Dewatering

Mechanical dewatering of sewage sludge
Roberto Canziani
POLITECNICO DI MILANO
Dipartimento di ingegneria civile e ambientale – Sezione Ambientale
Table of contents
Introduction 1 6 Hydraulic filter press
Centrifuge 2 7 Rotary press
Filter press 3 8 Electro-dewatering
Belt press 4 9 Other technologies
Screw press 5 10 Comparison
Roberto Canziani 2
Roberto Canziani 3
The sludge line
Biogas
PRIMARY Anaerobic
Pre-thickening
SLUDGE digestion
Post- CONDITIONING AND

thickening DEWATERING
SECONDARY Aerobic
Pre-thickening
SLUDGE stabilization
Drying
Backwashing Settling and

water thickening
Disposal
Supernatant from
water line
Roberto Canziani 4
The sludge line
Costs related to sludge
Disposal
Transport
Treatment (dewatering)
Pre-treatments
Storage and handling
Costs related to sludge treatment

Investment cost (equipment + civil works)
Operating costs (labour costs + reagents)
Maintenance costs (ordinary or extraordinary)
Energy consumption
Nuove tecnologie ambientali – Dewatering fanghi con geofiltri tubolari
Roberto Canziani 5
The goals of dewatering
Reduction of water content in sludge
Reduction of transportation costs
Reduction of disposal costs
Increase of the calorific value of sludge
Reduction of odors and putrescibility of sludge
Reduction of percolation in landfilling
Roberto Canziani 6
The water distribution in sludge
4 types of water in sludge: Sludge floc
– Free water
– Interstitial water (capillary)
– Surface water (vicinal)
– Intracellular water or chemically

bound
The dewatering efficiency depends on the bonding

energy of water with the sludge solid particles
Roberto Canziani 7
The water distribution in sludge
Surface
water
Bound Interstitial
water water Free water
Gravity drainage
Mechanical dewatering
the particle
Surface of
with polymer addition
Electro-dewatering
Solar drying
Thermal drying
Roberto Canziani 8
Operating parameters of dewatering
MECHANICAL DEWATERING
SludgeIN
SludgeOUT
H2O
Filtrate
Polyelectr.
MECHANICAL DEWATERING
𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝐼𝑁 + 𝑄𝐻2𝑂 + 𝑄𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑂𝑈𝑇 + 𝑄𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒/𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝐼𝑁 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝐼𝑁 + 𝑄𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑂𝑈𝑇 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝑂𝑈𝑇 + 𝑄𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒/𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
Roberto Canziani 9
Operating parameters of dewatering
QSludge IN = Flow rate of inlet sludge (m3/h)
DSIN = Dry solid content of inlet sludge (g/L)
QSludge OUT = Flow rate of outlet sludge (m3/h)
DSOUT = Dry solid content of outlet sludge (g/L)
QFiltrate = Flow rate of filtrate/centrate (m3/h)
DSFiltrate = Dry solid content of filtrate/centrate (g/L)
η = Solid capture or dewatering efficiency
QH2O = Flow rate of water consumed (m3/h)
QPoly = Flow rate of conditioning agent (kg/h)
u.c.Poly = Unitary cost of the conditoning agent (€/kg)
u.c.Sludge = Unitary cost of sludge disposal (€/t)
E.E. = Electric energy consumption (kWh/m3)
u.c.Pers = Unitary cost of personnel (€/y)
I = Investment cost (€)
Roberto Canziani 10
Factors for the selection of the dewatering machine
 Dry solid concentration in the dewatered sludge
 Flow rate of inlet sludge
 Sludge characteristics
 Investment costs
 Management costs
 Area of installation of the dewatering machine
 Characteristics and treatment of filtrates/centrates
Roberto Canziani 11
DS content in the dewatered sludge Solids capture efficiency (SCE)
𝑇𝑆𝑆0 % = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑇𝑆𝑆1 % = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛

𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑙𝑒𝑡 𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒
𝐷𝑆 𝑇𝑆𝑆0 − 𝑇𝑆𝑆1
𝐷𝑆 % = 𝑑𝑟𝑦 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑖𝑛 𝑆𝐶𝐸 % = × × 100
𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑑𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑇𝑆𝑆0 𝐷𝑆 − 𝑇𝑆𝑆1
Roberto Canziani 12
A low capture efficiency may cause:
 Wear of the dewatering unit
 Wear of pumps and equipment
 Higher maintenance costs
 Higher costs for conditioning agents
 Lower DS content in the dewatered sludge
 Higher costs for the WWTP and lower efficiencies
Roberto Canziani 13
14
Mechanical dewatering
Most commonly used mechanical dewatering processes are:
1. Centrifugation
2. Belt-press filtration
3. Chamber-press filtration
Flow Dewatered Solid Surface Energy

rate sludge recovery in requirement requirement
(m3 h-1) concentration dewatered
(%) sludge
Centrifuge 0.5 - 80 15 – 35% 94 – 98% Low High
Belt-press 1.0 – 25 18 – 22% ca. 95% Moderate Moderate
Filter-press 0.1 – 35 28 – 40% > 95% High Low
Roberto Canziani 14
Roberto Canziani 15
Description
Inlet sludge
Solids discharge Filtrate discharge
• Addition of polyelectrolytes
• Flexible machine
• Limited area for installation
• The solid-liquid separation takes place in a closed chamber: minor
problems of odor diffusion
Roberto Canziani 16
Centrifuges
Modern high-speed centrifuges can dewater:

a) anaerobically, well digested sludge up to 30 – 35%.
b) aerobically digested sludge up to 20-22%
Also: the lower the VS/TS ratio the higher the final DS
concentration
Roberto Canziani 17
Centrifuges for sludge dewatering – WWTP Cap Sicié, Toulon
(F)
Roberto Canziani 18
Types of centrifuges
Helical flux
Countercurrent Co-current
flux flux
• The solids travel towards the conical end • The solid particles and the liquid phase
• The liquid phase moves in the opposite run along the entire length of the drum
direction • Model rarely used due to maintenance
problems
OPERATING PARAMETERS
Feeding capacity
Rotation speed
Scroll speed
Depth of the settling zone
Polymer dosage
Roberto Canziani 19
Operating parameters
Operating parameter Value

Diameter of the bowl (mm) 230 – 1800
Length/diameter ratio of the bowl 2,5:1 – 4:1
Rotational speed of the bowl (rpm) 1500 – 6000
Rotational speed of the bowl (g) 2000 – 3000
Sludge flow rate (m3/h) 2,5 – 180
Sludge Treatment and Disposal - C. Vitorio Andreoli, M. Von Sperling, F. Fernandes
Andritz Alfa Laval Alfa Laval Flottweg Flottweg

Operating parameter
D Aldec Aldec G3 HTS Xelletor
Sludge flow rate (m3/h) 0,2 – 450 10 – 125 75 – 165 5 – 180 20 – 140
Installed power (kW) 7,5 – 350 7 – 287 18,5 – 411 10,5 – 305 28,5 – 140
Roberto Canziani 20
DS content in Solids capture
Parameter
dewatered sludge efficiency
Increase of diameter of the bowl  

Increase of length of the bowl ? 
Increase of rotational speed of the bowl  
Increase of differential speed bowl/scroll  
Increase of the pool depth  
Increase of the pitch of the helix  
Increase of the hydraulic retention time  
Increase of the beach angle  
Increase of the inlet flow rate  
Increase of DS content in the inlet sludge  ?
Improvement in the polymer dosage ? 
Roberto Canziani 21
Performance
Polymer dosage Solids capture
Type of sludge DSOUT (%)
(g/kgSS) efficiency (%)
Not stabilized
2.5 – 5.0 25 – 50
Primary 95+
2.0 – 3.0 28 – 34
2.5 – 8.0 25 – 35
Primary + Activated 95+
6.0 – 10.0 28 – 32
7.5 -15.0 16 – 25
Activated 95+
6.0 – 10.0 14 – 18
Anaerobically digested
4.0 – 6.0 25 – 40
Primary 95+
2.0 – 3.0 35 – 40
7.5 – 15.0 22 – 35
Primary + Activated 95+
4.0 – 6.0 26 – 30
Aerobically stabilized
10.0 – 15.0 18 – 25
Activated 95+
6.0 – 10.0 18 – 22
Wastewater Engineering – Treatment and resource recovery - Metcalf & Eddy
Roberto Canziani 25
Innovations
centrifugation
+
convection drying
Deflecting cone
Feeding
Centrate
Hot steam inlet Steam + sludge outlet
Roberto Canziani 26
Roberto Canziani 27
Description
Filtration Mobile
Internal chamber Plate
channel head
Air injection
Sludge
Hydraulic
Fixed cylinder
head
Opening Internal Filter cloth

channel (10-300 mm)
Roberto Canziani 28
Description
Filtrate
Dewatered
sludge cake
Dewatered
sludge cake
Plate
Plate
Filter Plate
cloth
Roberto Canziani 29
Working pressure (kPa) 500 – 2100
Filtration time (hours) 2–3
Total time for feeding/discharge (hours) 3–5
Cake thickness (mm) 25 - 38
Sludge flow rate (kgSS/(m2∙h)) 1–5
Faure Equipem. Henan Dazhang Toro Diemme

Operating parameter
TITAN Filter Equipment Equipment Filtration
800x800 – 1250x1250 – 470x470 – 630x630 –
Plate size (mm)
2000x2000 2000x2000 1500x1500 1500x1500
Max plates number 110 – 180 36 – 141 5 – 35 20 – 56
Filtration area (m2) 107 – 1140 100 – 1000 1,5 – 132,3 11 – 190
Max volume (L) 1450 – 17800 1479 – 20100 21 – 1865 150 – 2895
Installed power (kW) 4 –15 - 3–4
Roberto Canziani 30
Diaphragm filter press Filter cloth
Plate
Chamber
Sludge feed
Filtrate Diaphragm
Filter discharge
Rollers
Flexible
Sludge diaphragm
cake
Backwashing
channel

Initial pressure (kPa) 690 – 860
Filtrate Compression pressure (kPa) 1380 – 2070
Feeding time (min) 30
Filtration time (min) 15 – 30
Roberto Canziani 31
Diaphragm filter press
Example: primary sludge
Fixed volume filter press
Diaphragm filter press
Roberto Canziani 32
Performance
FeCl3 CaO Al2O3 DSOUT Filtration time
Type of sludge
(g/kgDS) (g/kgDS) (g/kgDS) (%) (h)
FIXED VOLUME FILTER PRESS
Not stabilized
Primary 40 – 60 100 – 140 - 45 1,5 – 2,0
Primary + Activated 50 – 60 100 – 120 15 – 39 27 – 41 2,5 – 3,5
Primary 40 – 60 200 - 23 – 37 1,0 – 3,0
Primary + Activated 27 170 12 – 13 37 – 42 2,0 – 3,0
Activated - - - 22 – 30 -
DIAPHRAGM FILTER PRESS
Not stabilized
Primary + Activated 49 – 90 110 – 290 - 35 – 50 0,75 - 1,0
Roberto Canziani 33
Performance
Type of Sudge flow rate DSOUT

Type of sludge
conditioner (kg/(m2∙h)) (%)
Primary Ferric chloride 35,1 27
Primary Lime 19,5 – 73,2 34 – 26
Primary + Activated Ferric chloride 19,5 – 39,1 21,5
Primary + Activated Lime 19,5 32 – 34
Sludge Engineering: The Treatment and Disposal of Wastewater Sludges
P. Aarne Veselind, F. Dilek Sanin, William Wade Clarkson
Roberto Canziani 34
Innovations
Thermal assisted filtration – J-VAP®
DS 99%
Sludge feeding Diaphragm

squeezing • Single-step process
• Easy operation and maintenance
• Minimal operation of workers
• Low emissions
• Reduction in pathigen content
• Lower energy consumption than
thermal drying
Heating (38°C) and Cake discharge
vacuum
Roberto Canziani 35
Roberto Canziani 36
Description
1) Feeding sludge 6) High pressure rolls

2) Back roll 7) Belts washing
3) Traction roll 8) Plows for sludge distribution
4) Discharge roll 9) Cake discharge
5) Low pressure perforated rolls
Roberto Canziani 37
38
Belt – presses (1/2)
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Chemical Drainage Dewatering by shear
conditioning and compression
Sludge Conditioned
sludge Washing
jets
Polymer/sludge
mixing device
Solubilized Washing jets

polymer
Dewatered
Wash water sludge (15 – 22%)
DS content in should be > 3%

DS out is < 20% for aerobically digested sludge, sludge with high VS/TS ratio and
sludge produced by treatment of textile finishing industry effluents (dyeing/printing)
Belt speed 30 – 300 m/h; specific flow rate: 2 – 8 m3 h-1 m-1 belt width
Frequent cleaning is required; hygienic conditions can be a problem (odors and dirt);
wash water pressure: 4 – 6 bar (400 – 600 kPa; 60 – 90 psig)
Roberto Canziani 38
39
Belt – presses (2/2): at the manufacturer before shipping
Roberto Canziani 39
Belt width (m) 0,5 – 3,5
Specific sludge flow rate (L/(min × m belt)) 100 – 640
Specific sludge flow rate (kgSS/(h × m belt) 90 – 680
Belt speed (m/h) 50 – 100
Backwashing water pressure (kPa) 400 – 600
Backwashing water flow rate (%) 50 – 200
Norsen Andritz
Operating parameter FRC PC FRC NPD FRC FPD
DYQ SMX-Q
Sludge flow rate (m3/h) 0,5 – 10 3 – 60 5 – 80 1 – 30 22,5 – 67
Installed power (kW) 0,4 – 0,6 0,7 – 2,6 1,1 – 2,0 1,3 – 6,5 1,5 – 4,4
Area for installation (m2) 3,3 – 7,5 6,3 – 29 12,5 – 36 3,5 – 25 12 – 25
Water consumption (m3/h) - - - 4 – 30 6,8 – 20,4
Roberto Canziani 40
Performance
Sludge flow rate Polymer dosage DSOUT
Type of sludge
(kg/h× m belt) (g/kgDS) (%)
Not stabilized
Primary 1130 – 1590 1,5 – 2,5 26 – 35
Primary + Activated 340 – 820 3,0 – 5,5 15 – 25
Activated 180 – 340 5,0 – 10,0 12 – 20
SBR 250 – 360 5,0 – 7,5 12 – 19
MBR 230 – 320 5,5 – 10,0 11 – 18
Primary 680 – 910 2,0 – 5,0 24 – 35
Activated 230 – 410 4,0 – 10,0 13 – 23
Primary + Activated 320 – 540 4,0 – 8,5 15 – 28
Activated 250 – 410 6,0 – 10,0 12 – 22
Roberto Canziani 41
Performance
Sludge flow rate DSOUT Solids capture
Type of sludge
(m3/h) (%) efficiency (%)
Not stabilized
Primary 11,4 – 23 23 – 25 95
Primary + Activated 9,1 – 2,3 23 – 28 95
Activated 10,4 – 23 14 – 18 90 – 95
Primary + Activated 6,4 – 15 18 – 24 95
Activated 7,3 – 23 14 – 18 92 – 95
Roberto Canziani 42
Innovations
Vertical belt press
Model 2VP
Roberto Canziani 43
Roberto Canziani 44
Screw press
Sludge feeding
Screw
Pressurized cone
Drum
Dewatered
Filtrate
sludge
Roberto Canziani 45
The drum
Filtration
Backwashing
Roberto Canziani 46

Pressure (kPa) 280 – 550
Backwashing water flow rate (L/h) 7 – 45
Washing cycle (s/min) 15 s / 10 min
Huber Vodatech Drycake

Operating parameter
Q Press SZK DSP
Sludge flow rate (kgSS/h) 15 – 540 20 – 756 10 – 144
Sludge flow rate (m3/h) 0,7 – 5,9
Rotation speed (rpm) 0,3 – 0,4 0,5 – 1,5 0,75
Installed power (kW) 0,55 – 4,1 0,25 – 9 0,37 – 1,5
Roberto Canziani 47
Solids capture efficiency(%)

DS dewatered sludge(%)
Cone pressure
Polymer dosage
Polymer dosage
Cone pressure
Sludge flow rate
Sludge flow rate
Study of operating parameters to maximize the

dewatering efficiency
Roberto Canziani 48
Performance
Polymer dosage Solids capture
Type of sludge DSOUT (%)
(g/kgDS) efficiency (%)
Not stabilized
Primary 4 – 10 30 – 40 90+
Primary + Activated 5 – 10 25 – 35 90+
Activated 8,5 – 11 15 – 22 88 – 95
Primary 20 – 17,5 22 – 28 90+
Primary + Activated 10 – 17,5 17 – 25 90+
Activated 8,5 – 17,5 15 – 25 88 – 95
Activated 8,5 – 17,5 15 – 20 88 – 95
Roberto Canziani 49
Innovations
Traveling
Screw Perforated screen
washing
shower
Variable speed screw drive
Filtrate
Cake squeeze
device Dewatered
sludge
Inspection access doors
ISHIGAKI COMPANY – ISGK
Roberto Canziani 50
Innovations – Multi-disc press
Thickening zone Sludge feeding
Dewatering zone
Filtrate
Sludge
End plate
AMCON – VoluteTM
Roberto Canziani 51
Roberto Canziani 52
Description
Roberto Canziani 53
Description
Support with Piston Draining Support with
Piston Cylinder elements bearings Sludge inlet
bearings seat
Liquid sludge
feeding
Filtrate
Dewatered sludge
Chamber for Filtrate outlet
Gear motor
filtrate collection
Roberto Canziani 54
Description
Feed (left) and pre-compression (right)
Compression (the piston moves forward) and

sludge dewatering (the piston moves backward) Sludge discharge
Roberto Canziani 55

Sludge flow rate (kgSS/h) 540 – 800
Cylinder volume (m3) 12
Filtration area (m2) 82
Process time (min) 70 – 120
Installed power (kW) 48
Roberto Canziani 56
Roberto Canziani 57
Description
Seal section Filtration zone
Filtration chamber
Metal disc
filter
Cover
Drive
shaft
Sludge
Valve
Fixed section
Rotary section
Sludge
Compression and Dewatered
Filtrate Cross section sludge
dewatering zone
Roberto Canziani 58

Number of channels 1–8
Washing water (L/day) 950
Diameter (mm) 460 – 1220
Maximum sludge flow rate – DS = 3% (kg/h∙m2) 244 – 254
Pressure (kPa) 10 – 100
Operating parameter Fournier Prime Solution
Number of channels 1–8 1–4

Rotating speed (rpm) 0,2 – 2 -
Installed power (kW) 3,7 – 22,5 1,1 – 56
Roberto Canziani 59
Performance
Polymer dosage DSOUT Solids capture
Type of sludge
(g/kgDS) (%) efficiency (%)
Not stabilized
Primary 2–6 28 – 45 95+
Primary + Activated 7,5 – 10 20 – 32 92 – 98
Activated 12,5 – 17,5 13 – 18 90 – 95
Primary 7,5 – 10 22 – 32 90 – 95
Primary + Activated 10 – 15 18 – 25 90 – 95
Activated 10 – 17,5 12 – 17 85 – 90
Activated 8,5 – 17,5 28 – 45 90 – 95
Roberto Canziani 60
Roberto Canziani 61
Working principle
ANODE +
2H2O 4H+ +O2(g) + 4 e-
Surface water
[H+] increases
Solid pH decreases
Free water
[H+] decreases
Cation pH increases
Anion CATHODE -
Thickened sludge Mechanical Electro- 2H2O + 2 e- 
Filter cloth
dewatering dewatering H2(g) + 2OH-
Electrophoresis Electroosmosis Electromigration
Roberto Canziani 62
CINETIK® (Ovivo, USA)

Installation area (m2) 11,6 – 27,9
Sludge flow rate (m3/h) 0,3 – 2,4
Washing water (L/min) 4,2 – 6
DS > 10%
• Simple operation
• DS up to 50%
• Lower energy consumptions than
thermal drying
• Lower odour emissions
• Reduction in the content of pathogens
• Fully automated
Roberto Canziani 63
Performance
Specific energy Specific energy
DSIN DSOUT
Type of sludge consumption consumption
(%) (%)
(kWh/ton) (kWh/kgH2O)
Not stabilized
Primary 22 – 24 29 – 49 110 – 260 012 – 0,29
Activated 13 – 17 28 – 43 150 – 270 0,17 – 0,30
Activated 25 33 – 38 210 – 310 0,23 – 0,34
Activated 16 – 20 32 – 43 230 – 310 0,25 – 0,34
Activated 16 – 20 32 - 43 230 – 310 0,25 – 0,34
Roberto Canziani 64
ELODE® (Siemens Water Technologies & ACE Korea Corporation)
SELO ELODE BELO ELODE

EDW on dewatered sludge DM+EDW on liquid sludge
Sludge flow Sludge flow Washing water

Operating Belt width Power
rate DSi=15% rate DSi=2% flow rate
parameter (mm) (kW)
(ton/h) (ton/h) (L/h)
SELO ELODE 500 – 3000 0,3 – 1,8 9,8 – 105 12 – 30
BELO ELODE 500 – 3000 2,5 – 13,0 9,8 – 105 92 – 579
Roberto Canziani 65
EKG dewatering bag (Electrokinetic Limited, UK)
• Ideal for the treatment of small

volumes
• Good for heterogeneous wastes
• Low energy consumption compared
to centrifuges and belt presses
• Small footprint
• It can be used with or without the use
of flocculants
Roberto Canziani 66
X-E-RAD (SLUDGETREAT PROJECT – IAPP 611593)
Results achieved by
means of a lab-scale
device
Publication No. WO/2019/082150

DEVICE FOR SLUDGE TREATMENT
Roberto Canziani 67
Odour control
Sp
noz
pac
Roberto Canziani 68
Roberto Canziani 69
Drying bed
PE<20,000
Length (m) 30 – 60
Width (m) 7,5
Slope (%) 1 – 1,5
Sand layer thickness (mm) 200 – 460
Sand size (mm) 0,3 – 0,75
Area Sludge loading rate

Type of sludge
(m2/person) (kg/m2∙y)
Stabilized
Primary 0,1 120 – 150
Primary + Activated 0,16 – 0,23 100 – 160
Roberto Canziani 70
Lagoon

Sludge depth (m) 0,75 – 1,25
Sludge loading rate (kg/m2∙y) 36 – 39
Roberto Canziani 71
Solar drying
• Sludge volume reduction of 3-4

times
• Sludge storage before final disposal
• Fully automated operation
• Use of renewable energy
• Process with reduced carbon
footprint
• System easy to integrate into the
surrounding environment, thus
reducing the environmental impact
• Odor control
• Sludge sanitization
Roberto Canziani 72
Tubular geofilter
1) FILLING
Sludge is pumped into the TG. To facilitate the aggregation of the
finer solid particles, the sludge is mixed with appropriate
chemical conditioners before being introduced.
2) FILTRATION (≈ 2-4 days)

While the liquid fraction filters through the surface of the TG, the solid
particles are retained inside it. The solids capture efficiency is > 97%.
3) CONSOLIDATION (≈ 1-3 months)

Sludge in the TG consolidates and the DS content increases up
to values > 25%, with a reduction in the overall volume > 80%.
Roberto Canziani 73
Roberto Canziani 74
Comparison of the dewatering technologies
Method for
Advantages Drawbacks
dewatering
• High
High wear
wearand
andmaintenance
maintenancecosts
costs
• High
High energy
energyconsumption
consumption
• Minimal odor problems • Strong
Strong noise
noiseand
andvibrations
vibrations
• Fast startup and shut down capabilities • Requires skilled personnel for maintenance
• Easy installation • Moderately high suspended solids content in
Centrifuge
• Compact
Compact design
design the centrate
• Production
Production ofofa arelatively
relatively
drydry
sludge
sludge
cake
cake • Requires grit removal and sludge grinder in
• Low capital cost-to-capacity ratio the feed stream
• Cannot observe dewatering zone to
optimize/adjust the performance
• Batch
Batch operation
operation
• High equipment costs
• High labor cost
• High
High cake
cakesolid
solidconcentration
concentration • Special support structure requirements
Filter press • High
High solids
solidscapture
captureefficiency
efficiency • Large
Large floor
floorarea
arearequired
required forfor
equipment
equipment
• Simple operation • Requires skilled personnel for maintenance
• Additional
Additional solids
solids due
dueto to
large
large
chemical
chemical
addition require
addition requiredisposal
disposal
• Limitations on filter cloth life
Roberto Canziani 75
Method for
dewatering
• Hydraulically limited in throughput
• Low
Low energy
energyconsumption
consumption
• Requires sludge grinder in feed stream
• Relatively low capital and operating costs
• Very
Very sensitive
sensitivetotoincoming
incoming sludge
sludge
feed
feed
• Easy to maintain
characteristics
characteristics
Belt press • Personnel
Personnel notnotrequired
requiredonon
site
site
• Short media life as compared to other devices
• High pressure machines are capable of
using cloth media
producing very dry cake
• Possible clogging of the belts
• Minimal effort required for system shut down
• Possible
Possible formation
formationofof aerosols
aerosols
• Low speed (0,3 - 1,5 rpm)
• Capacity
Capacity limitations
limitationswill
will
require
require
multiple
multiple
units
units
• Low
Low noise
noise(<68
(<68dBA)
dBA)
for WWTPs with a sludge production > 19.000
• Enclosed design contains odors and aerosols
m3/day
• Relatively
Relatively low
lowenergy
energyconsumption
consumption
Screw press • Washwater
Washwater required
requiredperiodically
periodicallythroughout
• Overdosing polymer does not clog screen and
operating cycle
throughout operating cycle
hinder dewatering
• Low shearing force reduces odors in
optimize/adjust performance
dewatered cake
• High
High cake
cakesolid
solidconcentration
concentration
Hydraulic filter
• High
High level
levelofofautomation
automationand
and
flexibility
flexibility • High
High energy
energyconsumption
consumption
press • Low noise
Roberto Canziani 76
Method for
dewatering
• Low speed (0,5 - 2,5 rpm)
• Low
Low noise
noise(<68
(<68dBA)
dBA)
• Relatively
Relatively large
largefootprint
footprintperper
unitunit
volume
volume
of of
• Enclosed design contains odors and aerosols
dewatering capacity
dewatering capacity
• Relatively
Relatively low
lowenergy
energyconsumption
consumption
• Capacity
Capacity limitations
limitationswill
will
require
require
multiple
multiple
units
units
• Overdosing polymer does not clog screen and
Rotary press for WWTPs with a sludge production > 19.000
hinder dewatering
m3/day
• Low shearing force reduces odors in
dewatered cake
optimize/adjust performance
• Washwater
Washwater needed
neededonly
onlywhen
whenthe
the
machine
machine
is
shut
is shut
down
down
• Moderate
Moderate to tohigh
highcapital
capital
costs
costs
• Automatic operation • Not particularly suited for WWTPs with a
• Automatic operation
• Good results for hardly dewaterable sludge production > 75.000 m3/day
• Good results for hardly dewaterable sludges
sludges • Limited final dryness achievable (45-50%)
• Mechanics are simple and easy to maintain
• Mechanics are simple and easy to maintain • Difficult to predict performance without bench
• Odor improvement and pathogen kill on the
Electro- • Odor improvement and pathogen kill on the scale testing
sludge
dewatering sludge
• Flexible with different incoming sludge
• Requires odor treatment for the process off
• Flexible with different incoming sludge gases
characteristics
characteristics • Require
Require preliminary
preliminarydewatering
dewateringto to
achieve
achieve
a
• 3–5 times more energy efficient than thermal
• 3–5 times more energy efficient than range
a rangeof of
feed
feed
between
between10 and
10 and
25%25%
drying
thermal drying • Operational cost sensitive to local electricity
tariff
Roberto Canziani 77
Method for
dewatering
• Low capital cost method where land is readily
• Requires
Requires large
largearea
areaofofland
land
available
• Requires
Requires stabilized
stabilizedsludge
sludge
• Does not require skilled personnel for
• Design requires consideration of climatic
operation
effects
Drying bed • Low
Low energy
energyconsumption
consumption
• Sludge removal is labor intensive
• Little
Little to
tono
nochemical
chemicalconsumption
consumption
• Low flexibility
• Less sensitive to sludge variability
• Low
Low solids
solidscapture
capture
efficiency
efficiency
• Higher solids content than mechanical
• It attracts
attractsinsects
insects
methods
• Low
Low energy
energyconsumption
consumption • Potential
Potential for
forodor
odorand
andvector
vector
problems
problems
• No chemical
chemicalconsumption
consumption • Potential
Potential for
forgroundwater
groundwaterpollution
pollution
• Organic matter is further stabilized • More land intensive than mechanical methods
Lagoon
• Low capital cost where land is available • Appearance may be unsightly
• Does not require skilled personnel for • Design requires consideration of climatic
operation effects
• Pre-treatments
Pre-treatments not notrequired
required
• High flow rates (> 400 m3/h)
Tubular geofilter • High
High quality
qualityofofthe
thefiltrate
filtrate • Requires
Requires large
largearea
areaofofland
land
• Low
Low energy
energyconsumption
consumption
• Low
Low capital
capitalcosts
costs
Roberto Canziani 78
Filter Belt Screw Rotary Electro-
Centrifuge
press press press press dewatering
Footprint
Energy consumption
Dewatering efficiency
Labour cost
Noise
Maintenance cost
Operating cost
Roberto Canziani 79
2000
400
350
TUBULAR GEOFILTER
Sludge flow rate (m3/h)
300
250
BELT PRESS
200 CENTRIFUGE
150
100
FILTER PRESS
50
ROTARY PRESS
SCREW PRESS
0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5
Energy consumption (kWh/m3)

DRYING BED Nuove tecnologie ambientali – Dewatering fanghi con geofiltri tubolari
Roberto Canziani 80
50
45 TUBULAR GEOFILTER
40
DS dewatered sludge (%)
FILTER PRESS
35
DRYING BED
30
25 CENTRIFUGE
BELT
20 PRESS
ROTARY PRESS
15 SCREW PRESS
10
0
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3 3,5 4 4,5 5
Energy consumption (kWh/m3)

Nuove tecnologie ambientali – Dewatering fanghi con geofiltri tubolari
Roberto Canziani 81
DS dewatered sludge (%)

Type of sludge
Sand drying
Lagoons Centrifuge Filter press Belt press
bed
Primary NA NA 28 – 35 40 – 45 32 – 38
Activated NA NA 15 – 20 25 – 32 12 –18
Primary
50 – 60 25 – 35 28 – 35 40 – 48 30 – 35
digested
Activated
50 – 60 25 – 35 15 – 20 25 – 35 15 – 20
digested

Sludge Engineering: The Treatment and Disposal of Wastewater Sludges - P. Aarne Veselind, F. Dilek Sanin, William Wade Clarkson
Roberto Canziani 82
DS dewatered sludge (%) – AVERAGE VALUES
Type of sludge
Electro-
Centrifuge Filter press Belt press Screw press Rotary press
dewatering
Not stabilized
Primary 34.2 45.0 27.2 35.0 36.5 39.0

Primary + Activated 30.0 34.0 22.7 30.0 26.0 36.0
Activated 18.0 28.0 16.0 18.5 15.5 -
Anaerobically
digested
Primary 35.0 30.0 29.5 25.0 27.0 -
Primary + Activated 28.0 39.5 21.2 21.0 21.5 -
Activated - - 18.0 20.0 14.5 -
Aerobically
stabilized
Activated 21.5 - 16.5 17.5 36.5 37.0
Roberto Canziani 83
WWTP Population equivalent Stabilization Dewatering machine DSOUT (%)
1 7,331 - Centrifuge 20.0

3 21,147 - Centrifuge 18.0
4 55,650 - Centrifuge 18.0
6 3,456 Aerobic Centrifuge 18.0
Roberto Canziani 84
14 104,000 Anaerobic Centrifuge 24.0
AVERAGE 23.0
20 47,372 Aerobic Filter press 36.0

Filter press 24.0
21 1,000,000 Aerobic
Hydraulic filter press 24.0
22 1,250,000 Anaerobic Filter press 24.1
AVERAGE 27.0
Roberto Canziani 85
23 32,458 - Belt press 18.0

24 21,090 Aerobic Belt press 15.0
33 69,500 Anaerobic Belt press 24.0
34 51,000 Anaerobic Belt press 16.7
AVERAGE 18.3
Roberto Canziani 86
Sludge dewaterability
CAPILLARY SUCTION TIME
Roberto Canziani 87
87
OR:
SRF = Specific resistance to filtration (m/kg); 2 ∙ ∆𝑝 ∙ 𝐴2 ∙ 𝑚
𝑆𝑅𝐹 =
A = Filtration area (m2); TTF (TIME TO FILTER) 𝜇∙ω
Δp = Difference of pressure between the two sides of the filter (N/m2);
Time needed for the filtration of the 50% of the initial volume of sludge
μ = Filtrate viscosity (kg/(m∙s);
ω = Weight of the sludge cake per volume unit of filtrate (kg/m3);
m = Slope of the curve (s/m6).
Roberto Canziani 88
88
Not conditioned sludge Conditioned sludge
MODIFIED CENTRIFUGAL INDEX (MCI)

g = Gravity acceleration (m/s2);
t = Time of centrifugation (s);
Higgins et al. (2014) - To et al. (2014)
Roberto Canziani 89
89
Conclusions
 The choice of the dewatering technology needs to take into account different factors,
among which:
 Sludge characteristics
 Flow rate of sludge to be dewatered
 Investment costs
 Operating costs
 Area available for the installation
 The optimization of dewatering process (final DS content in sludge and solids capture
efficiency) requires a study of:
 Type and dosage of polyelectrolyte (laboratory)
 Operating parameters of the machine
 A unique choice of the best dewatering machine does not exist.
Roberto Canziani 90
91
Thermal drying
Thermal drying use heat to reduce the water content of
sludge. down to 10-20%
It is often used to allow storage of sludge for shipping to
incineration plants or cement kilns, as it increase the LHV
(at 90% DS, it is close to that of woodchips).
High capital & operation costs: 90 €/t, including final disposal
to cement kilns, comparable to incineration.
Sludge drying costs
Electric energy 11% Capital cost 29%
Thermal energy
(natural gas): 30% Rentals 3%
Maintenance & analyses 3%
Disposal of dried sludge 20% Personnel 4%
Roberto Canziani 91
92
Thermal drying
Technological options:
1.Conventional high temperature (>110°C) processes;
2.Newly developed low temperature (80°C)

processes;
3.Newly developed ambient temperature (<45°C)

processes.
Roberto Canziani 92
93
Thermal drying – conventional processes
DIRECT DRIERS wet exhaust gas low oxygen flue gas
sludge outlet inlet
Heat is transferred by inlet
convection, mainly
process gas: provides the

heat for drying and drives Rotating drum direct drier dried
away the water vapor sludge
out
wet preheated,
INDIRECT DRIERS sludge oxygen
inlet diathermal oil in
depleted dry
Heat is transferred by air inlet
conduction through direct
contact of sludge with metal
lamellas heated by
diathermal oil vapor
dried
process gas: only drives away saturated
air diathermal oil out sludge
the water vapour out
Indirect thin-film drier
Roberto Canziani 93
94
Thermal drying – direct drier example

http://www.andritz.com/ep-thermal-sludge-dryers-flowsheet-dds.jpg
Scrubber - flue gas treatment
Air to Odour
Dust separators (cyclone dust collectors) Control Unit
Filter
Air to Odour
B
crusher Control Unit
Condenser
Air to Odour
Control Unit
Wet sludge
B Wobble sieve
A Cyclone C
Wet Dry sludge recycle
sludge
silo
Sludge recycle and dust control…
C
Dried
sludge A
mixer cooler
Feed
Dryer drum Dried sludge
Eccentric screw pump
furnace Air Rotary lock
Natural gas or biogas
dried sludge granules and dust (dotted line)

Air
Roberto Canziani 94
95
Thermal drying – direct drier example

Scrubber - flue gas treatment
Air to Odour
Dust separators (cyclone dust collectors) Control Unit
Filter
Air to Odour
B
crusher Control Unit
Condenser
Air to Odour
Control Unit
Wet sludge
B Wobble sieve
A Cyclone C
Wet Dry sludge recycle
sludge
silo
C
Dried
sludge A
mixer cooler
Feed
Dryer drum Dried sludge
Eccentric screw pump
furnace Air Rotary lock
Natural gas or biogas
dried sludge granules and dust (dotted line)

Air
Roberto Canziani 95
96
Thermal drying - indirect dryer example

cyclone
separator scrubber condenser
sludge feed
burner
Burner
(for
unconden water
sable) recycle
pump
dryer
burner heat exchanger
fan Water supply
fan
Burner (uncondensable)
Dried sludge
Roberto Canziani 96
Thermal drying – safety issues
High dust concentration in air causes

potentially explosive atmosphere inside the drier
ATEX Regulations
 directive 1994/9/CE
 directive 1999/92/CE
Health ad Safety Executive (UK) Report: HSE 847/9 (2005)
“Guidance on the control of safety risks at sewage

sludge drying plant – rotary and verticals dryers”
Roberto Canziani 97
 Control of oxygen concentration

 LESS THAN 2%  5% (depends on T°C) in process air
 Inert gases storage: N2 or CO2 are injected when

oxygen approaches operational limits
 Reduction of turbulence
 Cooling stored dried sludge in necessary
 Safety sprinklers should be provided
 Automatic fire extinguishers trigger at (T>Tlimit)
Roberto Canziani 98
99
Explosion prevention when dealing with dust
http://www.andritz.com/ANONIDZ763734CE5D0EF25C/ep/ep-thermal-main/ep-thermal-sludge-dryers-safety.htm
Roberto Canziani 99
100
Thermal drying – belt dryer (1/2)
Belt driers
(low temperature 80°C)
 Lower explosion risks because
- Process temperature is lower
- Low dust concentrations
- No sludge ricirculation
- Dried sludge is discharged at
low T
 Lower energy requirements as

low grade energy can be used
(low pressure steam)
Sludge can be stored Sludge can be burned

and used later in for energy recovery
agriculture
Roberto Canziani 100
101
Thermal drying – belt dryer (2/2)

Exhaust gas fan
Water supply Sludge from
dewatering units
Scrubber
Feed pump
Dispenser
Air recycle fan

Drain
Screw conveyor
Belt dryer
Dried
sludge
Fuel Hot air
Burner

Thermal drying – green-house dryers (1/3)
Green-house dryers
(ambient temperature <45°C)
•Development of sludge
drying beds;
•High sensitivity to seasonal
variations and local climatic
conditions;
•Approximate surface area
required: 0,1 m2/AE
Dried sludge (up to 60%

DS) can be stored and
used in agriculture

103
Veolia Water (SOLIAMIX®)

7 plants in France (6500 to
70000 PE)
http://www.veoliawaterst.com/solia/fr/

104
IST (D): 57 plants

(33 France; 9 Germany; 8 Austria;
4 Poland; 3 Australia; 2
Switzerland; 1 Hungary)
http://www.ist-anlagenbau.de/

Sludge reject water (or «supernatant» – 1/2)
Sludge treatment units produce dewatered sludge and a
liquid fraction, called supernatant, which is usually recycled
back to the biological process in the main treatment stream.
This recycled stream is rich in SST, COD, BOD, N and P and

has to be taken into account when designing the wastewater
treatment processes.
It is necessary to evaluate the mass balance of pollutants

over both treatment lines (wastewater and sludge) and
considering the feed-back effects due to thier recirculation.
The flow rate of supernatants account for 90 – 97% of the

waste-sludge flow rate, but only 2 – 5% of the influent
wastewater flow rates and for 15% of influent COD, N and P
loading rates.
Sludge reject water (or «supernatant» – 2/2)
RANGE OF TYPICAL VALUES (in mg/L)
TKN
(*)
(*) P concentration is higher in reject water coming from anaerobically digested

sludge
Ocansey, F.N. (2005). New trends in treatment of reject water from dewatering of
sludge, Master's thesis, Retrieved from:
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/3709442/new-trends-in-treatment-of-
reject-water-from-dewatering-of-sludge
(accessed on Nov 25th 2017)

Sludge disposal routes in Italy
2005
Energy
recovery Other
6% 1%
Landfill
55% 38%
2015
Energy
Land and agriculture recovery Landfill Other
8% 9% 8%
76%
Land and agriculture
Forthcoming regulations may strongly limit future disposal of

sludge to agriculture
Specific costs for sludge treatment and disposal
in Italy (arrow = trend in the last years)
Land and agriculture
Composting
Thermal drying (for

usage in cement kilns)
Incineration
To be abandoned
Sanitary landfill
in few years

Sludge disposal: incineration
Final disposal routes of sludges are to be chosen according to

their characteristics and their origin
Incineration: in Italy it is allowed for sludge corresponding to

the following characteristics:
Water content (% weight)  20% Cu  300 mg/kgDS
LHV of wet sludge  8.500 kJ/kg Mn  400 mg/kgDS
Sulfur (% weight in wet sludge)  0.6% Ni  40 mg/kgDS
Organic chlorine  1 mg/kgDS As  9 mg/kgDS
Pb  200 mg/kgDS Cd+Hg  7 mg/kgDS
Cr  100 mg/kgDS
1 kJ = 0,948 BTU; 1 kg = 2.205 lbs; 8500 kJ/kg * 0,948 BTU/kJ / 2,202 lbs/kg) =
= 3854,9 BTU/lbs
Other energy conversion factors are available at:
http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/energy_conv.html
Sludge mono-incineration plants in Europe.

Sludge incineration: fluidised sand bed
bottom section is
filled with sand

113
Sludge incineration: fluidised sand-bed schematics

Flue gases with high dust content
to dust removal treatment
rupture (bursting) disk
inspection window
free space
burner
sand inlet
fluidised air nozzles

thermocouple sand-bed
Auxiliary fuel inlet
sludge inlet
rupture (bursting) disk
fluidisation refractory
wall
air inlet start-up or air pre-
wind chamber heating burner

Sludge incinerator: treatment train
fine dust
Fluidised air / flue gas dust removal by removal by
bed heat exchanger electrofilter fabric filter
ash discharge
complete gas treatment should include removal of organic micro-
pollutants (dioxins, etc.) and mercury (Hg) by activated carbon addition
before the fabric filter

115
Sludge incineration: typical emissions after flue gas treatment
Measured
values

Sludge incineration: fluidised sand-bed
PROs of the fluidised sand bed incinerator:
Low excess air is necessary, due to high turbulence
Low NOx production, as combustion T has no peaks in the highly
mixed combustion bed
Flexible to sudden sludge load variations
Can be fed with diferent types of sludge (from 25 to 90% DS;
combustion air pre-heating is required if DS < ~ 40%)
High thermal stability due to sand mass
Control of acids by adding alkalis in the sand bed (e.g.: calcium
carbonate CaCO3, dolomite Ca.MgCO3)
CONs
High sand carry over in the flue gases (abrasion problems)
Risk of melted salts or ash vitrification over T = 950°C
WWTP and sludge incinerator in Cap Sicié, Toulon 117
(France)

WWTP and sludge incinerator in Cap Sicié, Toulon 118
(France) – in operation since 1997
Chimney Inlet Air vents
Access is either from a tunnel or from the sea if necessary

119
Sludge incinerators in UK
http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/809984/40/Mills%20-%20Unlocking%20the%20full%20energy%20potential%20of%20sewage%20sludge.pdf

WWTP and sludge incinerator in Zurich (CH) 120
Sludge Incineration Plant

Zurich / Switzerland

WWTP and sludge incinerator in Zurich (CH) 121
Fuel: Municipal Guaranteed emissions [mg/Nm³]
digested sludge Dust < 10 NOx < 80

Pb & Zn <1 HCl < 10
Hg < 0.1 HF <1
Capacity: 100,000 t/a
Cd < 0.1 NH3 < 5
12.5 t/h (30%DS)
3,75 tDS/h SO2 < 50 CO < 50
PCDD/PCDF < 0.1 ng TEQ/Nm³
Power: 5,000 kWth
Electricity 900 kWel
Commissioning 2015
In operation since 2016
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcq_soCc6dc

122
Sludge mono-incineration plant in St Petersburg
(Russian Federation)
Basic and Detail Engineering

study to get authority approvals
Fuel: Municipal Sludge

Capacity: 230.000 t/a
60.000 tDS/a
2 lines each 50%
Steam: 11 t/h
41 bar/400°C
Electricity: 2500 kWel
Contracted: 2014
Characteristics of sludge from domestic wastewater 124
(Northern Italy) and present limits for agricultural use.
Avg  st.dev. Present limits
Dry matter (DS) at 105°C (%) 22.0  0.6 --
Organic carbon of biological origin (%DS) 34.4  6.9  20
Kjeldahl Nitrogen (%DS) 4.4  0.7  1.5
Total Phosphorus (%DS) 1.5  0.7  0.4
Copper (mg/kgDS) 362.2  121.9 < 1000
Lead (mg/kgDS) 106.2  47.4 < 750
Cadmium (mg/kgDS) 2.6  2.2 < 20
Nickel (mg/kgDS) 49.3  6.2 < 300
Zinc (mg/kgDS) 783.5  276.6 < 2500
Chromium - total (mg/kgDS) 106.5  15.5 < 750
Chromium VI (mg/kgDS) 0.0  0.0 < 10
Mercury (mg/kgDS) 2.0  0.9 < 10
Arsenic (mg/kgDS) 3.4  2.0 < 10
125
Sludge disposal: material recovery
Material recovery options (e.g.: cement kilns, brick kilns, etc.) are
optimal options as sludge can provide
fuels (LHV valuable)
ashes as mineral constituents of the finished product.
Drawback: availability of industrial kilns and furnaces
Agricultural reuse: as a fertilizer, mixed with other constituents
Disposal of sludges to landfills is discouraged in the European

Union because of several operational drawbacks
uncontrolled biogas production,
leachate production, and pollutants mobility in subsoil
operational problems during wet weather

126
Anaerobic digestion of mixed sludge and
agrowastes
Ammonium sulphate
Thermophilic
digestion Thermophilic Thermophilic
digestion digestion
digestate
to
composting
recycle

127
Anaerobic digestion of mixed sludge and agro-
wastes – Vellezzo Bellini (Pavia, Italy)
The plants treats 120 000 t/y of

mixed municipal sludge,
agrowastes and foodwastes
20 M€ investment
The final product is used as an agriculture

modifier, as it adds organic matter to arid soils.
Nutrients can be also added to produce a

fertilizer
300 mn3/h methane production

132
Sludge treatment and disposal: a concise reference text
A concise reference text is on the following website

http://www.purebalticsea.eu/index.php/gpsm:good_practices
and refers to Countries around the Baltic Sea

Dewatering

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Dewatering

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Mechanical dewatering of sewage sludge

Introduction 1 6 Hydraulic filter press

Centrifuge 2 7 Rotary press

Filter press 3 8 Electro-dewatering

Belt press 4 9 Other technologies

Screw press 5 10 Comparison

Centrifuge 2 7 Rotary press

Filter press 3 8 Electro-dewatering

Belt press 4 9 Other technologies

Screw press 5 10 Comparison

Post- CONDITIONING AND

Backwashing Settling and

Costs related to sludge treatment

Operating costs (labour costs + reagents)

Maintenance costs (ordinary or extraordinary)

Nuove tecnologie ambientali – Dewatering fanghi con geofiltri tubolari

Reduction of water content in sludge

Reduction of transportation costs

Reduction of disposal costs

Increase of the calorific value of sludge

Reduction of odors and putrescibility of sludge

Reduction of percolation in landfilling

4 types of water in sludge: Sludge floc

– Interstitial water (capillary)

– Surface water (vicinal)

– Intracellular water or chemically

The dewatering efficiency depends on the bonding

with polymer addition

𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝐼𝑁 + 𝑄𝐻2𝑂 + 𝑄𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑂𝑈𝑇 + 𝑄𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒/𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒

𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝐼𝑁 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝐼𝑁 + 𝑄𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝑃𝑜𝑙𝑦 = 𝑄𝑆𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑔𝑒 𝑂𝑈𝑇 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝑂𝑈𝑇 + 𝑄𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒/𝑐𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒 ∙ 𝐷𝑆𝐹𝑖𝑙𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒

 Dry solid concentration in the dewatered sludge

 Flow rate of inlet sludge

 Area of installation of the dewatering machine

 Characteristics and treatment of filtrates/centrates

DS content in the dewatered sludge Solids capture efficiency (SCE)

𝑇𝑆𝑆0 % = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝑇𝑆𝑆1 % = 𝑡𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑠𝑢𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑛𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛

A low capture efficiency may cause:

 Wear of the dewatering unit

 Wear of pumps and equipment

 Higher maintenance costs

 Higher costs for conditioning agents

 Lower DS content in the dewatered sludge

 Higher costs for the WWTP and lower efficiencies

Most commonly used mechanical dewatering processes are:

Flow Dewatered Solid Surface Energy

Centrifuge 2 7 Rotary press

Filter press 3 8 Electro-dewatering

Belt press 4 9 Other technologies

Screw press 5 10 Comparison

Solids discharge Filtrate discharge

Modern high-speed centrifuges can dewater:

Operating parameter Value

Andritz Alfa Laval Alfa Laval Flottweg Flottweg

Increase of diameter of the bowl  

Hot steam inlet Steam + sludge outlet

Centrifuge 2 7 Rotary press

Filter press 3 8 Electro-dewatering

Belt press 4 9 Other technologies

Screw press 5 10 Comparison

Opening Internal Filter cloth

Faure Equipem. Henan Dazhang Toro Diemme

Operating parameter Value

Example: primary sludge

Fixed volume filter press