-styrene (“SBS”), which is a styrenic block copolymer. Styrenic block copolymers were developed for applications that require impact resistance, and this is still their primary use. SBS is highly sorbent, non-toxic, and remains coherent after it is oil saturated. An alternative styrenic block copolymer is styrene-isoprene-styrene (“SIS”).




In a preferred embodiment formed in accordance with the preferred process described below, SBS material formed into granules is mixed with granulated binder material. In that embodiment, granular porous SBS with about 30% styrene has been found suitable, when sifted to retain particles in the range of sizes between 4 and 24 mesh. Preferably, the SBS product is manufactured without talc, contrary to the standard manufacturing process, to enhance inter-granular linking or bonding in the formed body.




The binder material is a compliant or flexible, hydrophobic, olefinic polymer material in a granular form and having a melting point lower than that of the oil-absorbent copolymer. Polyolefin thermoplastic elastomers, such as ethylene propylene (“EP”) rubber or ethylene propylene with a diene monomer (“EPDM”) have been found suitable. The binder largely prevents fragments


130


from crumbling while being handled in dry form, yet also absorbs a certain quantity of oil. In a preferred embodiment, EPDM granules sifted to retain particles between 12 and 24 mesh were found suitable.




About 70-90% by weight of the material of fragments


130


consists of SBS and the remainder of EPDM binder. As explained below, SBS and EPDM granules are mixed and formed into fragments


130


in a way that results in SBS granules in an EPDM matrix.




The fragments


130


are irregularly shaped and not in powder form, preventing them from being too compactly packed inside hopper


110


, because that may restrict the flow of water. The random shapes also move the liquid laterally in hopper


110


, thereby further reducing the tendency of the liquid to collect into channels.




To permit faster oil absorption and less gel blocking (a phenomenon in which a layer of absorbed oil at the exterior blocking access to inner portions of fragments


130


), without increasing the distance from surface to center, it is desirable to avoid smooth exterior “skins” on outer surfaces of fragments


130


. The preferred process of formation discussed below promotes this goal.




Also to reduce gel blocking, fragments


130


preferably have numerous fissures


370


extending into them from exterior surfaces and passing between the grains of SBS, as illustrated in FIG.


7


. Such fissures increase the effective surface area of fragments


130


while still maintaining each as a coherent whole, permitting easy handling. The preferred formation process discussed below promotes this goal.




In one example, fragments


130


consisted primarily of irregularly shaped objects with various dimensions about a centimeter or two across. Those fragments


130


were formed, of 78% SBS and 22% EPDM and had a bulk density of about 0.6 g/cc and mostly weighed about 2 to 3 grams each. Some of the fragments had broken into smaller pieces, some of which weighed as little as 0.3 to 1 grams. A few fragments consisted of pairs of normally sized fragments that had linked together, forming larger fragments about 5 to 6 grams each.




The bulk density of fragments


130


is controlled, also to reduce gel blocking. With the preferred bulk density, the SBS granules in fragments


130


are also less likely to clump to each other when soaked with oil, which also improves sorbency. Similarly, the SBS grain sizes identified above are selected to avoid gel blocking from either overly large chunks or agglomerated small-diameter, powdery particles.




With the preferred materials discussed above, bulk density greater than 0.75 g/cc tend to prevent the oil from entering the fragments, while bulk density smaller than 0.35 g/cc cause the fragments to fragment more easily, either when dry or after absorbing oil. For example, copolymer fragments


130


with a bulk density in the preferred range have enough inter-granular voids to permit oil to penetrate substantially throughout the thickness of the larger fragments


130


, thereby avoiding gel blocking, while leaving them mostly intact. Fragments of such material can absorb up to five times their weight in oil.




One method of forming fragments


130


applies a modified extrusion process. SBS and EPDM granules are placed in the hopper of an extruder of conventional design, for example, a two-inch Bonnot lab extruder with a hot-water external barrel heater. The extruder heats the granular material to a temperature not exceeding 120° F., far below normal extrusion temperatures for plastic products, and preferably about 105° F.




In the barrel of the extruder, the EPDM quickly become softened, as a result of heat, pressure, and mechanical agitation by the screw and barrel in combination. The extruder's screw mixes the softened EPDM and the SBS, forming a matrix of EPDM surrounding and interlinked to SBS granules. Because the SBS is not melted, some air bubbles remain in the mixture. The softening process occurs quite rapidly in the extruder, permitting very short dwell times (such as less than one minute), which permits rapid manufacturing.




The composite material is pressed through a circular die with a central rod or mandrel, at a flow rate of about 6 g/sec., which if left undisturbed would form a cylindrical body with an axial hole. However, radial arms at the end of the die, or a similarly configured cutter just outside the nozzle, section the cylindrical bodies into segments, perhaps four sections. An automatic knife fires every two seconds or so, cutting off lengths of the sections.




In another embodiment of the process, a spider (used inside the extruder just before the die to stop rotation of the material) cuts the material, and the extruder is run at a higher speed, resulting in a flow rate of about 10 g/sec., sufficiently large to prevent the material from mixing back together after passing through the spider. Thus, the spider serves the additional purpose of cutting the material. In this embodiment, the knife speed is increased to about once a second, to correspond.




Another way of producing such fragments is to use a smaller die, with a hole approximately one centimeter across, to produce the fragments directly rather than by cutting them radially from a cylindrical form.




Upon passing through the die, the SBS granules, which have been compressed somewhat by being forced through the die, re-expand, “fluffing” the extruded material while it slowly cools. The expansion is further assisted by air remaining in the mixture. After the extruded material is cut into suitable lengths, it slowly cools outside the extruder, and the granules continue to expand for a time, causing additional fluffing.




The EPDM matrix


390


(see

FIG. 7

) forms a durable but permeable structure for the SBS granules


380


and provides mechanical integrity to resulting fragments


130


. Thus, fragments


130


formed in accordance with the preferred method resist breaking or cracking absent extreme elastic deformation, despite the presence of fissures


370


. Also, fragments of such bodies do not detach easily in the form of flakes, crumbles, or dust, even with rough handling.




The fluffing effect (typically undesired in extrusion processes) is beneficial because it forms inter-granular fissures


370


in the EPDM matrix, throughout the structure. However, the fissuring is not so great as to cause loss of structural integrity. As noted above, fissures are preferred to facilitate rapid passage of oil into fragments


130


and to reduce the incidence of gel blocking, permitting continued absorption.




Slight irregularities in the flow rate, the fluffing effect, and the way in which the knife cuts the material can cause fragments of different sizes to form. For example, a larger-than-normal fragment can be formed when two adjacent sections link together. A smaller-than-normal fragment can be formed when a section breaks apart if fissuring caused by fluffing happens to occur along a fracture line.




The resulting fragments


130


are similar in size and general appearance to popcorn. About 3,000 of the fragments would fill the hopper


110


of example dimensions discussed above.




Although the invention has been described with reference to specific embodiments, many modifications and variations of such embodiments can be made without departing from the innovative concepts disclosed. Thus, it is understood by those skilled in the art that alternative forms and embodiments of the invention can be devised without departing from its spirit and scope.



Claims
  • 1. A modular insert for storm drains for collecting trash and absorbing oil or chemicals comprising:(a) a hopper having a perforated bottom plate and side walls; (b) a basket inside the hopper; (c) wherein there is a space for a quantity of oil-sorbent material in the hopper and between the hopper and the basket; (d) wherein the hopper has a cutout at the top end of at least one of the side walls.
  • 2. The modular insert of claim 1 wherein the bottom plate is removable from the hopper.
  • 3. The modular insert of claim 1 wherein the basket is comprised of expanded metal forming diamond-shaped holes.
  • 4. The modular insert of claim 1 wherein the hopper is rectangular in cross-section.
  • 5. The apparatus of claim 4 further comprising a bracket coupled to the outside of the top end of a side wall of the hopper.
  • 6. The apparatus of claim 5 further comprising a lip at the top end of that side wall opposite to the bracket, which lip has an upper surface that is sloped relative to the top of the hopper.
  • 7. The apparatus of claim 6 further comprising a bumper at the bottom of the side wall to which the bracket is coupled.
  • 8. The apparatus of claim 7 wherein the bottom plate is removable from the hopper and wherein the basket is comprised of expanded metal forming diamond-shaped holes.
  • 9. The apparatus of claim 8 further comprising a horizontal diffuser plate in the hopper separating some of the multitude of fragments from the remainder of the multitude.
  • 10. The apparatus of claim 1 further comprising a horizontal diffuser plate in the hopper separating some of the multitude of fragments from the remainder of the multitude.
  • 11. A modular insert system for curb-inlet storm drains for collecting trash and absorbing oil or chemicals comprising:(a) a plurality of hoppers, each hopper having: (i) a perforated, rectangular bottom plate and side walls perpendicular to each edge of the bottom plate; and (ii) a basket inside the hopper; (iii) wherein there is a space for a quantity of oil-sorbent material in the hopper and between the hopper and the basket; (b) wherein at least two of the hoppers have matching cutouts at the top is end of adjacent side walls.
  • 12. The system of claim 11 wherein there are at least three hoppers, two of which have cutouts at the top end of only one side wall and a third of which has cutouts at the top end of opposing side walls.
  • 13. The system of claim 12:(a) wherein each hopper further has a bracket coupled to the outside of the top end of a side wall of the hopper; (b) wherein the cutouts of the third hopper are on different side walls from the side wall supporting the bracket; (c) wherein the cutouts of the two hoppers having only one cutout are on side walls adjacent to the respective side wall supporting the bracket; and (d) wherein the cutouts of the two hoppers having only one cutout are on opposite sides of the respective side walls supporting the bracket.
  • 14. The system of claim 13 wherein, for each hopper, the bottom plate is removable, the basket is comprised of expanded metal forming diamond-shaped holes, and the hopper further comprises a lip at the top end of that side wall opposite to the bracket, which lip has an upper surface that is sloped relative to the top of the hopper.
CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of application Ser. No. 09/252,041, filed Feb. 17, 1999 now U.S. Pat. No. 6,106,707, which claims the benefit of provisional application Ser. No. 60/075,280, filed Feb. 18, 1998.

US Referenced Citations (172)
Number Name Date Kind
RE. 29996 Jordan et al. May 1979
248559 Jackson Oct 1881
425641 Van De Walle Apr 1890
530816 Wright Dec 1894
543740 Kuhns Jul 1895
1032700 Pickett Jul 1912
1164527 Kelly, Jr. Dec 1915
1274227 Woodson Jul 1918
1471819 Bauschard Oct 1923
1935642 Laughlin Nov 1933
1972513 Drehmann Sep 1934
2102310 Egan Dec 1937
2182795 Day Dec 1939
2467021 Fischer Apr 1949
2557079 Cutri Jun 1951
2813745 Frieder et al. Nov 1957
2889928 Sisk Jun 1959
3147216 Oemler Sep 1964
3221888 Muller Dec 1965
3246582 Wade Apr 1966
3324630 Teller et al. Jun 1967
3415745 Isaacson Dec 1968
3494862 Horowitz Feb 1970
3518183 Evans Jun 1970
3536616 Kondoh et al. Oct 1970
3537587 Kain Nov 1970
3538020 Heskett et al. Nov 1970
3539013 Smith Nov 1970
3565257 Cavalieri Feb 1971
3567660 Winkler Mar 1971
3594335 Schultz et al. Jul 1971
3607741 Sohnius Sep 1971
3607793 Mahlman Sep 1971
3617565 Fahlvik Nov 1971
3617566 Oshima et al. Nov 1971
3667235 Preus et al. Jun 1972
3667608 Burroughs et al. Jun 1972
3679058 Smith Jul 1972
3681237 Orban Aug 1972
3702657 Cunningham et al. Nov 1972
3713539 Thompson et al. Jan 1973
3739913 Bogosian Jun 1973
3756948 Weinberg Sep 1973
3783621 Preus et al. Jan 1974
3800950 Hess et al. Apr 1974
3831760 Economy et al. Aug 1974
3837494 Stevenson Sep 1974
3868322 Orloff Feb 1975
3888766 DeYoung Jun 1975
3915859 Sundin et al. Oct 1975
3916969 Auerbach et al. Nov 1975
3923472 Martinez et al. Dec 1975
3929631 Winkler Dec 1975
4002177 Rainer et al. Jan 1977
4031839 Pedone Jun 1977
4039489 Fletcher et al. Aug 1977
4052306 Schwartz et al. Oct 1977
4060487 Samsel Nov 1977
4061807 Shaler et al. Dec 1977
4065923 Preus Jan 1978
4070287 Wiegand et al. Jan 1978
4084380 Hallhagen Apr 1978
4099619 Hudler et al. Jul 1978
4102783 Zenno et al. Jul 1978
4111813 Preus Sep 1978
4206080 Sato et al. Jun 1980
4207378 Klein Jun 1980
4248758 Wright Feb 1981
4261823 Gallagher et al. Apr 1981
4264444 Bronnec Apr 1981
4332854 Parker Jun 1982
4366067 Golding et al. Dec 1982
4401475 Eriksson et al. Aug 1983
4419232 Arntyr et al. Dec 1983
4420400 Weitzen Dec 1983
4427157 Klein Jan 1984
4429065 Gancy Jan 1984
4439324 Crotti Mar 1984
4454039 McCoy Jun 1984
4497663 Fisher et al. Feb 1985
4497712 Crowling Feb 1985
4519431 Yoshimura et al. May 1985
4519918 Ericsson et al. May 1985
4560718 Ritchey Dec 1985
4592690 Busch Jun 1986
4594157 McGowan Jun 1986
4640730 Streets et al. Feb 1987
4672781 Pichon Jun 1987
4737394 Zafiroglu Apr 1988
4740435 Markin et al. Apr 1988
4776722 Gaudin Oct 1988
4801386 Sugimori et al. Jan 1989
4919820 Lafay et al. Apr 1990
4929349 Beckman May 1990
4941978 Gabrick Jul 1990
4965129 Bair et al. Oct 1990
4980229 Park et al. Dec 1990
5009790 Bustamante et al. Apr 1991
5032640 Fachini Jul 1991
5037541 Ruey-Jang et al. Aug 1991
5071564 Stein et al. Dec 1991
5075014 Sullivan Dec 1991
5104548 Gabrick Apr 1992
5133619 Murfae et al. Jul 1992
5135578 Billings Aug 1992
5135660 Chromecek et al. Aug 1992
5159016 Inoue et al. Oct 1992
5165821 Fischer et al. Nov 1992
5173182 Debellian Dec 1992
5179611 Umeda et al. Jan 1993
5181802 Thengs et al. Jan 1993
5186831 DePetris Feb 1993
5207901 Ravagnan May 1993
5211858 Dovan et al. May 1993
5223154 MacPherson, Jr. et al. Jun 1993
5227072 Brinkley Jul 1993
5232587 Hegemier et al. Aug 1993
5248729 Inoue et al. Sep 1993
5252215 McFarlane et al. Oct 1993
5256226 Marzola et al. Oct 1993
5278217 Umeda et al. Jan 1994
5281463 Cotton Jan 1994
5284580 Shyh Feb 1994
5297367 Sainz Mar 1994
5304311 Codiglia Apr 1994
5324429 Holland Jun 1994
5330651 Robertson Jul 1994
5360548 Stein et al. Nov 1994
5364535 Buckalew Nov 1994
5374600 Hozumi et al. Dec 1994
5391295 Wilcox et al. Feb 1995
5403474 Emery Apr 1995
5405539 Schneider Apr 1995
5407575 Vinsonhaler Apr 1995
5414029 Lemoine et al. May 1995
5423985 Addeo et al. Jun 1995
5428085 Burel et al. Jun 1995
5432000 Young Sr., et al. Jul 1995
5439590 Steffan Aug 1995
5468539 Crivelli Nov 1995
5480254 Autry et al. Jan 1996
5496865 Heese et al. Mar 1996
5511904 Van Egmond Apr 1996
5516845 Heese et al. May 1996
5573349 Paoluccio Nov 1996
5575925 Logue, Jr. Nov 1996
5624576 Lenhart et al. Apr 1997
5632889 Tharp May 1997
5641847 Hozumi et al. Jun 1997
5679246 Wilcox et al. Oct 1997
5707527 Knutson et al. Jan 1998
5712358 Sojka Jan 1998
5720574 Barella Feb 1998
5725782 Chinn et al. Mar 1998
5733445 Fanelli Mar 1998
5744048 Stetler Apr 1998
5762790 Zoeller Jun 1998
5767060 Hanrahan Jun 1998
5788849 Hutter, Jr. et al. Aug 1998
5820762 Bamer et al. Oct 1998
5830967 Sojka Nov 1998
5834577 Sojka Nov 1998
5849198 Sharpless Dec 1998
5863440 Rink et al. Jan 1999
5869555 Simmons et al. Feb 1999
5925241 Aldridge et al. Jul 1999
5955552 Sojka Sep 1999
5958226 Fleischmann Sep 1999
6080307 Morris et al. Jun 2000
6099723 Morris et al. Aug 2000
6106707 Morris et al. Aug 2000
6143172 Rink et al. Nov 2000
Foreign Referenced Citations (4)
Number Date Country
CH-613245 Sep 1979 CH
7109 Oct 1900 GB
13514 Jul 1983 GB
4-371203 Dec 1992 JP
Non-Patent Literature Citations (38)
Entry
Fam, Sami, Michael K. Stenstron, and Gary Silverman, “Hydrocarbons in Urban Runoff,” Journal of Environmental Engineering, vol. 113, No. 5, Oct. 1987, pp. 1032-1046.
“Block Copolymers,” Polymer Handbook, p. 34 (Wiley, 3rd Edition 1989).
“Selection Criteria and Laboratory Evaluation of Oilspill Sorbents,” Environmental Protection Series, Report EPS 3/SP/3, pp. 1-73 (Jun. 1991).
“Environment Spill Encapsulant Polymers,” IRM Chemical Form 550 product brochure (Aug. 1993).
Rushefsky, “Old Tires Now Can Now Be Recycled,” Staten Island Advance (Oct. 22, 1993).
“Titan Tech Attacks Tire Recycling Mess,” American Metal Market (Oct. 26, 1993).
Alexander, “Bradley is Center of World Attention this Week” Chickasha Daily Express (Nov. 4, 1993).
“Business & Technology,” Solid Waste Report, vol. 24, No. 43, p. 346 (Nov. 4, 1993).
“A Cooler Way to Melt Junked Tires,” Business Week (Nov. 8, 1993).
Schulman, “A New Spin on Old Tires,” Newsweek (Nov. 15, 1993).
“Titan Develops Tyre & Plastics Recycling,” HazNews (Dec. 1993).
Kokish, “Titan Opens Pyrolysis Plants in South Korea,” Tire Business (Dec. 13, 1993).
Metz, “N.M. Firm is Ready to Roll into the Tire Recycling Industry,” The Boston Globe (Dec. 28, 1993).
“High-Tech Breakthroughs,” Boardroom Reports (Jan. 1, 1994).
Kansas, “Catalysts and Beams Take Aim at Wastes,” The Wall Street Journal (Jan. 21, 1994).
“Recycling News,” Green Alternatives, vol. 4, No. 1 (Feb./Mar. 1994).
“Titan Technologies, Inc.,” Conservative Speculator (Jun. 1994).
“Titan Technologies, Inc.,” Investor's NewsWire, p. All (Sep. 9, 1994).
DiChristina, “Mired in Tires,” Popular Science (Oct. 1994).
McDonagh, et al., “Handling and Disposal of Oil Waste from Oil Spills at Sea,” paper presented at Long Beach Oil Spill Conference (Feb. 27, 1995).
Cassidy, “Titan Potential,” MoneyWorld (Apr. 1995), pp. 18-21.
Titan Technologies, Inc. Investor's Booklet.
Materials re: King County Evaluation of Commercially Available Catch Basin Inserts for Treatment of Stormwater Runoff from Developed Sites, 10/95.
Shepp, David L., “Petroleum Hydrocarbon Concentrations Observed in Runoff from Discrete, Urbanized Automotive-Intensive Land Uses,” Watershed '96 Conference Proceedings, pp. 220-223.
Imtech-Imbibitive Technologies Corporation product literature re “Imbiber Beads,” 1993, 1996, 1997.
“HydroCartridges/Rubberizer” product literature 1994-1997.
Aqua Treatment Systems, Inc./“Absorbent W” product literature, 1996-1997.
“Innovative Stormwater Treatment Products & Services Guide,” prepared for the Stormwater Technologies Trade Shows, Nov. 17 & 19, 1997 (discussing several products, some of which were commercially available before Jun. 1997).
Suntree Isles, Inc. “Curb Inlet Basket” product literature, 1995-96 (and see item A above).
Inventive Resources, Inc. “Water Decontamination” product literature (4/98 and see itemB above).
“Petrosorb HGPPL-1 Petroleum Product Spill Encapsulant,” Petrosorb product brochure (source and date unknown).
“First in Thirst,” MatAsorb Industrial Sorbents product brochure (sourch and date unknown).
Pacific Fluid System, Corp. “Linductor Oil Recovery and Bulk Transfer System Booklet”.
“Fact Sheets, ” Team One USA Challenger Product Information.
Fingas, Mervis F., et al. “The Newfoundland Offshore Burn Experiment-Nobe”.
Buist, Ian A., et al. “In-Situ Burning of Alaska North Slope Emulsions”.
Guenette, Chantal, et al. “Studies of In-Situ Burning of Emulsions in Norway”.
Kristar Enterprises, Fossil Filter, brochure (9/96).
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60/075280 Feb 1998 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 09/252041 Feb 1999 US
Child 09/644137 US