349

FLOTATION IN WATER TREATMENT

T.Zabel

Water Group, Water Research Centre,

Elder Way, Stevenage, Hertfordshire SGI ITH, UK

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS

In potable water treatment, sedimentation is the most widely used

prefiltration process for removing readily settleable solids.
However, many raw water sources contain low density particles
such as algae which have a tendency to float thus causing
problems at the sedimentation stage. In particular, nutrient-rich
stored waters which can contain heavy algal blooms are difficult
to treat by sedimentation. Difficulties can also arise when
treating stored. coloured waters. The flocs produced from the
chemical treatment of these waters have a low settling velocity,
even with the addition of polyelectrolytes, especially during the
winter months. Large sedimentation tanks are therefore required
and floc carry-over can occur.

Attention has therefore been directed towards the use of

flotation for the treatment of these waters especially in view of
the current emphasis on raw water storage, which is often
associated with algal problems, in managing water resources.

TYPES OF FLOTATION PROCESSES

Flotation may be defined as the transfer of a solid from the body

of a liquid to the surface by means of bubble attachment.
Although in principle any gas that is not highly soluble in the
liquid phase can be employed, in practice air is the most
commonly used gas because of its availability, safety of use and
cost. The different methods of producing the bubbles give rise to
the different types of flotation process which are dispersed-air
flotation, dissolved-air flotation and electrolytic flotation.

K. J. Ives (ed.), The Scientific Basis of Flotation

© Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, The Hague 1984
350

Dispersed-air flotation

Dispersed-air flotation which has been discussed in detail in

some of the previous chapters is not suitable for potable water
treatment. It tends to generate relatively large air bubbles,
larger than Imm, compared with bubbles of 20 to 100~m for
dissolved-air flotation and electrolytic flotation. In addition
if a turbine or impeller is used for aeration to produce the air
bubbles a high degree of turbulence or shear is required. This
would break up the fragile flocs formed during chemical treatment
of surface water. If a diffuser is used for the production of the
air bubbles surface active agents are usually added to produce
sufficiently small bubbles. The addition of these materials would
be unacceptable in potable water treatment. The float produced by
dispersed-air flotation is also often of relatively low solids
concentration which may cause a disposal problem.

Electrolytic flotation

The basis of electrolytic or electro-flotation is the generation

of hydrogen and oxygen in a dilute aqueous solution by passing a
direct current between two electrodes. Initially aluminium or
steel' sacrificial electrodes were employed for generating the gas
bubbles. This incurred high maintenance and electrode replacement
costs and resulted in frequent down times of the plants. Earlier
work on the electrolysis of sea water had indicated that
platinized titanium could provide electrodes with an extended
life, however, the cost of the electrodes was found to be
excessive. More recently lead dioxide was investigated as
electrode material. As lead dioxide has little strength when
compacted, it was necessary to deposit it on a carrier. Titanium
was chosen as the carrier material and the lead dioxide was
deposited onto the titanium from an electrolyte solution. An
electrode life of several years has been achieved with this
material. Stainless steel of various grades has also been used as
electode materials which gave satisfactory service for several
months.

Besides the disadvantage of having to replace the electrodes at

relatively frequent intervals, fouling the electrodes is also a
frequent problem and mechanical cleaning devices for the
electrodes are therefore usually installed.

Electrical power is supplied to the electrodes at a low voltage

potential of 5 to 10 volts dc by means of a transformer
rectifier. The power consumption of electro-flotation depends on
the conductivity of the liquid and the distance between the
electrodes and is in the range of 0.5 to 0.7 kW/m2 of flotation
tank surface area producing approximately 50 to 60 1 of gas/h m2
of area.
 351

The bubble size generated in electrolytic flotation is generally

smaller that in dispersed-air and dissolved-air flotation. In
addition little turbulence is created by the bubble formation.
Hence this system is particularly attractive for the removal of
low density fragile floes. However, the surface loading for
electro-flo!ati2n is much lower~ 1 to 4 m3 h- 1 m- 2 compared with
8 to 12m3 h 1 m 2 for dissolved-air flotation.

The application of electrolytic flotation has been so far

restricted to effluent treatment problems and sludge thickening.
For small installations, in the flow rate range of 10 to 20 m3/h,
electro-flotation has been found to be a versatile and
competitive system. For larger plants dissolved-air flotation is
more economical. A schematic diagram of an electro-flotation
plant is shown in Figure 1.

Raw Water Sludge Sludge

Water Level Removal Trough
I Belt" ~

Electrodes Clarified
Water
Effluent

Figure 1. Schematic diagram of an electrolytic flotation plant

Electro-flotation has so far not been employed for potable water

treatment. Problems of heavy metal contamination can arise due to
the dissolution of the electrodes.

Dissolved-air flotation

Dissolved-air flotation was originally developed in the form of

vacuum flotation for the pulp and paper industry [2] as a process
for the removal of fibres from whitewater. In dissolved-air
flotation the bubbles are generated by the reduction of the
pressure of a water stream saturated with air. The air
precipitates in the form of fine bubbles, usually of less than
0.1 UDD diameter with only relatively little agitation of the
process stream.
352

Three main types of dissolved-air flotation processes are known

[3] :

1. Vacuum flotation

2. Micro-flotation

3. Pressure flotation

Vacuum flotation. In vacuum flotation the process liquid to be

treated is saturated with air at atmospheric pressure. The air
bubbles are generated by applying a vacuum to the flotation tank
releasing the air as small bubbles. The process has several
disadvantages,

the amount of air available for flotation is limied by the

vacuum achievable

as the air release is genetle, the process liquid will remain

supersaturated reducing the amount of air available for
flotation

it is a batch process

sophisticated equipment is required to produce and maintain

the vacuum

The application of vacuum flotation has been restricted to the

pulp and paper industry and is being replaced because of the
disadvantages by pressure flotation.

Micro-flotation An interesting development is the micro-flotation

process [4], Figure 2.

In micro-flotation the entire volume of water is subjected to the

increased pressure by passing the water down and up a shaft
approximately 10m deep. At the bottom of the shaft, on the down-
comer Side, air is injected. Undissolved air rises up the shaft
against the flow thus increasing the saturation of the water. As
the water rises in the up-flow section the hydrostatic pressure
decreases and some of the air is released in the form of fine air
bubbles.

Advantages claimed for the process are:

recycle is not used maximising the hydraulic capacity of the

plant.

one blower replaces several mechanical units required for a

conventional pressure dissolved-air flotation plant.
 353

l. Waste water intake.

2. Precipitation chemical.
® 3. Flocculation tank.
4. Compressed air.
5. Polymer dosage.
6. Shaft for aeration.
7. Aeration.
8. Riser.
9. Flotation tank.
10. Sludge tank.
11. Effluent.
12. Sludge outflow.

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of micro-flotation [4]

floc agglomeration and bubble generation occur simulaneously

and gentle providing good attachment of the air bubbles to
the floes.

The limitations of the process are:

The amount of air which can be dissolved is limited by the

depth of shaft e.g. hydrostatic pressure provided.

The saturation of the water with air at that depth is

dependent on the way the air is introduced to the system e.g.
size of air bubbles produced at point of injection.

As little agitation is produced in the upflow section it is

likely that the water remains supersaturated, e. g. not all
the air is available for flotation.
354

The process offers scope for improvement by for instance

providing agitation both in the down-comer and up flow chamber to
improve the dissolution and release of the air and to provide
adequate flocculation at the same time.

The process is in concept similar to the idea proposed by

Kitchener and Gochin (5) of generating the bubbles within the
floes. This could lead to a considerable economy in energy
compared with the other types of dissolved air flotation
processes, because the air is much more efficiently utilised.

Application of the process has been restricted so far to small

sewage and effluent treatment plants.

Pressure flotation. At present the most widely used dissolved-air

flotation process is pressure flotation, in which air dissolved
in water under pressure is released in the form of small air
bubbles by discharge to atmospheric pressure.

Three basic pressure dissolved-air flotation processes (6) can be

used, Figure 3: (a) full-flow pressure flotation, (b) split-flow
pressure flotation, and (c) recycle-flow pressure flotation.

In full-flow pressure flotation, Figure 3a, the entire influent

is pressurised and aerated. In split-flow pressure flotation,
Figure 3b, a fraction of the influent is subjected to
pressurisation, while the remainder flows directly to the
flocculation/flotation tank. This flow scheme offers a cost
saving over full-flow pressure flotation, since the saturator and
the feed pump only handle a portion of the total flow and
therefore smaller units are required. However, as less air is
provided in the split-flow system, this process would have to
operate at a higher pressure in order to provide the same amount
of air.

If a flocculation stage is required for the successful operation

of the process the full-flow system is unsuitable because any
floc formed prior to the air release device would be destroyed by
the high shear during the pressure release. The split flow system
is also not suitable i f efficient flocculation of the water is
required prior to flotation. If the fraction of the influent
subjected to pressurisation is taken off before flocculation,
this fraction does not receive any flocculation if on the other
hand it is taken off after the flocculation stage, the flocs
would again be destroyed by the high shear in the pressure
release device.

In addition both systems are susceptible to blockage of the air

release devices if large solids are present in the raw water.
 355
Sludge

Cllrifiod
.ffluont

Floa:uloting
agent
(if requir1ldl

(II FULL·FLOW PRESSURE FLOTATION

Sludge

CI.rified
Iffluont

Floa:ulating
ogent
(if requintdl
SaturltOf

(bl SPLIT·FLOW PRESSURE FLOTATION

Sludge

Clarified
effluent

Flocculating
agent
(if required)

(el RECYCLE·FLOW PRESSURE FLOTATION

Figure 3. Types of pressure dissolved-air flotation processes [6]

For the removal of fragile flocs, for ins tance those produced
during potable water treatment, recycle-flow pressure flotation
is the most appropriate sytem. In this process the influent flows
directly to the flocculation tank or to the flotation tank if
separate flocculation is not required. Part of the clarified
effluent is recycled, pressurised and saturated with air. The
pressurised recycle water is introduced to the flotation tank
through a pressure release device and mixed with the flocculated
water. In the pressure release device the pressure is reduced to
atmospheric pressure releasing the air in the form of fine
bubbles suitable for flotation (20 to 100 11m in diameter). The
air bubbles attach themselves to the flocs and float to the
surface. The float can be removed from the surface and the
clarified water is taken from the bottom of the flotation tank.
Because of the additonal flow through the flotation tank due to
the recycle the flotation tank has to be designed larger than for
the full-flow sustem especially if the recycle flow required is
large, as for sludge thickening.
356

APPLICATION OF FLOTATION FOR POTABLE WATER TREATMENT

The most widely accepted flotation process for potable water

treatment applications in flocculation followed by recycle
pressure flotation, Figure 4.

The raw water entering the plant is dosed with the coagulation
chemicals either in specially designed flash mixers or directly
in the raw water feed pipe. The coagulated water is subsequently
flocculated by gently agitation in the flocculator. The
flocculated water is mixed in the flotation tank with the recycle
stream containing the fine air bubbles. The bubbles attach
themselves to the flocs and the bubble/floc agglomerates rise to
the surface of the flotation tank and are removed as floated
sludge either by flooding or mechanical scraping. Part of the
flotation treated water is recycled, pressurised and saturated
with air in a saturator. The saturated water is returned to the
flotation tank through special pressure release devices in which
the pressure is reduced to atmospheric pressure precipitating the
air in the form of fine bubbles suitable for flotation.

Coagulation

Raw surface waters used for potable water supply contain

colloidal and suspended solids, which require the addition of
coagulents such as aluminium sulphate or ferric sulphate for
destabilisation and subsequent flocculation. Similarly if organic
colour such as humic and fulvic acids are present, coagulants are
needed for the precipitation of the colour and for flocculation.
To achieve efficient clarification the pH of the coagulated water
has to be optimised, which might require the addition of either
acid or alkali. The optimum pH is dependent on the type of raw
water being treated and the coagulent being used.

The optimum chemical conditions can be determined in a standard

flotation jar test apparatus. As the total residence time in the
flotation plant is relatively short (approximately 1 hour) the
plant can also be used for the final optimisation of the chemical
conditions.

The order of the chemical addition does not seem to be important,

however, good mixing of the raw water with coagulent and the pH
adjustment chemical is required for efficient operation of the
flotation plant. Most flotation plants are equipped with flash
mixers which consist of a tank providing a residence time of
between 0.5 and 1 min and which are agitated by high speed
stirrers (usually 350rpm). Tests carried out by the Water
Research Centre [7] have shown that improved treated water
quality could be achieved when the chemicals were dosed directly
into the raw water feed pipe. For larger plants with larger
 pressure Saturator
regulator

Sludge
beach Recycle
Raw In-line Sludge
Water
level
control

Coagulation Flotation treated

chemicals water to rapid
.......
ir Flotation tank gravity filter
injection
nozzle

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of a flotation plant for potable water treatment w

Ut
-...J
358

diameter feed pipes this would probably not provide sufficiently

good mixing and the use of in-line mixers such as static mixers
or dosing before orifice plates or valves should be considered.
Stirrers incorporated into the raw water feed pipe have also been
used for mixing of raw water and chemicals but little is known
about their efficiency.

Another important aspect, especially when treating soft waters

with a low pH buffering capacity. is that good mixing of the
first chemical should be completed before the second chemical is
added. A minimum distance of approximately 2m equivalent to 10
pipe diameters between the two dosing points was required for
effective mixing. Figure 5 [7].

Flow rate =57 m3 /h

• • Turbidity Raw water: Turbidity 2.8 FTU

a----... Residual Coagulant

pH
Temp
5.9
13°C
Colour 300 Hazen 1.4
1.4
Ferric sulphate dose 7.5 mgtl Fe

1.2 1.2

51.0
...
I-
~
.\
., 1.0
...
Ii

~
~
§ 0.8 ,, oS
!z
,,
0.8
<II
II:
:::>
S
l- isc(
\\
II:
W
~ 0.6 ~ 0.6 8
...J
;: \ c(
o \ :::>
w \ o
~ \ iii
~ 0.4 \ 0.4 ~
\
I- \
z
o
~I-
','. . ___ .----_____C-.
0.2 • 0.2
9...

o 2 4 6 8 o
DISTANCE SEPARATING DOSING POSITIONS (m)

Figure 5. Effect of distance separating dosing positions on

flotation treated water quality [7].
 359

Flocculation

Before the destabilised solids and the precipitated colour can be

removed successfully by flotation, flocculation into larger
agglomerates (flocs) is required. To achieve flocculation,
agitation must be provided to promote collisons between the
primary particles to facilitate floc growth.

The flocculator usually consists of a tank subdivided by partial

baffles into 2 to 4 equal sized compartments each agitated by a
paddle. The flocculation time required differs with the type of
raw water being treated and i t has been found that for algal
laden waters approximately 12 minutes is sufficient for adequate
flocculation whereas for highly coloured soft waters of low
turbidity a time of about 20 minutes is needed.

Table 1 shows the improvement in treated water quality which can

be achieved by increasing the flocculation time and stresses the
importance of the flocculation stage for efficient flotation.

Table 1. The effect of increasing the flocculation time on the

treated water quality (soft highly coloured water)[7]

Flocculation time Turbidity Residual Coagulent

(min) (FTU) (mg/litre Fe)
12 1.2 0.83
16 0.94 0.56
Although some improvement can be achieved in treated water
quality by increasing the number of flocculation stages, this
improvement can also be obtained by offering a longer
flocculation time. Therefore most flotation plant manufacturers
offer flotation plants with a two-stage flocculator and a
flocculation time of about 20 min.

Besides the flocculation times, the degree of agitation is also

very important. This can be measured by the "mean velocity
gradient" G calculated by
G=v4'(s-l)

where P = total power input to the water/volume of flocculator

compartment and ~ = dynamic viscosity. Agitation is usually
provided by slow moving paddles. To avoid excess shear of the
flocs the tip speed of the paddles should not exceed 0.5m/s.

Figure 6 shows the effect of varying the paddle speed and the
corresponding mean velocity gradient G on the treated water
quality,which indicates that the optimum velocity gradient is
about G = 70 s -1. This was independent of the type of water
treated [7].
360

An alternative approach to mechanical flocculation is the use of

hydraulic flocculation in which the energy required for
flocculation is provided by the water flowing through the
flocculator. Tests [6] have shown that a flocculation time of
only 5 minutes was required for hydraulic flocculation compared
with 10 min for mechanical flocculation, Figure 7. This is partly
due to the fact that very little backmixing occurs in a hydraulic
flocculator compared with a mechanical flocculator. However,
higher G values (G=150 s -1) were required for hydraulic
flocculation compared with 70 s-1 for mechanical flocculation.

The product of mean velocity gradient and flocculation time (G.t)

is often used to express the flocculation condition required. It
seems that for efficient flotation a G.t value of between 40 000
and 60 000 is required independently of whether hydraulic or
mechanical flocculation is employed.

Polyelectrolytes which are often required in sedimentation plants

to strengthen the flocs and tQ increase the settling velocity of
the flocs are usually not needed for flotation.

Flotation tank design

Although circular tanks are being used mainly for smaller

installations, most water treatment plants are designed with
rectangular flotation tanks. The rectangular tank design has the
advantage that the flocculated water can be introduced to the
flotation tank without any floc break-up. In addition the
flocculated water and recycle stream can be mixed efficiently and
distributed evenly over the whole width of the flotation tank.

Flotation tanks are normally designed with a tank depth of

between 1.2 and 2m and with upflow rates of between Band 12 m/h.
Only if a filter is incorporated in the same structure(e.g.in the
so-called Flofilter design)are the loadings reduced to between 5
and 6 m/h in order to be compatible with the maximum filtration
rates. The tank depth is also deeper for this design approximately
3m to accomodate the filter bed and the underdrain system.

The flotation tank is usually equipped with an inclined baffle

(600) at the inlet side directing the floc/bubble agglomerates
towards the surface and to reduce the velocity of the incoming
water to avoid disturbance of the sludge layer. The residence
time in the flotation tank is bewtween 5 and 15 min depending on
the loading (upflow rate) and dsepth of the flotation tank.

Tracer tests [B] using a slug dose of lithium chloride have shown
that the presence of the air bubbles improves the hydraulic
characteristics of the flotation tank, Figure.B.
 361

3
~
IL

>-
~ Raw water: Turbidity 1.5 - 1.7 FTU
o Turbidity
o o Residual coagulant pH 8.9
III
a: Coagulant dose: 5 mgtl AI
:::l
f-
a: 1.4
w z
f-
« a
i=
~
o 1.2 0.6 «
-'
w :::l
~ \!l
«
~ 1.0 0.4 a
~ u
z -'
«
g 0.8 0.2 :::l
0
~ in
w
a a:
it 0.6 .1....-~---T'""---r---I---.,..~
8 10
UNIFORM PADDLE SPEEDS (rev/min)
32 50 70 92 118
MEAN VELOCITY GRADIENT GIs-I,

Figure 6. Effect of varying mean velocity gradients on flotation

treated water quality [7]

FLOCCULATION TIME
o. • Hydraulic 4.6 min at 8.2 m'lh
.. Hydraulic 5.7 min at 8.2 m' fh o
o Mechanical 10 min at 8.2 ml/h
:;
~ O.
>-
o
~

iii
II:
::>

----
~ 0.7
II:
w
!;(

. _.
~
C
w
!;(
w
0.6
~
.
II:

.-----
~

0.5.l,..--------r--------r---------,
4 6 8 10
FLOW RATE (m'fh)

Figure 7. Comparison of hydraulic and mechanical flocculation [6]

362

The maximum size of a flotation tank is determined by hydraulic

conditions and the type of scraping device used for the removal
of the floated sludge. Tanks with surface areas in excess of 80m2
are in operation. However, for maximum flexibility of operation
flotation plants are usually designed with several independent
parallel units. The water level in the flotation tank is
regulated by the outlet valve or by adjustable or fixed weirs at
the outlet.

CICo

2-5

C =outlet concentration of tracer

t = time for sampling
2-0 Co = total mass of tracer
volume of tank

to = .volume of tank

l··
J!I, flowrate

~I ~\
I
I
~
\
--<i)- no recycle
--I!I-- with 8% recycle
I \
1·0
!
I
~~
\
If! \
I \
0-5 I ~
I ,
, 't§I.
,
~
o +-~~§4~------~-----'-------T--~---r---=~~3_0
0-5 1-0 1-5 2·0 2-5
~
tlto

Figure 8. Results of tracer tests on a flotation tank [8] - a

residence time distribution

The sludge accumulating on the flotation tank surface can be

removed either continously or intermittently by flooding or
scraping. Flooding involves raiSing the water level in the
flotation tank sufficiently for sludge and water to overflow
 363

into the sludge collection trough. This method has low equipment
cost and the sludge removal has little effect on the treated
water quality. However, the sludge produced has also a very low
solids content (less than 0.2%) and the water wastage is
relatively high (about 2% of plant throughout) thus one of the
advantages of flotation, the production of thick sludge is lost
with this method.

The equipment cost for mechanical scraping devices can be high

(as high as 10 to 20% of total equipment cost) and deterioration
in treated water quality can occur during the removal process
especially if the sludge is allowed to accumulate on the
flotation tank surface for too long and i f the scraper speed is
too high. However, high sludge solids concentrations (up to 6%)
suitable for direct dewatering in filter presses can be produced
by mechanical scraping devices.

The most widely used scraping system in potable water treatment

are the full length or partial length
called beach scrapers have also been used
for algal laden waters. The beach scraper
rubber blades which only remove sludge
sludge beach, Figure 9 [6].
scrapers. However, so-
successfully especially
compromises a number of
accumulated above the

As the sludge is scraped off over the beach fresh sludge from the
flotation tank surface is drawn by natural flow towards the beach
area. This type of scraping devices reduces the likelihood of
sludge break-up and. its associated deterioration in treated water
quality as the blades themselves create very little disturbance
i f the sludge layer on top of the flotation tank. It is worth
noticing that in potable water treatment the production of good
water quality is of prime importance whereas the production of a
thick sludge is only of secondary benefit. Best treated water
quality and sludge thickness are produced by operating the sludge
beach scraper continuously and by maintaining a sludge layer of
approximately 10mm on the flotation tank surface. It is also
important that the water level in the flotation tank is adjusted
correctly to avoid excess water being carried over the beach
during the sludge removal.

A full length scraper removes during each passage the sludge from
the whole surface of the flotation tank. It is important to
select the correct scraper speed and frequency of scraping. If
the speed is too fast it can lead to sludge break-up and to high
carry-over of water producing a thin sludge. If the speed is too
low or if the sludge is removed too infrequently, e.g. the
accumulated sludge layer is too thick, this can also lead to
sludge break-up during the removal resulting in a deterioration
in treated water quality. Least disturbance of the sludge layer
is peoduced by operating the scraper continuously at a scraper
364

.
.
Cl'

bJ)
.,-1
11<
 365

Liquidl.ir =-=:=::;'\
i(;"

Air

Recycle Recycle
pump Liquid out· pump Liquid out-
to flotation unit to flotation unit

INJECTION OF AIR INTO SUCTION LINE OF PACKED SATURATOR

RECYCLE PUMP

1--____--..---A_Electrode

Reaeration
pump suction pump discharge

SATURATOR WITH REAERATION PUMP AND EDUCTOR

Inlet· from ~irculation pump

Air in

- Air out

v.lve

Air air
discharge

Recycle
I
pump Outlet· to flotation unit Outlet· to flotation unit

ENTRAINING THE AIR WITH EDUCTOR UNPACKED SATURATOR

Figure 10. Different air saturation systems for dissolved-air

flotation plants [9]

speed of approximately 30m h- 1 • The use of a full length scraper

is advisable i f the stability of the sludge on the tank surface
is poor (e.g. when treating a stored, soft coloured water).
Besides the two extremes, full length scraper and sludge beach
scraper, devices are being used which remove the sludge from part
of the tank surface.
366
The flotation tank must be covered against the effect of bad
weather as both rain and wind can lead to a break-up of the
flotation sludge layer. Freezing of the sludge when allowed to
accumulate has also been experienced.

Dissolution of air in water

Various different methods are being employed for dissolving air

under pressure in the recycle stream, Figure 10 [9].

Approximately half of the operating cost of a dissolved air

flotation plant is associated with the air saturation system. The
use of a packed saturator system which has thge lowest operating
cost is therefore gaining acceptance in potable water treatment
applications. If the air is introduced on the suction side of the
recycle pump saturation levels from 60 to 80% [10] are only
achieved and in addition higher pumping costs are required.
Sparging the air through water in an unpacked saturator [11]
results also in a very inefficient air dissolution. If the water
is sprayed through an unpacked saturator the system has to be
operated at a pressure of 100 to 200kPa [12] above that required
for a packed saturator to supply similar quantities of air to the
flotation tank.

100
'"
0 Water temperature 12.SOC
loading 1900 m1/m l Iday

'" Water temperature 4.8· 6.00C

loading 1900 mJ/m1/day
80

'"
! Packing:
z 60
0
;:: Plastic pall rings

"'">-
::>
40
Plate distributor
Pressure 415 kPa
;1j

20

0
0 0.2 OA 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
PACKING OEPTH (m)

Figure 11. Effect of packed bed depth on saturator performance

[9 ]

Extensive work [9] has been carried out on optimising the design
of a packed saturator. Different types of packing material were
investigated which indicated that the choice of the packing
material was not very important, by marginally better results
were achieved using polypropylene Pall rings which was also the
 367

cheapest packing tested. Figure 11 hows that saturation

approaching the theoretical level could be achieved using a
packing height of 0.8m, which was considerably higher than the
0.3m reported elsewhere [11].

The surface loading is another important design parameter for a

packed saturator. Experiments [9] have shown that the saturator
can be operated over the range 300 to 2000 m3 m- 2 d- 1 , based on
the empty cross sectional area of the saturator, without any
deterioration in performance. Higher loadings could not be
investigated because of equipment limitations. These loadings
were achieved with all the different packing materials
investigated.

As oxygen is more soluble in water than nitrogen, the partial

pressure of nitrogen in the gas inside the saturator has to rise
in order to maintain the same ratio of oxygen to nitrogen in the
saturated water as in the influent air. This has the effect that
the theoretical quantity of gas that can be dissolved is reduced
by about 9% compared with that achievable i f the gas in the
saturator has the same compostion as the air, Figure 12.

The introduction of an air bleed confirmed that more gas could be

dissolved. However, it is doubtful whether the small increase in
saturation level which could be achieved would justify the
operation of an air bleed which would necessitate the
installation of larger compressor capacity.

3.5. Release of Air from the Recycle Stream

Different devices are being used for precipitating the air from
the saturated water. These include proprietary nozzles, needle
valves and simple gate vaives. It is important that the pressure
is released close to the flocculated water stream to minimise the
coalescence of the bubbles resulting in a loss of air bubbles
available for flotation. Good mixing of the air bubbles with the
flocculated water stream is also essential to facilitate
bubble/floc contact. To achieve effective air release the
pressure should be reduced suddenly and highly turbulent
conditions must exist in the air release device. However, the
velocity of the recycle stream leaving the device should be low
enough to minimise floc break-up.

In full-scale flotation plants usually a number of these

pressure release devices fed from a joint manifold are installed
at a spacing of about O.3m across the inlet of the flotation tank
to provide uniform between the flocculated water entering the
flotation tank and the recycle stream.
368

160

140

;::: 120
'"E
o
w
~ 100
w
...J
W
cr:
ow 80
>
...J
oen
5 60
cr:
C(
40 Air atmosphere in saturator
Nitrogen-rich atmosphere in saturator

20 Temperature values in °c

o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

PRESSURE (kPa)

Figure 12. Mass of gas dissolved in water as a function of

pressure and temperature [9]

Tests [8] comparing the performance of the proprietary nozzle

developed by the Water Research Centre with that of a needle
valve produced similar treated water qualities. Figure 13 shows
the bubble size distribution, determined by a photographic
method, produced by the needle valve and the WC nozzle for
similar conditions of flow and pressure.

Slightly larger bubbles were produced by the needle valve,

however, for both devices most of the bubbles were in the range
of 10-12011m. Because of the similar performance of the devices in
terms of flotation treated water quality the suggests that the
exact distribution of sizes is not critical, provided that most
are in the range 10-12011m. Similarly little difference in bubble
size distribution was found for different we nozzle sizes and
operating pressures, in each case over 95% of the bubbles were in
 369

5')

45 Saturator pressure 485 k Pa

I
I~I
40 I \

., ,, ,I \

it:
I \
\ -@- Needle Valve
I ,

,
I \
\
--@-- WRC Nozzle
I
I
j 25 I

20
,
I
I

,
I
I
15 I
I
10
I
I
\
\
,
~ "-
5 I
I
'ls.,
I
I
's_
o~~~~--~----~--~~~~~~~
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
Bubble diameter ll'm) •
Figure 13. Bubble size distribution produced by needle valve and
WRC nozzle [8]

the range 10 to 120~m. It is important to minimise the formation

of very large bubbles as this represents in terms of air
utilisation a loss of a large number of small bubbles. However in
all devices used at present, some large bubbles are being formed.

3.6 Quantity of air required for flotation

The quantity of air available is controlled by both the saturator

pressure and the flow of recycle. Experiments varying the recycle
and pressure showed that the treated water quality was only
dependent upon the total quantity of air introduced to the system
and not upon the individual values of pressure or recycle. This
can be explained by the observation that the same range of bubble
sizes (10 to 120~m) was obtained for all nozzle sizes and
pressures investigated.

Approximately 7 to 8 g of air/m 3 of raw water treated are

required for optimum flotation, Figure 14. This corresponds to an
operating pressure between 350 and 420 kPa and a recycle rate of
between 7 and 8% provided a packed saturator is used.

The recycle should be limited to between 6 and 10%. 1£ the

recycle flow is too low inadequate mixing between the flocculated
water and the recycle flow can occur and if it is too high excess
flotation' tank capacity must be provided and break-up of the
f locs can occur.
370

4·0

3·0

~r2'0
:2 1·0
.c
~
4·0 5'0 6·0 7·0 8·0

•
9·0 10·0 11·0 12·0

Air added (g air/ m 3 raw water )

Figure 14. Effect of quantity of air on flotation treated water

quality [7]

The air/solids ratio required for potable water treatment can be

as high as 400 ml/g which is considerably higher than that needed
for thickening of activated sludge which is in the range of 15 to
30ml/g[13]. The large excess of air required when treating
surface waters is probably needed to facilitate adequate
collisions between the flocs present as a dilute suspension and
the air bubbles.

PERFORMANCE OF FLOTATION PLANTS FOR THE TREATMENT OF RAW SURFACE

WATERS

Flotation has been evaluated extensively on several different

surface waters:

(i) a hard, flashy stream

(H) a turbid, lowland river water,
(Hi) a soft, highly coloured upland water
(iv) a long-term stored water with algal problems and
(v) a short-term stored water with algal problems.

Detailed results are given elsewhere [6,7]

The process was found to be especially suitable for the treatment

of nutrient-rich, long-term stored water with algal problems and
for soft, highly coloured upland water.

Treatment of nutrient-rich, long-term stored water with algal

problems

Much better algal removal was achieved by flotation than on the

sedimentation plant operating on the same water, Figure 15.
 371

Aphanizomanon Microcystis
200
102000
100

150

E
"! "
i
!.l!! ~'" "f
"1ii" .l!!
:;::
c "!
.
'i c
... ~'" ~"
'i .2 0
.;:;
"'u
"'u 100 .="
'S! c ...
'0
50
:j
"'. '.,"
C 1: c c

.. ".
.2 .2
)( .;0 ,~
,S "E 1ii 1ii
c
au ~ 1::>
0
",

..
~

!! "5l .."
'6
~ ~
u
'iii 50 'iii
!P
~ c(

2800
0 0

Figure 15. Algae removal by flotation and sedimentation [8]

The flotation plant was operated at a surface loading of 12 m/h

compared with only 2 m/h for the sedimentation plant. At times
the algae remaining in the flotation treated water were less than
those in the filtered sedimentation treated water.

Efficient flocculation is essential for effective algal removal.

When the flotation plant was operated without coagulant addition
only about 10 to 20% of the algae were removed. Figure 16 shows a
comparison of the effectiveness of three primary coagulants -
chlorinated ferrous sulphate, aluminium sulphate and poly
aluminium chloride (PAC) - for algal removal at their optimum pH
for minimum residual coagulant.

Aluminium sulphate at a pH 7.0 to 7.5 proved to be the most

effective coagulent. The poorest algal removal was produced with
chlorinated copperas at a pH between 8.3 and 8.7.

The sludge produced by flotation was quite frothy, particularly

during periods of high algal concentrations in the raw water, and
could be removed easily by a beach scraper giving a sludge of 3%
dry solids.

Treatment of soft, highly coloured upland water

The flocs produced by the flocculation of these types of waters

are very light and even with the addition of polyelectrolytes the
sedimentation tanks could only be operated at very low loadings
372

Raw Water Algal Count Raw Water

Coagulant Turbidity (FTU)
Icolls/mll· Microcysti.

o Aluminium 40000 3.5·4.1

sulphate

• Aluminium 5.5· 5.9

120000
sulphate

• PAC 120000 5.5·5.9

.. Chlorinated
ferrous 48000 3.6
sulphate
100
~
;i90
1)
~
~BO
...J
..:
";i 70
o 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 mgt) AI
o 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 mw'1 Fe
COAGULANT DOSE

Figure 16. Comparison of the effectiveness of three coagulants on

algal removal [7]

( < 1m/h) and particularly during periods of cold water

temperature «40 C) it was difficult to maintain stable sludge
blankets in the sedimentation tanks. The flotation plant was
operated successfully at all temperatures at loadings of 12 m/h.

A comparison of the raw, flotation-treated, sedimentation-treated

and filtered water quality is given in Table 2.

The treated water quality produced by the two processes was

similar. Only the residual coagulant concentration of the
sedimentation treated water was usually lower by about 0.2 mg/l
Fe. However, by increasing the flocculation time from 12 to 165
minutes the residual coagulant concentration in the flotation
treated water was reduced to that in the sedimentation-treated
water.

The coagulation pH was critical for the performance of the plant.

In the winter it was between 4.3 and 4.7 and in the summer
between 4.8 and 6.2 if chlorinated copperas was used as
coagulant.

The sludge produced from this type of water was more like a paste
and tended to grow into the water similar to an iceberg rather
than float on the water surface. The sludge started to break-up
after only 30 minutes accumulation at the surface. The best
method for the removal of this sludge was continuous scrap'ing
 373

using a full length sludge scraper at a low speed. As the sludge

required frequent removal a sludge solids concentration of only
1% dry solids could be produced when treating this type of
water.

COST OF FLOTATION

Dissolved-air flotation for water clarification is a relatively

new process and only a limited number of mainly relatively small
plants have been installed in the UK so far.

A recent report on the costs of water treatment plant [14]

recommended a cost function based on the limited data available
for flotation which corrected to (Q4) 1981 prices can be
expressed as:

Capital Cost = 23* AreaO. S2

where the Captial Cost is in f1000 and the Area is the area of
the flotation tank alone, in m2 • Costs do not include any
substantial buildings which might be needed to protect the
flotation plant from adverse weather. However, flocculation and
saturation equipment are included in the costs.

Estimated operating costs for a 22.7Ml/d flotation plant are

given in Table 3 [6]. The costs are based on 1979 prices and do
not include the cost for raw water and high lift pumping.

It is interesting to note that although the energy cost for

flotation are significant the chemical costs are substantially
higher.

A cost comparison of flotation with floc blanket clarification,

the currently most widely used primary water treatment process in
the UK, has shown that the overall costs of the two processes is
similar. Flotation tends to have lower capital costs but higher
operating costs than sedimentation thus a low plant utilisation
would favour flotation.

However, in addition to the cost comparion other considerations

must be taken into account which might influence the process
selection. Flotation can offer several process advantages over
sedimentation, including better treated water quality e.g. when
treating algal laden waters, rapid start-up and shut down, high
rate operation and the production of a thicker sludge.
 W
-...J
~

Table 2. Comparison of raw, flotation. treated, sedimentation-treated and

filtered water [7]

Sample Turbiditity Dose Colour pH Iron Manganese Aluminium

(FTU) (mg/litre Fe) (0Hazen) (mg/litre Fe) (mg/litre Mn) (mg/litre Al)
Raw 3.2 45 6.2 0.70 0.11 0.23
Flotation
-treated 0.72 8.5 2 4.8 0.58 0.16 0.04
Flotation-
filtered 0.19 9.0 0.04 0.02 0.04
Sedimentation-
treated 0.50 6.0 + 0.8 mg/ 0 5.05 0.36 0.14 0.10
litre poly-
electrolyte
Sedimentation-
filtered 0.29 0 10.5 0.01 0.02 0.10

Improved flotation treated water quality similar to that achieved with sedimentation was obtained
by increasing the flocculation time from 12 to 16 min.
 375

Table 3. Estimated operating costs (in sterling) of a 22.7 Ml/d

flotation plant with a 95% load factor [6]

1. Fixed charges from the capital for

(a) Civils of £180 000 for concrete, flash mixing, flocculating

and flotation tanks, plus foundations for saturators.

(b) Mechanicals of £160 000 for all mechanical plant for flash
mixing, flocculation, flotation, chemical mixing and dosing,
manual control and nominal coverage of the flotation tanks.

Note these costs are exclusive of raw water and high lift pumps,
sludge disposal facilities and all buildings.

Annual cos ts Water costs

(£'OOOs) (p/m 3 )
Civils - 30 year plant life
10% interest rate
10.6% amortisation rate 19.1 0.24

Mechanicals - 20 year plant life

10% interest rate
11.75% amortisation rate 18.8 0.24

2. Power for saturation at 400 kPa and

with 7% recycle, plus flash mixing,
flocculating, chemical mixing and
dosing and sludge removal.
Estimate 22 kWh/Ml at 3.2 p/k Wh 5.51 0.07

3. Chemicals - average dose 7mg/litre 21.9 0.28

as Fe, and sodium hydroxide for pH
adjustment

4. Labour - operator, quality control 8.0 0.1

1 man year with overheads

5. Maintenance - fitter, 1/4 man year

and materials 6.0 0.08

Total annual costs £79 310 1.01 p/m 3

376

REFERENCES

1. Barrett, F., Electroflotation - development and application.

~ater Pollution Control, 74, (1) 59, 1975.

2. Kalinske, A.I., Flotation in ~aste Treatment. Biological

treatment of sewage and industrial Wastes, 2 (J.McCabe & ~.W.
Eckenfelder Jr, Editors) Reinhold Publishing Corp., New York,
NY, 1958. 222.

3. Melbourne, J.D., and Zabel, T.F.(Editors). Papers and

Proceedings of the of the ~ater Research Centre Conference on
Flotation for \iater and ~aste Treatment, Medmenham, England,
May 1977.

4. Hemming,M.L., Cottrell,~.R.T., and Oldfelt, S. Experience in

the treatment of domestic sewage by the microflotation
process. Paper 2, Papers and Proceedings of the ~ater
Research Centre Conference on Flotation for ~ater and \iaste
Treatment. Medmenham, England, May 1977.

5. Kitchener,J.A., and Gochin, R.J. The mechanism of dissolved-

air flotation for potable water: basic analysis and a
proposal. Water Research, 15, 585, 1981.

6. Zabel, T.F., and Melbourne, J.D., Flotation in Developments

in ~ater Treatment - Vol 1. Lewis, W.M. Applied Science
Publishers Ltd., London, 1980.

7. Rees, A.J., Rodman, D.J.,' and Zabel, T.F. Water clarification

by flotation - 5. WRC Technical Report TR1l4, ~ater Research
Centre, Medmenham, 1979.

8. Rees, A.J. ,Rodman,D.J. , and Zabel, T.F. Dissolved air

flotation for solid/liquid separation. J.Separ.Proc.
Technol.,I,(3), 19, 1980.

9. Rees, A.J.Rodman,D.J. and Zabel,T.F. Evaluation of dissolved-

air flotation saturator performance. WRC Technical Report TR
143. Water Research Centre, Medmenham, 1980.

10. Vrablik,E.R. Fundamental principles of dissolved air

flotation of industrial wastes. Proceedings of the 14th
Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, 1959.

11. Bratby, J., and Marais, C.V.R. Saturation performance in

dissolved air (pressure) flotation. ~ater Res., 1975,~, 929.
 377

12. Zabel, T.F., and Hyde, R.A. Factors influencing dissolved air
flotation as applied to water clarification. Paper 8 Papers
and Proceedings of the Water Research Conference on Flotation
for Water and Waste Treatment. Medmenham, England, May 1977.

13. Maddock,J .L. Research experience in the thickening of

activated sludge by dissolved air flotation. Paper 5, Papers
and Proceedings of the Conference on Flotation for Water and
Waste Treatment. Water Research Centre, Medmenham, England,
May 1977.

14. Cost information for water supply and sewage disposal. WRC
Technical Report TR6l, Water Research Centre, Medmenham,
1978.

15. Gregory,R. A cost comparsion between dissolved air flotation

and alternative clarification processes. Paper II, Papers and
Proceedings of the Water Research Centre Conference on
Flotation for Water and Waste Treatment, Medmenham, England,
May 1977.