FILTRATION AND

BACKWASHING
A. Amirtharajah
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, GA 30332
CEE - Georgia Tech

FILTRATION: THE GREAT

BARRIER TO PARTICLES,
PARASITES, AND ORGANICS

CEE - Georgia Tech

Particle Removal
Improve taste, appearance
Sorbed metals and pesticides
Pathogens: bacteria, viruses, protozoa

CEE - Georgia Tech

Organic Removal in Biofiltration

Prevent biofouling of distribution system
Remove DBP precursors

CEE - Georgia Tech

Multiple-Barrier Concept
chemical addition
watershed
protection

direct filtration
sedimentation

filtration
disinfection

raw water
screen

coagulation

flocculation
waste sludge

backwash recycle

waste sludge
CEE - Georgia Tech

distribution
system

Fundamental and Microscopic

View
1. Filtration:
Attachment
Detachment

2. Backwashing:
Detachment

CEE - Georgia Tech

Mechanisms of Filtration
particle, dp
transport

attachment

collector, dc
CEE - Georgia Tech

fluid streamline

detachment

History of Filtration Theory(1)

Phenomenological - Macroscopic View
Basic Equations:

c
u

0 . . . . (1)
z t
c
c
. . . . (2)
z

Ives:
CEE - Georgia Tech

o 1
1 1

1 o
o
u

Trajectory Theory
dp

dc

Viruses
0.01 -0.025 m
dc

dc

Bacteria
0.2 - 1 m
Cryptosporidium
3 - 5 m

Diffusion

Sedimentation

dp < 1 m

dp > 1 m

CEE - Georgia Tech

Interception

Giardia
6 - 10 m

History of Filtration Theory (2)

Trajectory Analysis - Microscopic View

dc

1.5
D G I c

dz
dc

CEE - Georgia Tech

Detachment - Macroscopic View

Mintz:

c
a

o c

z
u

c
Ginn et al.:
a d c
z
CEE - Georgia Tech

Particle Size Distribution Function

1.0E+8

Ao

n (#/mL m)

1.0E+7
1.0E+6

1.0E+5

1.0E+4

1.0E+3
1.0E+2
1.0E+1

n (d p ) = A 0 (d p )-

1.0E+0
0.1
CEE - Georgia Tech

dp (m)

10

100

 value from power law function

Variation inAcross a Water

Treatment Plant
4

3.5

n =11

n =11

2.5
n =22
2

Raw water
CEE - Georgia Tech

Coagulated
water

Filtered water

Filter Effluent Quality

Filter Ripening
Outlet

Effluent Turbidity

Backwash remnants

TB

above in
media media

TM
Function

Clean
backwash

Media

of influent
TU

Strainer

Filter
breakthrough
TU
CEE - Georgia Tech

TM

TB

Time

TR

Alum Coagulation Diagram

mol /L
Log (Al) Zeta Potential

Alum - mg/L

as Al 2(SO 4)314.3H 2O

CEE - Georgia Tech

pH of Mixed Solution

Alum Coagulation Diagram

A
l(O
H
)

1
0
0

2
+

3
0

-4
.5

Log[Al]-m
ol/L

-5
.5
-6
.5
-7
.5
-8
.5

3
C
h
a
rg
e
N
e
u
tra
liza
tio
n

A
l(O
H
)

R
e
sta
b
iliza
tio
nZ
o
n
e
(b
o
u
n
d
a
rie
sv
a
ryw
ith
d
iff
e
re
n
tw
a
te
rs)

A
l TO
T
A
L
4

CEE - Georgia Tech

1
0

S
w
e
e
p
C
o
a
g
u
la
tio
n

5
6
p
H
o
fM
ix
e
dS
o
lu
tio
n

0
.3
9

Alum-m
g/L

-3
.5

(-) Detachment Attachment (+)

Filter coefcient ()

Conceptual Model of Filtration

Filter
Ripening

CEE - Georgia Tech

Effective
Filtration

Turbidity
Breakthrough
Time

Wormhole
Flow

Question:
Why is it easier to remove alum or clay
particles in contrast to polymer coated
particles or micro-organisms during
backwash?

CEE - Georgia Tech

Sphere - Flat Plate Interactions (1)

Van der Waals Force:
A a

Fv =
- 1

6z z

a
z

Electrostatic Double Layer Force:

kT
Fe = - 64 a

Ze
CEE - Georgia Tech

Ze1
Ze2
tanh
tanh
exp z
4kT
4kT

Sphere - Flat Plate Interactions (2)

Born Repulsion:

Fb = -

Aa 6
180z 8

Structural Forces
Hydration Force:
Hydrophobic Force:
CEE - Georgia Tech

z
Fh = - 2 aKh exp -
h
z
FH = aC exp -
D

Detachment During Backwashing

Hydrodynamic Forces > Adhesive Forces
1. Spherical Particles - pH and Ionic Strength
2. Non-spherical Particles - Ionic Strength
Kaolinite Platelets

CEE - Georgia Tech

Backwashing Filters
Weakness of fluidization backwash
Improvement due to surface wash
Collapse-pulsing air scour

The best for cleaning

CEE - Georgia Tech

Theory for Collapse-Pulsing

V
aQ a %
Vmf

a, b = coefficients for a given media

Qa = air flow rate

V
%
Vmf
CEE - Georgia Tech

Percentage of minimum fluidization

water flow

Equations Describing CollapsePulsing for all Filter Beds

Filter Media

Equation

Applicable range of Qa

Sand

0.8 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 43.5

1.8 to 4.6 scfm/sq ft

Anthracite

1.7 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 43.0

Dual Media

1.7 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 39.5

GAC

3.3 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 26.6

GAC-Sand

3.0 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 27.2

Quarles WTP Dual Media

1.2 Qa + %(V/Vmf) = 49.1

Vmf based on d90% size.

CEE - Georgia Tech

2
2

1.5 to 4.2 scfm/sq ft

0.8 to 2.4 scfm/sq ft

Qa < 2.7 scfm/sq ft

Qa < 2.0 scfm/sq ft

1.4 to 4.0 scfm/sq ft

Total force (nN)

Total Interaction Force: Hydrophilic

Clay Vs Hydrophobic Bacteria
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
-50
-60

Clay
Bacteria

0
CEE - Georgia Tech

Separation distance (nm)

10

Biofiltration
Ozonation
Microbial counts in effluent
Head loss
Effect of biocides
Particle removal

CEE - Georgia Tech

Biological Filtration and

Backwashing
Precursor Removal
Minimize DBPs
Effect of Hydrophobicity

CEE - Georgia Tech

Repulsion

Energy barrier

Distance

Attraction

Potential Energy of Interaction

Bacterial Adhesion

Release of extracellular
polymeric substances at
secondary minimum
Primary minimum

CEE - Georgia Tech

Secondary
minimum

Turbidity and Bacterial Removal

During Backwashing
HPC (cfu/mL)

60
50

HPC
Turbidity

10

40
30

104

20
10

103

0
0

CEE - Georgia Tech

Backwash time (min)

Turbidity (NTU)

70

106

Backwashing Biofilters
Collapse-pulsing air scour
Cleans better
No deleterious effect

Chlorinated backwash reduces TOC

removal over time

Chloraminated backwash less than 2.0 mg/L
may be used
CEE - Georgia Tech

Pathogenic Protozoa
Low infective doses
Resistant to chlorine disinfection
Analytical techniques

CEE - Georgia Tech

Outbreaks of Cryptosporidiosis

Surface and groundwater sources

Runoff
Sewage spills
Coagulation
Filtration
rate changes
Backwash recycle
Contaminated distribution system

CEE - Georgia Tech

Particle Counts
Continuous on-line monitoring
Low operating costs
High sensitivity
Detachment of aggregates

CEE - Georgia Tech

4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0

Log Removal of
Cryptosporidium

Log Removal of Giardia

Cyst Removal vs Particle Removal

Log Removal of 7 - 11 m Particles

4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
0

Log Removal of 4 - 7 m Particles

Nieminski and Ongerth (1995)

CEE - Georgia Tech

Minimizing Risk of Outbreaks

Optimal destabilization of particles
Filter-to-waste
Coagulants in backwash
Slow-start filtration
Minimizing flow rate changes in dirty filters
Treatment of backwash water
Filter effluent turbidity < 0.1 NTU
CEE - Georgia Tech

Concluding Statement
In the multiple-barrier concept,
filtration is the great barrier to
particles, parasites and organics.

CEE - Georgia Tech

Summary and Conclusions

Importance of particle destabilization
Micromechanical force model
Biofiltration for organics removal
Effectiveness of collapse-pulsing air scour
Multiple-barrier concept

CEE - Georgia Tech

References
Amirtharajah, A., Some Theoretical and Conceptual Views

of Filtration, JAWWA, Vol. 80, No. 12, 36-46, Dec. 1988.

Amirtharajah, A., Optimum Backwashing of Filters with
Air Scour - A Review, Water Sci. and Tech., Vol. 27, No.
10, 195-211, 1993.
Ahmad, R. et al., Effects of Backwashing on Biological
Filters, JAWWA, Vol. 90, No. 12, 62-73, Dec. 1998.

CEE - Georgia Tech

Acknowledgments
This paper includes the work of several former
students at Georgia Tech:
M.S. students T.M. Ginn, L. Zeng and X. Wang
and Ph.D students, Drs. P. Raveendran, R.
Ahmad, K.E. Dennett and T. Mahmood.
They were not only students but teachers too!
Their work is acknowledged with gratitude.
CEE - Georgia Tech