![]() |
Evaluaion of Recycled Crushed Glass
Sand Media
for High-Rate Sand Filtration |
CWC
A division of the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region (PNWER)
2200 Alaskan Way, Suite 460
Seattle, WA 98121
October 1998
Project consultant:
Aquatic Commercial
Industries
Copyright © 1998 CWC. All rights reserved.
Federal copyright laws prohibit reproduction, in whole or in part, in
any printed, mechanical, electronic, film or other distribution and storage
media, without the written consent of the CWC.
To write or call for permission: CWC, 2200 Alaskan Way, Suite 460,
Seattle, Washington 98121, (206)
443-7746.
Disclaimer
CWC disclaims all warranties to this report, including mechanics, data contained within and all other aspects, whether expressed or implied, without limitation on warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, functionality, data integrity, or accuracy of results. This report was designed for a wide range of commercial, industrial and institutional facilities and a range of complexity and levels of data input. Carefully review the results of this report prior to using them as the basis for decisions or investments.
LINKS
This report contains links to outside resources and
documents that are pertinent to the context of the information in this
report. The following list will take
you to the point in the report where you can use each link:
CWC (formerly the Clean Washington
Center)
Environmental Protection Agency
NIST Manufacturers’ Extension
Service
The Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER)
A description of a recycled glass filtration medium
installation in King County, WA
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CWC is a nonprofit organization providing recycling market development services to both businesses and governments, including tools and technologies to help manufacturers use recycled materials. CWC is an affiliate of the national Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST MEP) – a program of the US Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology. The MEP is a growing nationwide network of extension services to help smaller US manufacturers improve their performance and become more competitive. CWC also acknowledges support from the US Environmental Protection Agency and other organizations.
Special thanks to the
following individuals, companies and agencies, whose help and support made this
evaluation possible.
Bally Total Fitness for
providing their facility in Federal Way.
To Mike Chapman, Steve Smith, and other staff for their help in data
collection and mechanical work.
Wayne Smith, at WMS Aquatics for his continued interest and support during this
evaluation.
City of Bellingham,
Washington for loaning the Hach Turbidometer for the duration of the project.
Fred Miller and the staff at
TriVitro for their
dedication, technical and problem solving assistance, and for providing the
glass sand media.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................ i
1.0 BACKGROUND................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 PLAN AND SETUP............................................................................................................ 3
3.0 FILTER EQUIPMENT........................................................................................................ 4
4.0 ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT........................................................................................... 5
5.0 ESTABLISHING THE CONTROL DATA........................................................................ 6
6.0 MEDIA CHANGE............................................................................................................... 8
7.0 FLOW METER PROBLEMS............................................................................................. 8
8.0 GLASS SAND DATA......................................................................................................... 9
9.0 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................................... 12
10.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY..................................................... 13
11.0 REFERENCES................................................................................................................. 15
APPENDIX A: FIGURES
Figure 1: Comparison of Average Recirculation Flow Rates
Figure 2: Comparison of Average Influent Pressures
Figure 3: Comparison of Average Effluent Filter Pressures
Figure 4: Comparison of Average Differential Filter Pressures
Figure 5: Comparison of Average Turbidity Units
Figure 6. Comparison of Backwash Time
APPENDIX B
1. Specification Sheet
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A field test was performed to examine the potential for using finely processed recycled glass sand as a filtration medium in high-rate sand filtration. Previous CWC studies and lab tests at Pennsylvania State and San Jose State Universities have demonstrated that, when properly processed, recycled glass is an effective filtration medium as a substitute for natural sand in many applications. This field test at an athletic club swimming pool was designed to determine whether glass sand was able to attain or exceed the clarity achieved with conventional sand and to establish how the cleaning characteristics of glass sand media compared with sand in terms of frequency and water use. This project was also intended to provide the filtration industry with information for economic evaluations to be made regarding the market potential for recycled glass sand as a filtration medium.
The test was run from July 1997 to March 1998 at the
Bally Total Fitness Center in Federal Way, Washington. Three filters were used, with a filter
surface area of 21.18 square feet. The maximum design flow for the filter
system, at 15 gallons per minute per square foot of filter area, was 327
gallons per minute. Each filter
contained 275 pounds of 1/8" x 1/4" pea gravel and 650 pounds of #20
silica sand. Control data on turbidity,
operating pressures and backwash efficiency was developed by observing and
testing the filters’ operation through four complete filter runs with
conventional silica sand media (US Sieve Standard #20 x 30).
The conventional media was removed and replaced with
VitroClean™ crushed glass sand media
manufactured by TriVitro Corporation
in Seattle, Washington. Again, data was
collected during repeated filter runs with the recycled glass media. This data was then compared to the control
data for silica sand.
The
field evaluation revealed the following trends that illustrate the performance
of recycled glass sand media compared to conventional sand media:
1.
Improved water clarity shown by a 25%
reduction in National Turbidity Unit
(NTU) readings.
2.
Increased backwash efficiency shown by a 23%
reduction in water used for backwashing.
3.
Approximately 20% less glass sand (by weight)
required for filtration.
An anomaly in filter pressure differentials was found during the data analysis phase. While it is unfortunate that the data on influent pressure and flow was inconsistent, other critical and positive information regarding improved water clarity and increased backwash efficiency remains unaffected.
The data supports findings that indicate possible performance advantages in using recycled glass in high-rate sand filtration. Glass appears to be able to catch more turbid particles, thereby cleaning water more effectively and efficiently. This may allow pool filters to be operated for fewer hours to achieve desired water clarity, thereby saving energy and equipment life. More efficient backwashing uses less pool water that has already been chemically treated, heated and filtered and requires less operational and staff time.
Of particular interest is the fact that these results were achieved by using 20% less filter media by weight. In economic terms, filter media is measured and purchased by weight; costs for filter media are incurred in both the acquisition and disposal of media. Simply by the fact that glass is 20% less dense than silica sand, real savings in pool operating costs can be achieved, especially when improved water clarity and increased backwash efficiency are added considerations.
1.0 BACKGROUND
This study compares the performance
of a recycled glass filtration medium with conventional sand in high-rate
recirculating sand filters. Previous
studies sponsored by the CWC have tested glass as a filtration medium in slow sand filtration for municipal water treatment,
septic treatment sand filtration, and monitoring well filtration. Those studies demonstrated that, when properly
processed, recycled glass is an effective filtration medium as a substitute
for natural sand in many applications. This study extends the knowledge base of effective filtration uses
of recycled glass.
The water treatment and
swimming pool industries have used slow-rate sand filtration for over a
century. In slow-rate filtration, water
flows by gravity through a filter bed.
Because the only driving force is gravity, slow-rate filters require
large amounts of filtration media and large facilities. In addition, flocculants (broad-based
polymer filtration aids) are often needed to cause particles to agglomerate for
physical removal in the filter. In
order to reduce the size of filtration facilities while maintaining filtration
efficiency, gravity sand filters evolved into pressurized
"rapid-sand" filters, with flow rates designed for three to five
gallons per minute per square foot (gpm/sq ft). These filters use more tightly graded filtration media.
In the 1950's, pressurized
sand filters with filtration rates of up to 20 gpm/sq ft were introduced. These “high-rate” sand filters did not use
flocculants. The lack of flocculants,
along with the higher flow rates, made the need for high quality filtration
media even more critical. These filters
require very tightly graded media, typically U.S. Standard Sieve #20 x #30
(ASTM E11 – .850mm x .600mm) silica sand, with high uniformity of size, no
clays or non-silica soils, and sub-angular grain shape.
The Northwest United States (especially Oregon and Washington) does not have natural sources of high quality sand media for high-rate filters. This has resulted in higher costs for media because the material must be shipped from other parts of the country.
TriVitro Corporation of Seattle, Washington, processes glass for a
variety of uses, including tile manufacturing, paint additives, and media for
abrasive blasting. TriVitro manufactures VitroClean™,
a filter medium that has been processed specifically to meet swimming pool
filter specifications. As a result of TriVitro’s process, VitroClean™ glass sand particles have the sub-angular grain shape
required by the filter industry.
The glass used in this
project was post-industrial plate glass scrap from window and door
manufacturers. The glass is processed
through a series of crushers, dryers, and screens to remove contaminants and to
produce a range of uniformly sized filtration media. Post-industrial glass was chosen for this test because it is
completely free of the potential organic (sugars, labels, etc.) and inorganic
(aluminum rings, steel caps, etc.) contamination that can be present in
post-consumer container glass. The
potential for these types of contamination would introduce another variable in
the analysis, and it was beyond the scope of this project to test methods for
cleaning post-consumer glass.
Other studies of crushed
glass filtration media for slow sand or rapid sand filters have included
“Crushed, Recycled Glass as a Water Filter Media”, by Richard Huebner, Ph.D,
Penn State University, 1994, and “Recycled Glass: Development of Market
Potential”, by R. Guna Selvaduray, San Jose State University, 1994. These studies have indicated that crushed
glass media filters function as well as conventional sand filters and may
remove small turbid particles more efficiently than conventional sand media.
The two specific issues of special interest in this study were:
1.
to
determine whether glass sand was able to attain or exceed the clarity achieved
with conventional sand; and
2.
to
determine how glass sand compared with conventional sand in cleaning frequency
and water use.
2.0 PLAN AND SET UP
This study examined and compared the performance of recycled glass sand media with a conventional sand medium in high-rate sand filters during actual operating conditions. Data was first collected on the operating characteristics of conventional sand media, then that data was compared with recycled crushed glass sand media. The original parameters planned for evaluation of the two media included:
The visual inspection
(by photo) was eliminated early in the evaluation because the range of changes
seen in turbidity were not observable through visual or photographic
inspection. In addition, unforeseen
field conditions affected the recirculation flow rate and influent pressure
readings and resulted in limiting the conclusions that can be drawn from this
project.
The Pacific West Health Club (Federal Way, WA) was
chosen as the test site. Upgrades
required at the facility to facilitate this study included upsizing of a
backwash pit by adding an auxiliary backwash tank with a gravity drain to an
approved sewer connection, and installation of new digital flow meters, sight
glasses, pressure gauges, and a turbidometer.
3.0 FILTER EQUIPMENT
Filters used for this evaluation were
"Triton" TR series filters manufactured by PacFab, Inc. These filters are common in the swimming
pool industry, with an estimated 5,000 to 7,000 filter vessels located on the
West Coast of the United States. Each
filter contained 7.06 square feet of cross-sectional filter area. Three filters were on one manifold, for a
total of 21.18 square feet of filter surface area. The maximum design flow for this installation, at 15 gallons per
minute (gpm) per square foot of filter area, was 327 gpm. These filters are manufactured for flow
rates between 5 and 20 gpm per square foot.
Each filter contained 275
pounds of 1/8" x 1/4" pea gravel and 650 pounds of #20 silica
sand. The sand depth from surface to
bottom drain lateral was 13.5 inches. The
bottom drain laterals were grooved to prevent sand particles larger than #30
silica from leaving the filter. Each
filter was fitted with manual air relief valves.
The backwash sight glass was
not sufficient for this study, so an additional in-line sight glass was
installed on the backwash discharge line between the filters and the backwash
holding tank. This sight glass was
fitted with two parallel lines, allowing a technician to evaluate the clarity
of the backwash water to determine when the filter had been sufficiently
backwashed.
The size of the existing
backwash holding tank was unable to hold a complete backwash discharge from
even one filter. An additional backwash
holding tank with a capacity of 300 gallons was installed. This allowed a complete backwash of three
minutes per tank. The holding tank
water gravity-flowed into the sewer pit.
4.0 ADDITIONAL EQUIPMENT
The recirculation flow rate and the backwash flow
rate were monitored by Signet Model 5100 digital flow meters. One was placed on the effluent recirculation
line downstream of the filter, prior to chemical injection points, measuring
recirculation flow. The other flow
meter was placed in the backwash discharge line. To assure accuracy, the devices were installed in locations providing
laminar flow (10 pipe diameters prior to measuring device and 5 pipe diameters
downstream of the device of clear pipe: no fittings, elbows, etc.).
Pressure readings were taken with stainless steel
pressure gauges manufactured by Ashcroft with oil filled cases for vibration
dampening. They were located on the
filter cap and the effluent filter line; six gauges were used, two on each
filter. Since the filters were manifolded,
the gauge readings were averaged to achieve consistency. The gauges chosen were 0-60 psi. In retrospect, 0-30 psi gauges would have suited the project
better. Pressure gauge readings of
influent and effluent pressures were used for the calculation of pressure
differential. Differential pressure
measurements provide the best evaluation of filter bed performance with respect
to collection of suspended particles, reflected by resistance created across
the filter.
Water clarity was determined from turbidity units
measured by a Hach Turbidometer, model 1720A.
Measurements were recorded in National Turbidity Units (NTU’s). According to standards established by the
National Sanitation Foundation, pool water that is rated "excellent"
maintains a NTU reading of .5 or less.
Data collection sheets and procedures were developed
in-house. Two National Swimming Pool
Foundation Certified Pool Operators were employed as primary and secondary
technicians. Training in data
collection and backwashing procedures was completed and data collection began
on July 1, 1997.
The swimming pool was intended to be the primary
test site. However, since a spa system
was located in the same room, both systems were fitted with the equipment
described above and comparative evaluations were conducted. A system of valves was installed so that the
Hach Turbidometer could measure either the pool or the spa. After switching the water source, a waiting
period of ten minutes was established to allow the Turbidometer to adjust to
the new water. The spa water often
provided skewed turbidity readings because the spa air jets introduced air
bubbles that were not entirely dissipated or removed by filtration. The air bubbles appeared as turbid particles
to the turbidometer.
5.0 ESTABLISHING
THE CONTROL DATA
The original silica sand in the filters was tested
by an independent test lab and rated "very good." The sieve size was primarily U.S. Standard
#20 x 30, with a size coefficient (D60/D10) of 1.4. The size coefficient is the ratio of the
screen size through which 60% of the medium passes, divided by the screen size
through which 10% of the medium passes.
The plan was to operate with the conventional sand for no less than four
complete filter runs (period between backwashes) to establish a "control
database" to which the crushed glass sand media would be compared.
There was difficulty with the backwash flow meter
because debris continued to foul the transducer paddle wheel. An in-line oversized strainer basket was
installed to capture large debris and the problem was partially solved. Data collection was resumed the following
week, however, small particles continued to clog the flow meter too often to
provide reliable flow data. As a data
back-up, backwash duration (in time) was noted. While this was not as accurate as flow, it did provide a backwash
standard that could be measured and evaluated against the glass sand media.
The pool water clarity was excellent with the
original conventional sand. Due to
inadequate lighting for quality photos and the subtle differences expected, the
visual evaluations and recordings originally planned were not conducted.
Collected data was consistent each day, with
expected increases and decreases in pressures, flow and turbidity readings
corresponding to filter performance as the filters filled with turbid
particles. The control data phase was
completed in eight weeks (see Appendix A for Figures 1 through 6).
The data was an average of the pressure and flow
characteristics recorded each week.
However, sometimes because of staff scheduling, data was not collected
and some days were interpolated from adjacent data. According to Washington State Health and Safety Regulations,
after the
recirculation flow drops 10% (approximately 25 to 30
gallons per minute), backwashes must be
scheduled to clean the filters and to re-establish
the desired flow. During the analysis
of the baseline sand and glass sand media, the time between filter backwashes
was seven days in all but two cases during the 17 weeks of data collection. Seven days was a convenient schedule for
backwashing, so scheduling and data charting were established on a seven-day
cycle. Figures one through five,
therefore, reflect pressure and turbidity averages for each successive day
following a backwash.
The backwash flow rate measurements were somewhat
skewed by flow meter problems. The
average duration (in minutes) of backwash (total of six backwashes recorded) of
the conventional sand was three minutes, twenty-one seconds. Although this was somewhat subjective, the
backwash sight glass was fitted with two black parallel lines that were to be
viewed through the backwash water. When
the edges of the lines were clear, the backwash was deemed complete.
6.0 MEDIA CHANGE
The conventional media was removed and replaced with
the TriVitro crushed glass sand media. The sand replacement took approximately one
day. The 1/8" x 1/4" rounded
pea gravel bed below the medium was left in place. The underdrain laterals were surrounded and covered with gravel
to a height of approximately one-inch above the laterals. This gravel allowed the filter to better
distribute the backwash flow to the sand bed and is required by the National
Sanitation Foundation (NSF) for the filter's approval at filter rates of 15 gpm
(and higher) per square foot of filter area.
The filter manufacturer's specifications required
6.5 cubic feet of medium for each filter (a total of 19.5 cubic feet for the
system). This would have required 1,950
pounds of silica sand. However, glass
is less dense than silica sand, so only 1,560 pounds were needed, demonstrating
a 20% savings in filtration media by weight.
This savings would be reflected in both raw material and shipping
costs. This difference is derived from
two factors . First, the specific
gravity of glass is 2.53, compared with approximately 2.75 for sand, a 10%
difference. In addition, the newly
fractured glass particles appear to not pack as tightly as the sand
grains. Therefore, the interstitial
spaces between the glass particles are, on average, larger and have less
rounded edges than sand grains. This
confirmed previous research at Pennsylvania
State University.
7.0 FLOW METER PROBLEMS
Upon installation of the glass medium, the Signet
flow meter equipment failed on a regular basis. Evaluation of the recirculation flow meter transducer revealed
that glass particles (estimated to be 40 micron and smaller) were passing
through the filter underdrain laterals, causing the rotor to jam. After evaluation of the glass filtration
medium, it was determined that there were too many "fines" left in
the first batch of VitroClean™ sand
after processing. The problem began to
lessen
as repeated backwash procedures eventually removed
the smaller sand particles. However, at
this point there was a question of whether the glass filtration medium as
delivered in the first batch would meet most pool owners’ satisfaction.
During the same period, TriVitro had improved its glass processing to the extent that TriVitro’s engineers were confident that
their process improvements had almost totally eliminated the fines
carryover. Therefore, it was
recommended that the original glass sand be replaced and additional data
collected using this improved media product.
The CWC agreed to a project extension and an additional six weeks of
testing was undertaken.
The final TriVitro
product tested was VitroClean™ 25N,
with a coefficient of uniformity of 1.40 and effective size of .50mm. Effective size is defined as the size
opening that will just pass 10% (by weight) of a representative sample of the
filter material. A specification sheet
is included in Appendix B.
8.0 GLASS SAND PERFORMANCE
With the exception of the backwash duration data,
the glass sand media data was collected from the second sand media load. In fact, after four weeks of operation and
backwashing and most of the "fines" removed, the media
characteristics of the "cleaned" glass sand (the first medium after
being subjected to multiple backwashes) and the new
"improved" glass sand were virtually identical. The glass sand media data is illustrated in
Figures 1 through 6.
Recirculation Flow
After switching to the
glass sand media, the most immediate and surprising change was the measurable
increase in recirculation flow (Figure 1).
This was surprising in light of the increased influent pressure readings
(Figure 2). In general, for a
centrifugal pump, it is expected that the
only way to achieve
increased flow is in conjunction with decreased pressure drop. In this case, effluent pressure was
constant, as shown in Figure 3. Since
influent pressures increased, the differential pressure across the filter must
have increased, as shown in Figure 4.
Explaining the strange and conflicting data in this field test is
difficult.
The CWC’s project
manager and the technical consultant for this project, Aquatic Commercial
Industries, share responsibility for this problem. In the first month a differential pressure increase should have
been seen along with an increased flow rate; people with experience with pump
curves should have realized there was a problem and investigated. Unfortunately, the issue was not noticed
until the curves were generated.
Another possible
source of inaccuracy in the project was the fact that 60 psi gauges were used
to take readings as low as 3 psi. Good
instrument practice requires that mechanical gauges be read within the middle
50% of the range, in this case 15 to 45 psi.
It is possible that cumulative gauge misreadings contributed to this
problem.
It is also possible
that a reduction in the pump suction head (possibly stemming from a change in the
pump strainer basket and/or its maintenance) lowered the total system head,
therefore allowing higher flow as well as higher influent pressures.
Water Clarity
NTU readings actually
dropped 25% with installation of the glass medium (Figure 5). This significant drop in NTU readings
indicates that glass sand media may trap finer turbid particles than
conventional sand, resulting in clearer water.
Backwash
The average duration of backwash (in minutes) was
2:34 based upon ten backwashes, compared to 3:21 for silica sand based on six
backwashes. Therefore, there was a
reduction of as much as 23% of water used for backwashing glass sand media
compared to conventional sand.
The glass media seemed to fluidize quicker and
require less water for a complete backwash.
This is probably a result of a combination of causes. First, glass sand has lower density. The lighter material simply floats more
easily with backwash flow. In addition,
glass particles have a more angular shape and relatively flatter fractured
sides. This may mean that glass
particles pack less densely than sand and therefore require less backwash water
to “unpack” during filter cleaning.
The noteworthy improvements in the backwash results
in this field test were consistent with trends identified in the San Jose State
University study (Selvaduray) where measurements of the sand bed expansion were
greater with the glass sand media than with conventional sand.
Consumption
In all cases, the amount of media required by weight
was substantially less (approximately 20%) for the recycled glass sand than for
silica sand. In pool operations this
difference would be noted twice – first in the purchase of filter media and
second in the disposal of spent media.
Both are purchased by weight rather than by volume.
Summary
The field evaluation
revealed the following trends:
1. a
25% reduction in National Turbidity
Unit readings;
2. a
23%+ reduction in time for backwashing; and
3. approximately
20% less glass sand (by weight) is required for filtration.
It is worthy to note
that items 1, 2, and 3 were mirrored in the spa test data.
Industries and governments
use high rate filtration systems in a variety of settings. Findings from this and preceding studies
show strong potential for glass to be used in commercial and municipal
filtration. It is likely that the
benefits concluded from this swimming pool field evaluation would be seen in
other types of filtration applications, such as stormwater, agricultural and
industrial filtration.
9.0 CONCLUSIONS
This project was intended to be a full-scale “field
test” of recycled glass for high-rate sand filtration. The work done at San Jose State University
and Pennsylvania State University showed that, in laboratory scale, recycled
glass had equal or better efficiency than conventional sand. Consistent with this prior research,
recycled glass sand media performed as well or better than conventional filter
sand in swimming pool filtration.
The main advantages of recycled glass sand over conventional sand are:
1.
Improved Water Quality. Finer particles were removed in the filter
more efficiently, reflected by the 25% decrease in NTU’s. The findings showed repeatedly that recycled
glass sand cleaned water more effectively.
Clearer water is always desired.
Being able to catch smaller turbid particles makes high-rate filtration
sand even more efficient and therefore attractive over other types of
filtration media. This advantage may
allow recirculation systems to be operated fewer hours in those locations that
allow pool systems to be turned off during non-use periods. This saves electrical energy and extends
equipment longevity.
2.
More Efficient Backwashing. Less backwash water was required to clean the
filter medium. As these test results
are duplicated in repeated future usage, the ability to backwash with over 20%
less water is a major advantage that can prove valuable both in construction
and in operation. The cost of sewer lines
and holding tanks can be reduced. Most
importantly, water has been saved.
Beyond the value of the water resource, pool water has an added economic
value when it has been chlorinated, pH adjusted, alkalinity adjusted, hardness
adjusted, heated and filtered. The
savings through more efficient backwashing are measured both in the cost of the
water consumed and then disposed (some facilities that are charged per 100
cubic feet of water that is treated by sewage plants). Costs for chemicals and for heating water
are also reduced.
3.
Less Media. Glass sand media is less dense and therefore lighter than
conventional sand filter media. Less
media by weight is required. Shipping,
handling and disposal costs would be saved proportionately to the ratio of
density of glass vs. silica sand media., approximately 20%.
The benefits described in 1 and 2 above (i.e.,
savings in pool operating costs, energy, water usage, etc.) are achieved with
20% less material by weight.
It cannot be emphasized strongly enough that these results reflect a
test of a specific glass filtration medium produced by a specific
processor. Although they confirm the
efficacy of properly processed glass as a recirculating water filtration
medium, they do not support the use of glass for this application from any
other processor, unless that processor is able to produce media that meets
industry specifications for consistency in particle shape, size distribution,
cleanliness and uniformity.
10. 0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
FURTHER STUDY
The
following recommendations are provided to those who may wish to undertake
further testing in swimming pool operations:
1. The
use of ultra-sonic flow measurement devices with totalizers will allow for a
more precise measurement of filter media backwash flow and water usage. The paddle wheel units, though very
accurate, have small tolerances for particulate matter in the water and can
become clogged.
2. The
ability to record data seven days per week every week is important in order to
monitor trends.
3. Controlling
pool operating conditions at the field test facility is important. Filtration equipment repairs or
modifications and staffing changes can interfere with data collection and skew
results.
4. Care
must be taken to isolate and monitor changes in operating pressures due to the
use of recycled glass media. Using
gauges that more accurately reflect the actual pressure conditions (see Section
4), careful evaluation of suction and discharge head condition on the
recirculation pump during the baseline evaluation and new media evaluation is
important. This can be accomplished
with vacuum and pressure gauges on the suction and discharge lines of the pump.
5. Test
designs should track filter ripening and run times. Reports from the Pennsylvania State and San Jose State University
studies showed faster ripening and longer run times. It would be valuable to determine if these trends are readily
observed in field test conditions.
As
a result of this project, King County Washington has installed recycled glass
filtration media in its municipal pools.
11.0 REFERENCES
Certified Pool Operator Handbook, National Swimming Pool
Foundation, Lester
Kowalski,
Editor. 1990.
Aquatic Facility Operator Handbook, National Recreation and
Park Association,
Kent
Williams, 1994.
Washington State Health and Safety Code, for Swimming Pools.
Crushed, Recycled Glass as a Water Filter Media, Pennsylvania State
University, 1994,
Richard
Heubner PhD, Project Director.
Recycled Glass: Development of Market Potential, San Jose State University,
1994,
Dr. Guna
Selvaduray
Crushed Glass as a Filter Media for Onsite Treatment
of Wastewater,
CWC. 1995
Examination of Pulverized Waste Recycled Glass as
Filter Media in Slow Sand Filtration,
NYSERDA,
October 1997.
APPENDIX A: FIGURES 1 THROUGH 6
Figure 1: Comparison of Average Recirculation Flow Rates
Figure 2: Comparison of Average Influent Pressures
Figure 3: Comparison of Average Effluent Filter Pressures
Figure 4: Comparison of Average Differential Filter Pressures
Figure 5: Comparison of Average Turbidity Units
Figure 6: Comparison of Backwash Time
APPENDIX B
1.
Specification Sheet
Figure 1
Comparison of Average Recirculation Flow Rates (gallons per minute)

Figure 2
Comparison of Average Influent Pressures (pounds per square inch)

Figure 3
Comparison of Average Effluent Filter Pressures (pounds per square
inch)

Figure 4
Comparison of Average Differential Filter Pressures (pounds per square
inch) 
Figure 5
Comparison of Average Turbidity in National Turbidity Units (NTUs)
Figure 6
Comparison of Average Backwash Time in Minutes
Note:
Conventional sand recorded for 6 weeks, Glass sand for 10 weeks.