Methods of optimized control of multiple oxidizer feedstreams

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 6623647
  • Patent Number
    6,623,647
  • Date Filed
    Friday, March 15, 2002
    22 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, September 23, 2003
    21 years ago
Abstract
This invention is directed to a method and apparatus for controlling and optimizing the feed of two or more oxidizers to an aqueous stream, thereby providing a synergistic effect. The system combines the use of amperometric or ORP based sensor technology with amperometric sensor technology employing a gas permeable membrane, thereby providing definitive control of each oxidizer feed stream.
Description




FIELD OF THE INVENTION




This invention relates to the control of multiple oxidizer levels in water treatment processes, and particularly relates to the use of a combination of sensors including at least one amperometric sensor isolated by a gas permeable membrane.




BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION




In the areas of both pool water and waste water treatment, there has been an increased trend toward combining oxidizers to achieve a synergistic effect, thereby exceeding the performance of the individual oxidizers. Although there is no question as to the benefits provided by the use of synergistic oxidizer chemistry, the ability to control their concentrations, ratios, and optimize their feed rate in real world applications has proven to be a difficult task. This often leads to overfeeding to ensure adequate results.




Most oxidizer feed applications incorporate either ORP (Oxidation Reduction Potential) or wet chemistry methods which use color change reagents,. e.g. DPD, to indicate the presence and concentration of the oxidizer. ORP has become increasing popular due to its ability to control the feed of oxidizer based on the oxidizer demand.




In many water treatment applications the demand for oxidizer can change over time. In pools for example, as bathers enter the pool water, organic contaminants are introduced to the water that impose a demand on the oxidizer (usually chlorine). In order to maintain the same oxidation potential, the ORP controller would increase the concentration of chlorine in the water. This process ensures enough oxidizer has been added to not only satisfy the organic demand, but also to ensure sufficient residual oxidizer is available to effectively sanitize the water.




In the pool example, chlorine is the sanitizer and therefore must be maintained in sufficient concentrations to effectively provide for a safe bathing environment. However, if another oxidizer is added to the pool water to enhance oxidation of organic contaminants, the ORP based control system can be compromised since either chlorine or the second oxidizer can satisfy the ORP setting.




Should chlorine feed be compromised, the second oxidizer could be fed in sufficient concentrations to meet the ORP set-point. In this instance, sanitation of the water could be compromised. Also, because chlorine concentrations are reduced, the synergistic effects provided by the combined effect of the two oxidizers would also be compromised.




DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART




U.S. Pat. No. 5,239,257 to Muller et al teaches an amperometric probe with a gas permeable membrane. The patent fails to teach or disclose a measuring system for controlling oxidizers in a water treatment process by combining multiple sensors inclusive of at least one gas permeable membrane enclosed amperometric sensor.




U.S. Pat. No. 5,902,751 to Godec et al teaches a method for the measurement of dissolved carbon employing a gas permeable membrane dividing deionized water from the oxidized sample water and a pair of micro-conductivity and temperature sensors.




U.S. Pat. No. 6,030,842 to Peachey-Stoner teaches a method for determining free halogens in aqueous fluids utilizing an azine indicator material and a benzidine type catalyst material impregnated into a matrix carrier.




The prior art fails to teach or suggest a system for determining and controlling the amounts of free oxidizer in a multiple oxidizer system.




SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION




Many water treatment applications incorporate two oxidizers that together provide a synergistic effect. For example, Advanced Oxidation Technologies (AOTs) can employ ozone with peroxide to produce hydroxyl free radicals (hydroxyl radicals). In yet another similar application, hydrogen peroxide is converted to hydroxyl free radicals using ultra violet radiation. While one oxidizer is predominant, the production of hydroxyl radicals makes for a two-oxidizer application. There are other similar processes used in AOTs with the results being to produce hydroxyl free radicals.




In yet another water treatment application, a halogen based oxidizer such as chlorine is used in combination with peroxygen based oxidizers such as potassium monopersulfate to effectively eliminate the formation of volatile halogenated nitrogen based compounds into the air of indoor aquatic facilities. In this application, both chlorine and monopersulfate are fed to the pool water based on ORP based control.




Although these applications take advantage of the synergistic properties which flow from the use of two oxidizers, they nevertheless fail to optimize the control and/or optimize the feed or production of each oxidizer based, on program performance, e.g. oxidizer demand.




For example in the pool, while ORP initiates oxidizer feed based on demand for the oxidizer(s), this method of control does not clearly differentiate between the oxidizers. Oxidizers are fed proportional to one another. Using this control scheme, dynamic optimization of oxidizer ratios, and verification of individual oxidizer feed is not possible. Similar inefficiencies exist with AOTs.




Accordingly, it is an objective of the instant invention to teach a method of operation and apparatus for performing the method which combines the use of either ORP or amperometric sensor technology, along with at least one amperometric sensor that employs a gas permeable membrane to provide superior process control in two oxidizer systems. The gas permeable membrane described in this application will have the ability to allow gases and/or nonionic compounds to permeate while restricting ionic particles from permeating.




It is a further objective of the instant invention to teach a process wherein the combination of sensor technologies can, in many two oxidizer applications, independently control the oxidizers, verify concentration or presence of both oxidizers, and enhance the optimization of oxidizer(s) feed rates in dynamic systems.




Other objectives and advantages of this invention will become apparent from the following description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings wherein are set forth, by way of illustration and example, certain embodiments of this invention. The drawings constitute a part of this specification and include exemplary embodiments of the present invention and illustrate various objects and features thereof.











BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES





FIG. 1

is a block diagram and flow-sheet of a typical testing device in accordance with the present invention;





FIG. 2

is a graphical analysis of the relative concentration of chlorine versus pH;





FIG. 3

is a graph of the increase in the amperometric value as Hydrogen peroxide is incrementally added to the solution.











DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION




In the application employing a halogen-based oxidizer with a peroxygen-based oxidizer, the invention is comprised of at least one amperometric sensor incorporating a gas permeable membrane in conjunction with one or more of ORP, pH, and temperature sensor technologies. These sensors serve as data inputs to a microprocessor or analog based computer. The computer employs some mode of control utilizing Time Based Proportional (TBP), Proportional (P), Proportional Integral (PI), Proportional Integral Differential (PID) and/or on/off control for controlling chemical(s) feed.




To further improve control, the computer can be programmed utilizing either Fuzzy logic or Boolean logic protocols to provide the system with the ability to make changes to various settings or feed adjustments based on evaluation of input data.




In yet another application of the invention, AOT applications employ at least one amperometric sensor utilizing a gas permeable membrane that separates the amperometric electrode from the treated water, along with one or more standard amperometric sensors (no gas permeable membrane). These sensors serve as data inputs to a microprocessor or analog based computer. The computer employs some mode of control utilizing Time Based Proportional (TBP), Proportional Integral (PI), Proportional Integral Differential (PID) and/or on/off control for controlling chemical feed.




To further improve control, the computer can be programmed utilizing Fuzzy logic or Boolean logic to make changes to various settings or feed adjustments based on evaluation of input data.




Halogen/Peroxygen Test




In this test, chlorine in the form of sodium hypochlorite was used in combination with potassium monopersulfate.




The amperometric sensor incorporated a gas permeable membrane used to prevent dissolved solids from influencing the amperometric sensor. Therefore, only dissolved chlorine in the form of hypochlorous acid can permeate the membrane and influence the amperometric sensor. The sensor was calibrated for use with chlorine. The amperometric sensor and supporting hardware employ pH and temperature inputs for accurate determination of free chlorine. An ORP sensor was incorporated to measure water ORP values.




A circulating system with a 10-gallon reservoir was used for testing purposes (FIG.


1


).




The circulating pump was turned on, the water was treated with sodium bypochlorite, and the pH was adjusted. Free chlorine concentration was verified using standard DPD methods with a HACH DR-2000 spectrophotometer. The amperometric controller was standardized, then allowed to track while samples where periodically tested using DPD free chlorine test. The solution ORP was recorded periodically throughout the test period.




After ensuring the sensors had achieved equilibrium (stabilized readings), the solution was treated with various concentrations of potassium monopersulfate by addition into the top reservoir. After each addition of monopersulfate, the effect on both the amperometric reading and ORP reading were measured and recorded (Table 1).


















TABLE 1









Persulfate




Approx.






HACH Free





Amperometric






Addition




Time lapsed






Chlorine




Amperometric




Free Chlorine






(ppm)




(minutes)




ORP mv




pH




(ppm)




HOCl (ppm)




(ppm)





























0




0




53




0.3




5.2




2.77




5.2






9




5




62




0.3




n/a




2.78




5.2






9




15




64




0.3




n/a




2.83




5.2






26




30




70




0.2




n/a




2.9




5.1






26




50




82




0.1




5.1




2.95




5.1














With the addition of the acid based monopersulfate, slight changes in pH induced a change in the measured hypochlorous acid (FIG.


2


). However, the calculated free chlorine value remained stable since the monopersulfate exists as an ionized salt that cannot permeate the gas permeable membrane.




It is evident from the results of this test that free chlorine concentration was accurately measured by the amperometric sensor while the ORP value was significantly influenced by the presence of the second oxidizer (potassium monopersulfate). Even with concentrations of monopersulfate magnitudes higher than that applied in actual application such as the pool example, free chlorine residual was accurately measured by the amperometric sensor.




By incorporating this sensor technology into this dual oxidizer application, verification and optimization of chlorine feed would be achieved even in the presence of the second oxidizer. Therefore, in a pool application where chlorine is used as the sanitizer, implementation of this control technology would ensure that low levels of chlorine would not occur due to the satisfied ORP value measured by the ORP controller.




Yet another benefit of this invention is the improved performance achieved through the optimized proportioning of the oxidizer. For instance, if sufficient chlorine is available to ensure sanitation and support its role in the oxidation processes, the second oxidizer could be selected and fed independent of the chlorine. Boolean logic or Fuzzy logic can be effectively included to maximize performance through optimized proportioning of the oxidizers whether fed together or independently.




AOT Test 1




An amperometric sensor combined with a readout display was calibrated to report the measured value of hydrogen peroxide as Chlorine (Cl


2


). Hydrogen peroxide was incrementally added to the solution. The increase in the amperometric value is illustrated in FIG.


3


. Based on these results, it is evident that amperometric technology can effectively detect the presence of hydrogen peroxide.




The same test was performed using an amperometric sensor incorporating a gas permeable membrane. For the 90 ppm active concentration of hydrogen peroxide, the displayed value was 0.1 ppm as Cl


2


.




Based on these two tests, it is evident the employing these two types of amperometric methods of measure could allow for an accurate measure of oxidizers independently in a two oxidizer environment.




In AOT applications hydrogen peroxide is converted to form hydroxyl free radicals, the second most powerful oxidizer known. This process incorporates combining hydrogen peroxide with ozone, or contacting the hydrogen peroxide with UV radiation.




Hydroxyl free radicals rapidly react with many organic and inorganic contaminants found in many water treatment applications. However, if the concentration of hydroxyl radicals is to be optimized based on demand for the oxidizer, an accurate means of measuring this oxidizer in the presence of the second oxidizer must be employed.




ORP sensors do not provide an accurate method for measuring hydrogen peroxide. Amperometric sensor technology can be applied as previously reviewed. However, hydroxyl radicals can interfere with the amperometric sensor if present with the hydrogen peroxide. In order to adjust the concentration of hydroxyl radicals, independent measure of hydroxyl radicals must be made while in the presence of residual hydrogen peroxide.




Like hypochlorous acid, hydroxyl radicals are nonionic. This enables them to permeate through gas permeable membranes like that employed in the previous test. Hydrogen peroxide on the other hand possesses a strong anionic charge.




An amperometric sensor calibrated to report the oxidizer concentration as chlorine (Cl


2


) incorporated a gas permeable membrane.




A sample of water was treated with 600 ppm of active hydrogen peroxide by adding 30% laboratory grade hydrogen peroxide to distilled water. A sample of solution was placed on a magnetic stirrer, the sensor with the membrane was immersed into a sample of the solution, the stirrer was activated, and the sensor was allowed to equilibrate for approximately 30-minutes.




Another equal volume of sample was placed in a reaction vessel, in which a UV lamp was placed. The sample with the lamp was periodically immersed in a swirling ice bath to maintain temperature at 23° C. (±1° C.). The solution was exposed for approximately 30 minutes.




After equilibrating for approximately 30 minutes, the amperometric reading was recorded followed by the ORP, and temperature. After recording, the UV sample was given a final ice water bath to stabilize the solution temperature. The lamp was disengaged, and the amperometric w/gas membrane sensor was immersed into the solution. The magnetic stirrer was initiated and the sensor was allowed to equilibrate.




After approximately 60 seconds, the measured value on the display increased significantly and in approximately 3-minutes reached a value of 8.38 as Cl


2


as illustrated in the following table. The pH, ORP and temperature were also recorded.




















Temperature




Amperometric








Sample Name




° C.




w/membrane




ORP




pH











Control




23




0.37




245




7.25






UV radiated




23




8.38




240




7.25














AOT Test 2




To further demonstrate the ability to differentiate oxidizers and provide superior process control, a 500 ml sample of tap water was treated with 1 ml of 30% hydrogen peroxide. 50 ml of solution was removed and radiated with UV for 30 minutes. The remaining 450 ml of peroxide solution was stirred using a magnetic stirrer with the membrane amperometric sensor immersed.




After 30 minutes and temperature adjustment with an ice bath, the UV radiated solution was reintroduced to the starting 600 ppm solution. Because both solutions began with 600 ppm of active hydrogen peroxide, addition of the solution would not affect the concentration of peroxide and thereby induce interference to the reading. In fact, it is reasonable to assume it would reduce the peroxide concentration since some of the peroxide had been consumed in the production of hydroxyl radicals.




The results clearly demonstrate the membrane-amperometric based technology has the ability to insulate electrode from significant interferences induced by the presence of hydrogen peroxide, thereby allowing effective detection and measurement of hydroxyl radicals.





















Temperature




Amperometric







Sample Name




° C.




w/membrane













Control




22




1.1







Treated




22




8.3















Including gas permeable membrane based amperometric technology with conventional amperometric technology provides superior process control of two oxidizers in two oxidizer systems.




One example is to maintain sufficient hydrogen peroxide in a body of water, such as a pool, for sanitation with use of a standard amperometric sensor. Then enhancing oxidation of organics with hydroxyl radicals by applying the gas membrane amperometric sensor technology to measure residual hydroxyl radicals directly, or by difference between the two gas membrane amperometric readings, one taken before and one after hydroxyl radicals are employed. This application could effectively be applied to pools as well as other water treatment applications where oxidation using hydroxyl free radicals would effectively assist in the reduction of organic and other oxidizable inorganic substances.




To further illustrate other potential performance benefits offered by this process control system, with increased concern of cryptosporidium contamination of water, and the high chlorine tolerance of said organisms, the ability to control hydroxyl free radical concentrations offers the ability to destroy the protective lipid layer of the Cryptosporidium Oocyst by inoculating the water with effective doses of hydroxyl free radicals. Application of this technology with additional treatment and/or on-line monitoring could further improve water safety and quality.




The hydroxyl measurement can be used as part of a feedback control by which adjusting the introduction of hydroxyl radicals into the water to be treated, or by increasing the production rate of hydroxyl radicals by increasing or decreasing the ozone concentration or UV intensity and/or contact with the supporting oxidizer (peroxide or ozone) is controlled.




Yet another method of applying this technology to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of 2-oxidizer systems when utilizing a halogen oxidizer is to measure the free halogen concentration with the gas permeable membrane amperometric sensor, while also measuring the solution pH and ORP. An algorithm is used to correlate the concentration of oxidizer demand based on the required free halogen concentration needed to achieve the measured ORP for a given measured pH.




For a given water quality, it will require a specific concentration of free halogen oxidizer at a given pH to achieve a targeted ORP value. This concentration of halogen will not change unless the demand for the oxidizer changes (at a constant pH). If the measured free halogen concentration needed to achieve a targeted ORP increases, the demand in the water has increased. By using an algorithm to identify the presence of this demand, a second oxidizer can be employed to effectively address this demand. For example, the feed rate or production rate of hydroxyl radicals can be adjusted in real-time utilizing this form of control to maximize the performance of the treatment program.




In one or more embodiments the present invention provides a method of treating water involving addition of a halogen donor and a peroxygen compound to the water to maintain the free halogen level of the water at about 0.2 ppm to about 10 ppm and maintain the ORP of the water at about 700 mV to about 850 mV. And, in some embodiments of the present invention, the ORP is maintained at about 750 mV to about 850 mV, preferably, about 760 mV to about 800 mV.




It is to be understood that while a certain form of the invention is illustrated, it is not to be limited to the specific form or arrangement of part herein described and shown. It will be apparent to those skilled in the art that various changes may be made without departing from the scope of the invention and the invention is not to be considered limited to what is shown and described in the specification and drawings.



Claims
  • 1. A method of treating water in a water system comprising:measuring a free halogen level of the water wit an amperometric sensor having a gas permeable membrane and an ORP of the water; controlling addition of a halogen donor to the water to maintain the free halogen level at about 0.2 ppm to about 10 ppm in the water based on the measured free halogen level; and controlling addition of a peroxygen compound to the water to maintain an ORP of about 700 mV to about 850 mV in the water based on the measured ORP.
  • 2. The method of claim 1, further comprising optimizing the ratio of halogen donor to peroxygen compound to maintain the free halogen level at about 0.2 ppm to about 10 ppm while maintaining the ORP of about 700 mV to about 850 mV in the water.
  • 3. The method of claim 1, further comprising controlling at least one of temperature and pH of the water.
  • 4. The method of claim 1, further comprising maintaining a high oxidation rate in the water to cause any halogenated amine compounds in air to be reabsorbed in the water.
  • 5. The method of claim 1, wherein controlling addition of the halogen donor incorporates any of time-based proportional control, proportional control, proportional-integral control, proportional integral differential, on/off control and combinations thereof.
  • 6. The method of claim 1, wherein controlling addition of the peroxygen compound incorporates any of time-based proportional control, proportional control, proportional-integral control, proportional integral differential, on/off control and combinations thereof.
  • 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the ORP is maintained at about 760 mV to about 800 mV.
  • 8. The method of claim 1, wherein the halogen donor is selected from the group consisting of trichloroisocyanuric acid, dichloroisocyanuric acid, sodium bromide, hydantoin-based bromine, chlorine, calcium hypochlorite, sodium hypochlorite, lithium hypochlorite, and mixtures thereof.
  • 9. The method of claim 1, wherein the peroxygen compound is selected from the group consisting of hydrogen peroxide, sodium peroxide, potassium peroxide, sodium perborate, potassium perborate, sodium monopersulfate, potassium monopersulfate, ammonium monopersulfate, sodium peroxydisulfate, potassium peroxydisulfate, and ammonium peroxydisulfate.
  • 10. A method of facilitating treating water in a water system comprising providing a controller that receives signals from an amperometric sensor having a gain permeable membrane and an ORP sensor and regulates addition to the water of at least one of a halogen donor and a peroxygen compound to maintain a halogen concentration of about 0.2 ppm to about 10 ppm and an ORP of about 700 mv to about 850 mV of the water based on the signals from the amperometric senior and the ORP sensor.
  • 11. A method of treating water in a water system comprising:adding a free halogen donor to the water; adding a peroxygen compound to the water; providing an amperometric sensor having a gas permeable membrane that sends a signal corresponding to a free halogen concentration in the water to a controller; providing an ORP sensor that sends a signal corresponding to an ORP of the water to the controller; maintaining the free halogen concentration in the water at between about 0.2 ppm and about 10 ppm based on the signal from the amperometric sensor; and maintaining the ORP in the water at between about 700 mV and 850 mV based on the signal from the ORP sensor.
  • 12. The method of claim 11, further comprising the step of controlling at least one of a temperature and a pH of the water.
  • 13. The method of claim 11, the ORP is maintained at about 760 mV to about 800 mV.
  • 14. The method of claim 11, wherein the free halogen donor comprises at least one of trichloroisocyanuric acid, dichloroisocyanuric acid, sodium bromide, hydantoin-based bromine, chlorine, calcium hypochlorite, sodium hypochlorite, lithium hypochlorite, and mixtures thereof.
  • 15. The method of claim 11, wherein the peroxygen compound comprises at least one of hydrogen peroxide, sodium peroxide, potassium peroxide, sodium perborate, potassium perborate, sodium monopersulfate, potassium monopersulfate, ammonium monopersulfate, sodium peroxydisulfate, potassium peroxydisulfate, and ammonium peroxydisulfate.
RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a divisional application, under 37 C.F.R. §1.53(b), of application Ser. No. 09/780,198, filed Feb. 9, 2001.

US Referenced Citations (117)
Number Name Date Kind
2008684 Craddock Jul 1935 A
2212260 Brothman Aug 1940 A
2249263 Wheelwright, Jr. Jul 1941 A
2268461 Nichols Dec 1941 A
2556014 Tolman Jun 1951 A
2651582 Courtney Sep 1953 A
2686110 Carver Aug 1954 A
2740696 Longwell Apr 1956 A
3252689 Blomgren, Sr. et al. May 1966 A
3319937 Wilson et al. May 1967 A
3389970 Scheibel Jun 1968 A
3536646 Hatch et al. Oct 1970 A
3559959 Davis et al. Feb 1971 A
T896051 Hamlin et al. Mar 1972 I4
3702298 Zsoldos et al. Nov 1972 A
3742735 Verreyne et al. Jul 1973 A
3747899 Latinen et al. Jul 1973 A
3756570 Bühner Sep 1973 A
3794817 Shinskey Feb 1974 A
3852234 Venema Dec 1974 A
3965027 Boffardi et al. Jun 1976 A
4016078 Clark Apr 1977 A
4113688 Pearson Sep 1978 A
4125574 Kastner et al. Nov 1978 A
4146676 Saeman et al. Mar 1979 A
4171166 Trowbridge et al. Oct 1979 A
4217145 Gaddis Aug 1980 A
4218147 Rosenberger Aug 1980 A
4233265 Gasper Nov 1980 A
4234440 Hirozawa et al. Nov 1980 A
4241016 Hirozawa et al. Dec 1980 A
4243636 Shiraki et al. Jan 1981 A
4300909 Krumhansl Nov 1981 A
4433701 Cox et al. Feb 1984 A
4470907 Sencza Sep 1984 A
4522502 Brazelton Jun 1985 A
4550011 McCollum Oct 1985 A
4575678 Hladky Mar 1986 A
4581074 Mankina et al. Apr 1986 A
4648043 O'Leary Mar 1987 A
4664528 Rodgers et al. May 1987 A
4701055 Anderson Oct 1987 A
4719252 Dutton et al. Jan 1988 A
4747978 Loehr et al. May 1988 A
4752740 Steininger Jun 1988 A
4913822 Chen et al. Apr 1990 A
4965016 Saitoh et al. Oct 1990 A
4977292 Hwa et al. Dec 1990 A
5000866 Woyciesjes Mar 1991 A
5004549 Wood et al. Apr 1991 A
5018871 Brazelton et al. May 1991 A
5030334 Hale Jul 1991 A
5061456 Brazelton et al. Oct 1991 A
5112521 Mullins et al. May 1992 A
5130033 Thornhill Jul 1992 A
5135968 Brazelton et al. Aug 1992 A
5139627 Eden et al. Aug 1992 A
5164429 Brazelton et al. Nov 1992 A
5213694 Craig May 1993 A
5239257 Muller et al. Aug 1993 A
5256307 Bachhofer et al. Oct 1993 A
5262963 Stana et al. Nov 1993 A
5306355 Lagana Apr 1994 A
5306432 Puetz Apr 1994 A
5316031 Brazelton et al. May 1994 A
5320748 Dupuis Jun 1994 A
5332511 Gay et al. Jul 1994 A
5382367 Zinkan et al. Jan 1995 A
5422014 Allen et al. Jun 1995 A
5424032 Christensen et al. Jun 1995 A
5489344 Martin et al. Feb 1996 A
5494588 LaZonby Feb 1996 A
5575920 Freese et al. Nov 1996 A
5658467 LaZonby et al. Aug 1997 A
5683654 Dallmier et al. Nov 1997 A
5736097 Ono Apr 1998 A
5770039 Rigney et al. Jun 1998 A
5783092 Brown et al. Jul 1998 A
5785867 LaZonby et al. Jul 1998 A
5800732 Coughlin et al. Sep 1998 A
5814233 Starkey et al. Sep 1998 A
5814247 Derule et al. Sep 1998 A
5820256 Morrison Oct 1998 A
5849985 Tieckelmann et al. Dec 1998 A
5855791 Hays et al. Jan 1999 A
5858246 Rafter et al. Jan 1999 A
5858249 Higby Jan 1999 A
5866013 Kessler et al. Feb 1999 A
5882526 Brown et al. Mar 1999 A
5888374 Pope et al. Mar 1999 A
5895565 Steininger et al. Apr 1999 A
5902751 Godec et al. May 1999 A
5947596 Dowd Sep 1999 A
5972196 Murphy et al. Oct 1999 A
5980758 LaZonby et al. Nov 1999 A
5985155 Maitland Nov 1999 A
6015484 Martinchek et al. Jan 2000 A
6030842 Peachey-Stoner Feb 2000 A
6045706 Morrison et al. Apr 2000 A
6068012 Beardwood et al. May 2000 A
6106770 Ohki et al. Aug 2000 A
6120619 Goudiakas et al. Sep 2000 A
6120698 Rounds et al. Sep 2000 A
6132593 Tan Oct 2000 A
6143184 Martin et al. Nov 2000 A
6146538 Martin Nov 2000 A
6149819 Martin et al. Nov 2000 A
6159552 Riman et al. Dec 2000 A
6238555 Silveri et al. May 2001 B1
6270680 Silveri et al. Aug 2001 B1
6284144 Itzhak Sep 2001 B1
6315950 Harp et al. Nov 2001 B1
6409926 Martin Jun 2002 B1
6419817 Martin Jul 2002 B1
6423234 Martin Jul 2002 B1
20020043650 Martin Apr 2002 A1
20020152036 Martin Oct 2002 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (14)
Number Date Country
262 139 Nov 1988 DE
4 312 417 Oct 1994 DE
0 257 740 Feb 1988 EP
0 504 621 Sep 1992 EP
2672058 Jul 1992 FR
2 335 044 Sep 1999 GB
11028479 Feb 1999 JP
2000-221165 Aug 2000 JP
80951 Feb 1979 LU
8908728 Sep 1989 WO
9630307 Oct 1996 WO
9924369 May 1999 WO
0034760 Jun 2000 WO
0198558 Dec 2001 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (82)
Entry
Dexter et al., “Use and Limitations of Electrochemical Techniques for Investigating Microbiological Corrosion”, Corrosion, 1991, vol. 47, No. 4, pp. 308-318.
Gusmano et al., “Electrochemical Noise Resistance as a Tool for Corrosion Rate Prediction”, Corrosion, 1997, vol. 53, No. 11, pp. 860-868.
Kim, Yong H., “On the Activation of Polymeric Flocculants,” AIChE Annual Spring Meeting, Houston, TX, Apr. 2-6, 1989.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Ryznar Stability Index The 3rd Dimension Needed for Proper ‘Water Balance,’” Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-3.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Total Dissolved Solids, Friend or Foe?”, Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 2, 1988; pp. 1-7.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “The Relationship of ORP to PPM and Its Automated Control,” Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 3, 1999, pp. 1-5.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “The Chemistry and Control of Chloramines,” Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 4, 1999, pp. 1-5.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Yes, Your Pool Needs Calcium Too,” Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 5, pp. 1-3.
Carpenter, Colleen et al., “Chlorine Disinfection of Recreational Water for Cryptosporidium parvum,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, vol. 5, No. 4, Jul.-Aug. 1999, pp. 579-584.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Why Do I Have Algae In My Pool?” Aquatic Technology Newsletter, vol. 1, No. 6, 1999, pp. 1-2.
Kowalsky, L., “Pool-Spa Operators Handbook,” National Swimming Pool Foundation, 1983-1990.
Lynntech, Inc., “Electrochemical Ozone Generator,” Model 124 Product Literature (date unknown).
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol Automated Water Chemistry Control for Commercial Pools,” 1998.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol System 3 Pool & Spa Chemistry Controller,” 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol System 4 Pool & Spa Chemistry Controller,” 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol System5 F Pool & Spa Chemistry Controller,” 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol System6 Pool Chemistry & Filter Backwash Controller,” 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol System7 Mechanical Room Controller for Aquatic Facilities,” 2000.
Kloberdanz, B., “The Air in There: Enhancing an Indoor Pool Environment,” Recreation Management, 2000.
Selvick, E., “Take Control of ‘Yo-Yo’ Treatment Cycles,” International Aquatics, National Trade Publications, Inc., Jul./Aug. 1997.
Frazier, B., “Automation to the Rescue,” Aquatics International, May/Jun. 1998.
Batt, T. et al., “The Water Down Under,” Parks & Recreation, Nov. 1999.
Krone, D., “Automated Water Chemistry Control at University of Virginia Pools,” Facilities Manager, vol. 13, No. 6, Nov./Dec. 1997.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Remote Monitoring for Unstaffed Pools,” Parks & Recreation, Nov. 1997.
Minton, E., “On the Waterpark,” Swimming Pool/Spa Age (date unknown).
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool: New ECS System Eliminates Chronic Air Quality Woes For New York School District Pool,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #806, Jul. 1998.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool Complex: New ECS System Optimizes Air & Water Quality at Colorado Recreation Center,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #807, Nov. 1998.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool: Parks District Uses New ECS System to Eliminate Chronic Air Quality Problems at High School Pool,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #808, May 1999.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool: ECS System Optimizes Air & Water Quality at Texas School District Swim Center,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #811, Nov. 1999.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Special Indoor Pool: New ECS System Eliminates Chronic Air Quality Woes in School District Pool & Spa Serving Special Needs Children,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #812, Oct. 1999.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool: ECS System Eliminates Chronic Air Quality Problems at High School and Parks District Indoor Pool Facility,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #813, Jul. 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control at Indoor Pool: ECS System Optimizes Air & Water Quality at Iowa Recreation Center,” Stranco Products Capsule Case History #814, May 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Air & Water Quality Control for Indoor Aquatic Facilities,” U.S. Filter Corporation, 1998.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Strantrol ECS—Environmental Control System (For Pool),” 2000.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Abstracts of Strancol ECS Case Histories,” (date unknown).
Williams, K., “Aquatic Facility Operator Manual,” National Recreation and Park Association, Second Edition, 1995.
Normenausschusse Wasserwesen, “Treatment and disinfection of water used in bathing facilities,” DIN 19643-4, Feb. 1999.
Normenausschusse Wasserwesen, “Treatment and disinfection of water used in bathing facilities,” DIN 19643-3, Apr. 1997.
Normenausschusse Wasserwesen, “Treatment and disinfection of water used in bathing facilities,” DIN 19643-2, Apr. 1997.
Normenausschusse Wasserwesen, “Treatment and disinfection of water used in bathing facilities,” DIN 19643-1, Apr. 1997.
Stranco, “The Best of Poolfax,” The Poolfax Newsletter, 1981-1984.
Victorin et al., “Redox potential measurements for determining the disinfecting power of chlorinated water,” J. Hyg., Camb., 70, 1972, pp. 313-323.
U.S. Filter/Stranco, “Environmental Control System Training Meeting, Mar. 15, 2000”.
Kim, Yong H., “Evaluation of Redox Potential and Chlorine Residual as a Measure of Water Disinfection,” presented at the 54th International Water Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, Oct. 11-13, 1993.
Scully et al., Disinfection Interference in Wastewaters by Natural Organic Nitrogen Compounds, Environ. Sci. Techn., vol. 30, No. 5, 1996, pp. 1465-1471.
White, Geor. Clifford, Handbook of Chlorination and Alternative Disinfectants, Third Edition, (date unknown), pp. 803-809, 922-924.
Carlson, S., “Fundamentals of water disinfection,” J Water SRT—Aqua, vol. 40, No. 6, (1991), pp. 346-356.
Lund, E., “Oxidative Inactivation of Poliovirus,” from the Virological Laboratory of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Gothenburg, and the Virological Department of the Municipal Laboratories, Gothenburg, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, (1963), pp. 1-49.
Lund et al., “The Effect of Oxidation and Reduction on the Infectivity of Poliomyelitis Virus,” from the Virological Laboratory of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Gothenburg, and the Virological Department of the Municipal Laboratories, Gothenburg, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, (1961), pp. 100-110.
Lund, E., “Inactivation of Poliomyelitis Virus by Chlorination at Different Oxidation Potentials,” from the Virological Laboratory of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Gothenburg, and the Virological Department of the Municipal Laboratories, Gothenburg, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, (1961), pp. 330-342.
Lund, E., “the Significance of Oxidation in Chemical Inactivation of Poliovirus,” from the Virological Laboratory of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Gothenburg, and the Virological Department of the Municipal Laboratories, Gothenburg, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, (1963), pp. 1-13.
Lund, E., “The Rate of Oxidative Inactivation of Poliovirus and its Dependence on the Concentration of the Reactants,” from the Virological Laboratory of the Department of Bacteriology, University of Gothenburg, and the Virological Department of the Municipal Laboratories, Gothenburg, Sweden, Springer-Verlag, (1963), pp. 1-18.
Stranco, “Solutions: Effluent Dechlorination”, Stranco Product Literature (date unknown).
Hensley, R. et al., “Disinfection Metamorphosis: From Chemicals to Control,”Operations Forum, vol. 12, No. 4, Apr. 1995.
Hetzler, J.T. et al., “ORP: A Key to Nutrient Removal,” Operations Forum, vol. 12, No. 2, Feb. 1995.
Bossard, G. et al., “Optimizing Chlorination/Dechlorination at a Wastewater Treatment Plant,” reprinted from Public Works, Jan. 1995.
Eddington, Gordon, “Successfully Managing Wastewater Chlorination,” Stranco Product Literature (date unknown).
Ryan, D. et al., “Waste Not, Want Not: Avoiding Chemical Excesses,” reprinted from Operations Forum, vol. 11, No. 4, Apr. 1994.
D'Adam, D. et al., “A Case Study of Wastewater Plant Disinfection,” reprinted from Public Works Magazine, Nov. 1994.
“Louisiana Plant Uses New Technology for Dechlorination,” reprinted from American City & County, Feb. 1994.
Kiser, P. et al., “ORP or Residual: Which Measures Oxidation?” Sep. 19, 1992, pp. 1-7.
“Aquasol Controllers: Chemical Automation for Pools and Spas,” Product Literature (date unknown).
“Pool and Spa Controller: Acu-200 Pool Management Software,” Product Literature (date unknown).
“Acu-Trol Programmable Controllers,” Product Literature from www.acu-trol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
Santa Barbara Control Systems, “Chemtrol™ Programmable Controllers: Integrated Water Treatment with Remote Control,” Product Literature, (date unknown).
“Chemtrol Automatic Pool Controllers,” Product Literature from www.sbcontrol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
“Chemtrol—PC6000 Controller,” Product Literature from www.sbcontrol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
“Chemtrol—PC3000 Controller,” Product Literature from www.sbcontrol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
“AK100 Swimming Pool Control Systems,” Product Literature from www.acu-trol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
ACU-TROL, “AK100 Series” Product Literature (date unknown).
ACU-TROL, “Acu-Trol Programmable Controllers: AK100 Series and AK200,” Product Literature (date unknown).
Aquasol Controllers, Inc., “Aquasol WTC,” Product Literature, (date unknown).
Aquasol Controllers, Inc., “What is a Controller?” Product Literature from www.aquasol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
Aquasol Controllers, Inc., “Aquasol WTC Specifications,” Product Literature from www.aquasol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
Aquasol Controllers, Inc., “Aquasol SPC Specifications,” Product Literature from www.aquasol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
ACU-TROL, “AK100 Summary,” Product Literature from www.acu-trol.com, printed Nov. 19, 1999.
Cat Controllers, “CAT 2000+ Programmable Water Chemistry Controller,” Product Literature (date unknown).
Rola-Chem Corporation, “The New Wave in Water Management: Take Control with Rola-Chem,” Product Catalog, Apr. 1999.
Strand, R. et al., “ORP As a Measure of Evaluating and Controlling Disinfection in Potable Water,” (Source and date unknown).
Mansfeld et al., “Electrochemical Noise Analysis of Iron Exposed to NaCl Solutions of Different Corrosivity,” J. Electrochem. Soc., vol. 141, No. 5, May 1994, pp. 1402-1404.
Brusamarello et al., “Analysis of Different Methods to Calculate Electrochemical Noise Resistance Using a Three-Electrode Cell,” Corrosion, vol. 56, No. 3, Mar. 2000, pp. 273-282.
Mansfeld et al., “Electrochemical Noise Analysis of Iron Exposed to NaCl Solutions of Different Corrosivity,” J. Electrochem Soc., vol. 140, No. 8, Aug. 1993, pp. 2205-2209.