A portion of the disclosure of this patent document contains material that is subject to copyright protection. The applicant no objection to the facsimile reproduction by anyone of the patent document or the patent disclosure, as it appears in the Patent and Trademark Office patent file or records, but otherwise reserves all copyright rights whatsoever.
This invention is directed to the field of blenders, and more particular, to blenders adapted for mixing polymers with sludge.
Various mixing devices have long been utilized for mixing polymeric flocculants to improve their contact with a low solids mixture. A water based slurry containing solids from which the water is to be removed is a common situation which presents itself in many industries. Many techniques have been utilized in handling such slurries (whether sludges or whether having other physical properties) for enhancing water removal, such as improved centrifugation or filtration, including vacuum filtration. In many of such water removal process techniques, the dewatering can be even further enhanced via the addition of a suitable polymeric substance. Suitable polymeric substances vary widely, depending upon the substance to be dewatered and its chemical, physical, and electrostatic properties. In many sludge handling applications a suitable polymer might be a high molecular weight and high charge density cationic polymer. However, in many commonly encountered applications, such as in the treatment of sewage sludge, achieving enhanced water removal even with addition of a suitably selected polymer is often difficult to achieve. One approach often used, which is rather expensive, is simply to increase the polymer dosage. However, in some cases, even that technique does not provide much improvement. In such cases, the ultimate solids dryness remains sufficiently low that significant savings in further handling costs (particularly with respect to charges for drying, transportation, and disposal) could be achieved if only the polymer addition achieved the performance results in full scale that were (and sometimes still are) seen in comparable bench scale trials.
A common problem encountered in the methods heretofore tried which are of interest to us is that polymer addition is often done only in conjunction with pumps designed to move the material. In such cases, the amount of work done on both the sludge and to the polymer being added has been primarily (if not totally) dependent on the work that the pump device, such as a progressive cavity pump impeller, did in the process of moving the sludge or slurry from one location to another. Thus, those methods inevitably leave the results in the hands of the selection of a few variables, namely polymer selection and dosage rate, since the pump itself is usually provided for a fixed service (i.e., flow, impeller rpm, and pressure differential). It is often rather difficult (if not impossible) to accomplish a quick adjustment of the pump, so, plant workmen are often found to be simply too lazy or too pressed for time to properly make use of the available adjustments, if any. So, a commonly encountered situation is that vendors of polymers are called in to test their various products, at different dosages, until an optimum product and dosage selection are attained to most cost effectively achieve the desired dewatering results.
Thus, there remains a continuing and as yet unmet need for a device that would provide immediate and precise control over polymer mixing, and which separates the work of sludge/polymer mixing from sludge pumping, and which can withstand the hazards inherent in sludges from sources such as municipal wastewater treatment plant operations.
In order to enable the reader to attain a more complete appreciation of the invention, and of the novel features and the advantages thereof, attention is directed to the following detailed description when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings, wherein:
The foregoing figures, being exemplary, contain various elements that may be present or omitted from actual implementations depending upon the circumstances. An attempt has been made to draw the figures in a way that illustrates at least those elements that are significant for an understanding of the various embodiments and aspects of the invention. However, various other elements of an in-line blender and of a method of mixing polymer with sludge are also shown and briefly described to enable the reader to understand how various optional features, methods, or structures may be utilized in order to provide a useful in-line blender application that easily accommodates adjustment of polymer application rates and of the mixing work accomplished on a sludge/polymer mixture, in order to achieve optimization of sludge dewatering and drying processes.
Attention is directed to
An attachment system such as flange 62, attachment ring 63, gasket 64, and bolt 66 with matching nut 68 is used to sealingly affix the first component of the mixer drive 32, namely the nozzle side 70 of pipe housing 34, to the mixer mounting nozzle 30. As illustrated, the pipe housing 34 is provided in the shape of a tubular cylindrical component having nozzle side 70 with sealing face 72 (see
As easily seen in
In the embodiment illustrated in the figures herein, the blender housing 22 is provided with a main housing portion 140 having a cylindrical tubular configuration along a longitudinal axis having an interior housing wall 144. As illustrated, the blender housing 22 is provided with a plurality of baffles 146 that are mounted to the interior housing wall 144, In the configuration illustrated, the baffles 146 are provided as narrow, elongated structures extending from the interior housing wall 144 inward toward, but spaced apart from, the impeller 60. In one embodiment, baffles 146 are provided a baffle pairs 1461 and 1462, mounted in opposing fashion on the interior housing wall 144, as indicated in
Turning now to
In order to receive an additive stream such as a liquid polymer, a first nozzle such as inlet nozzle 24 shown in
In some applications, it is advantageous to use a “reverse flow” configuration as shown in
As shown in
In one embodiment, as indicated in
For ease of inspecting, cleaning, and servicing the impellers 60 or 60′, a cleanout access nozzle 260 has been provided. The nozzle 260 has a flanged outlet 262 sealed by a blind cover plate 264 removeably and sealingly secured to the flanged outlet 262 by seal 266, mounting ring 268, and appropriate fasteners such as bolts 270 and nuts 272. To support the in-line blender 20, a pair of support feet 290 and 292 are provided. In one embodiment, apertures 294 in support feet 290 and 292 are adapted for compatibility with the nut and bolt system used for affixing (1) the pipe housing 34 to the mixer mounting nozzle, and (2) for affixing outlet flange 296 to the outlet nozzle 26. Also, such support feet 290 and 292 can be provided in the form of L-shaped brackets, including foot apertures defined by edge walls 297 suitable for mounting anchor bolts 298 to a selected substrate 299, as seen in
As briefly mentioned above, a motor controller 110 is provided to adjustably set the speed of the motor 46 to drive impeller 60 or 60′ at a predetermined rotational velocity. Normally, the motor 46 is, but need not necessarily be, an electric motor. The motor controller 110 is usually configured for continuous drive of the motor 46. However, the motor controller 110 is of the type suitable for adjustably controlling the speed at which the motor 46 drives the impeller 60 or 60′.
By use of the in-line blender described herein an improved method of dewatering of sludge can be practiced. This method includes providing an in-line blender downstream of a sludge pump 300 (see
Subsequent to the mixing step, the sludge/polymer mixture is subjected to the step of dewatering in a dewatering apparatus 302, such as a centrifuge 208. Alternately, the dewatering unit 302 can be practiced in the form of filtration, such as via a belt filter. The method is particularly applicable and useful for the treatment of a municipal wastewater treatment sludge.
Thus, the in-line blender described herein provides the necessary apparatus for carrying out a method for optimizing the application of polymer as used for solid/liquid separation in dewatering a particular wastewater sludge, to minimize the overall life cycle costs for dewatering, handling, hauling, and disposing of sludges or other dewatered solids. The method includes providing an in-line blender located between a sludge or solids feed pump and a dewatering apparatus and in fluid communication with each. A reagent is provided for addition to the solids or sludge for improving the dewatering characteristics thereof. First, it is important to measure the input variables, including (1) the rate of flow of a sludge to be dewatered, (2) the water content of said sludge, (3) the flow rate of a dilute reagent be mixed with the sludge, and (4) the water content of the dilute reagent stream (5) a mixing rate, as measured by rotational speed of said blender. Then, it is important to measure the output variables, including (1) sludge cake flow rate, (2) sludge cake dryness, (3) output water flow rate, and (4) solids content of output water, which variables are measured as achieved after a dewatering step subsequent to the step of blending polymer with the sludge or other solids. After such measurements, an operating point is located during operation to determine a characteristic operational range. Then, the reagent flow rate is adjustably fixed and reagent application rate is adjustably fixed, and the mixing rate is adjustably fixed, so as to bring the in-line blender and reagent application operating point into a range considered to be a stable and optimal operating range for mixing the sludge/polymer blend. Depending on the results of the treatment from the inputs on the sludge flow rate, the polymer flow rate, and mixing rate, the input variable are optimized to achieve a desirable throughput and sludge dryness result, in order to attain preselected economic and product specification goals.
In summary, the in-line sludge mixing apparatus and the method of employing such a blender in a method of dewatering materials such as sewage sludge is unique in that it separates the mixing work from the pumping work, and in that the impeller design is non-ragging and thus suitable for use in sewage sludge applications.
It is to be appreciated that the in-line blender system provided herein is an appreciable improvement in the art of the dewatering of sewage sludge. Although only a few exemplary embodiments have been described in detail, various details are sufficiently set forth in the drawings and in the specification provided herein to enable one of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention(s), which need not be further described by additional writing in this detailed description. It will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art that the in-line blender system may be modified from those embodiments provided herein without materially departing from the novel teachings and advantages provided. Thus, the aspects and embodiments described and claimed herein may be modified from those shown, and may be embodied in other specific forms without departing from the spirit or essential characteristics thereof. Therefore, the embodiments presented herein are to be considered in all respects as illustrative and not restrictive. As such, this disclosure is intended to cover the structures described herein and not only structural equivalents thereof, but also equivalent structures. Numerous modifications and variations are possible in light of the above teachings. It is therefore to be understood that within the scope of the appended claims, the invention(s) may be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein. Thus, the scope of the invention(s), as set forth in the appended claims, and as indicated by the drawing and by the foregoing description, is intended to include variations from the embodiments provided which are nevertheless described by the broad interpretation and range properly afforded to the plain meaning of the claims set forth below.
This application is a Divisional of U.S. application Ser. No. 10/107,016 filed Mar. 25, 2002, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,808,305, issued Oct. 26, 2004, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR MIXING ADDITIVES WITH SLUDGE IN A POWERED LINE BLENDER” the disclosure of which is incorporated herein in its entirety by this reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2268461 | Nichols | Dec 1941 | A |
2576995 | Carvel | Dec 1951 | A |
2939770 | Schwartzkopff et al. | Jun 1960 | A |
3469948 | Anderson et al. | Sep 1969 | A |
3584840 | Fuchs | Jun 1971 | A |
3605775 | Zaander et al. | Sep 1971 | A |
3675902 | Marshall | Jul 1972 | A |
3747899 | Latinen et al. | Jul 1973 | A |
3751010 | Latinen | Aug 1973 | A |
3752447 | Chen | Aug 1973 | A |
4170553 | Lang et al. | Oct 1979 | A |
4198298 | Zuckerman et al. | Apr 1980 | A |
4347135 | LaFosse et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4427336 | Lake | Jan 1984 | A |
4470907 | Sencza | Sep 1984 | A |
4474479 | Redelman | Oct 1984 | A |
4576723 | Eisenlauer et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4577974 | Prough et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4612123 | Eustacchio et al. | Sep 1986 | A |
4642222 | Brazelton | Feb 1987 | A |
4648796 | Maghenzani | Mar 1987 | A |
4675116 | Hoyland | Jun 1987 | A |
4688945 | Brazelton et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4778280 | Brazelton | Oct 1988 | A |
4797550 | Nelson et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4797559 | Oblad et al. | Jan 1989 | A |
4810371 | Fonseca | Mar 1989 | A |
4861492 | Lehmkuhl et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4935151 | Do | Jun 1990 | A |
4981367 | Brazelton | Jan 1991 | A |
5012975 | Korsmeyer | May 1991 | A |
5018870 | Brazelton et al. | May 1991 | A |
5018871 | Brazelton et al. | May 1991 | A |
5032287 | Salmond | Jul 1991 | A |
5061456 | Brazelton et al. | Oct 1991 | A |
5075012 | Busse | Dec 1991 | A |
5133872 | Baldwin et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5135968 | Brazelton et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5141324 | Strand et al. | Aug 1992 | A |
5164429 | Brazelton et al. | Nov 1992 | A |
5248416 | Howard, Jr. | Sep 1993 | A |
5252635 | Brazelton et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5284626 | Brazelton et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5284627 | Brazelton et al. | Feb 1994 | A |
5338779 | Brazelton | Aug 1994 | A |
5366622 | Geyer | Nov 1994 | A |
5401402 | Christy et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5662805 | Cameron et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5820256 | Morrison | Oct 1998 | A |
5902487 | Pickering et al. | May 1999 | A |
5971600 | Paterson | Oct 1999 | A |
6036355 | Yant et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6808305 | Sharpe et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2353874 | Oct 1973 | DE |
2942740 | May 1981 | DE |
3025521 | Jan 1982 | DE |
3103968 | Jan 1982 | DE |
487137 | Jun 1938 | GB |
1468811 | Mar 1977 | GB |
1509969 | May 1978 | GB |
1603681 | Nov 1981 | GB |
54-129747 | Oct 1979 | JP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20050082232 A1 | Apr 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10107016 | Mar 2002 | US |
Child | 10923260 | US |