Methods for Chlorine Control in

Critical Cooling Towers

Methods for Chlorine Control In Critical Cooling Towers

The following paper was presented in part at the 1996 Cooling Tower Institute Annual Conference, Houston, Texas,
February 1996 by Stephen A. Wortendyke, Capital Controls Company, Inc.
1. Introduction
The precise and continuous measurement of chlorine at low levels is essential to the efficient operation of cooling towers.
The operators of cooling towers are looking for ways to keep the chlorine level as low as possible in order to achieve
maximum efficiency in their towers and high enough to control slime and microbial growth. This paper will discuss
the various methods in use today to control and monitor chlorine as well as the pros and cons of each method. We will then
proceed to describe the unique requirements of chlorine control in cooling towers. Finally, we will review a case study of how
a cooling tower used the precise and accurate measurement of chlorine to decrease corrosion rates by 60%.
2. Chemistry of Chlorine
Chlorine has been used as a disinfectant in water treatment for about 90 years. As our understanding of this chemical
increased, we have gained an incredible knowledge base as to the effectiveness of chlorine and the exact levels
necessary to minimize or eliminate microbiological contaminants in water. In cooling water, chlorine has been proven to be
an economical and effective way to control microbiological growth. Too little chlorine can prove ineffective for disinfection
control. Alternatively, too much chlorine can have disastrous effects on our environment and cooling water systems.
As chlorine dissolves in cooling water, hypochlorous acid and hydrochloric acid are formed according to the following
equation:
CI2 + H2O <---> HOCI + HCI
In addition to gaseous chlorine, hypochlorous acid may be formed
with the addition of hypochlorite (NaOCI or Ca(OCI)2) to
water. Hypochlorous acid is a weak acid only partially dissociating
in water into hydrogen and hypochlorite ions.
HOCI <---> H+ + OCI”
The degree of dissociation of hypochlorous acid is
significantly affected by pH and temperature. With decreasing
pH, the degree of dissociation of hypochlorous acid decreases.
Below a pH of 5.0, the dissociation of hypochlorous acid is
virtually 0%, regardless of the temperature. As the temperature
increases or decreases, the dissociation curve shifts along the pH
axis. See Figure 1.
This concept of dissociation and pH is significant for two
reasons. The first is that HOCI has both a higher oxidation
potential and is a more effective germicide. The “Handbook
of Chlorination” by G. White states that HOCl is 100 times more
effective as a germicide than OCI-. The work in drinking water is
conducted at pH levels of about 7 to 8.5 pH with some exceptions.
Usually the pH is constant and an effective microbial kill versus
concentration of chlorine is well established in drinking and
waste waters. Most water treatment companies recommend that
the pH be controlled in cooling towers in order to optimize Figure 1 - Dissociation Curve
the effectiveness of their chemical additives. This is important as
-1- 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
it directly affects disinfection capability. The second reason is that the galvanic cells used in amperometric chlorine
analyzers are also pH dependent. This is because HOCI is a more powerful oxidant than OCI and responds faster to the
amperometric cell and as the pH drifts or shifts the readings become less stable and the response time increases. It
is important to maintain a constant pH in order to establish a stable and accurate instrument. By buffering the sample to 4.5
to 4.8 pH we force all free chlorine to the HOCI state and the result is a more accurate and faster responding instrument. (See
the amperometric analyzer section for a more detailed explanation).
The sum of hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite ion in solution is called “free available chlorine”. If ammonia is present in
water that is being chlorinated, further reactions can occur between ammonia and hypochlorous acid to form chloramine
compounds. Chloramines are called “combined available chlorine”. The sum of free and combined available chlorine is
defined as “total available chlorine”.
3. Methods of Chlorination
Chlorine can be fed continuously or as a shock dose. On a shock basis, sufficient chlorine may be fed to provide a residual
chlorine level up to 1 mg/I free residual chlorine, measured downstream of water cooling systems, for one hour, two to three
times daily. To reduce the chlorine swings and in order to keep the system running consistently, continuous low
chlorine feed is used to keep the residual at about 0.2 to 0.5 mg/I free residual chlorine throughout the system.
The amount of chlorine needed to destroy biofouling organisms in the water and oxidize organic and inorganic matter is
called the “chlorine demand” of the system. The chlorine feed rate depends upon the degree of biofouling expected, the
nonbiological chlorine demand in the water, the holding time in the system, discharge limitations and the chemical
additives used to control corrosion. Chlorination equipment should be sized using the maximum waterflow and maximum
chlorine dosage anticipated. Typically, the actual dosage will be 1 /3 to 1 /2 of the design dosage so that additional capacity
is available to meet unforeseen developments, such as loss of chlorine through aeration in the tower or increased demand
in the summer. Actual feed rates can be calculated using the following equations:
(Recirculating rate, U.S. gpm) X (ppm dosage) X 0.012 = lb/day chlorine
(Recirculating rate, m3/h) X (mg/I dosage) X 0.001 = kg/h of chlorine

Figure 2 - Typical Gas Chlorination System

010.3035.0 -2-
Formerly 210.9005.1
Thus, to feed 1 ppm to a 100,000 gpm system would require:
100,000 X 1 X 0.012 = 1200 lb/day
The equipment, however, would be sized to feed 2400 to 3600 lb/day.
For a two hour feeding cycle, the chlorine consumption is
1200 X 2/24 = 100 lb per cycle
Figure 2 shows a typical chlorine gas system for shock or continuous treatment.
There are a variety of methods used to feed chlorine. We will discuss an example of a gaseous feed system and an on-site
hypochlorite generation feed system. In all cases safety and reliability are of primary concern.
Gaseous chlorine
Chlorine is packaged as liquefied gas under pressure and is the most economical and simplest method for disinfection.
Some of the advantages include the following:
Chlorine is a pure substance, with no other materials added
Chlorine remains constant in strength. With the use of direct cylinder or ton mounted vacuum feed systems, it is
easy to control and apply.
Chlorine is the most economical source. Pure chlorine gas is about 1/3 the cost of comparable quantities of sodium
or calcium hypochlorite.
There are two methods for feeding gaseous chlorine, pressure feed and vacuum operated. Pressure feed uses
the pressure in the chlorine cylinder to inject chlorine directly into the main through a pressure feed chlorinator.
Pressure feeders are not as safe as vacuum operated units. With vacuum operated systems, chlorine gas is immediately
reduced to a vacuum at the container valve, minimizing any danger of pressurized chlorine gas from escaping. A water-
operated, vacuum-producing ejector located directly at the point of application, extends the vacuum operation from the
chlorine source to the point of use and eliminates the need for pressurized solution lines. Figure 3 shows a vacuum
operated gaseous feed system.

Figure 3 - Vacuum Gaseous Feed System

-3- 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
Liquid Hypochlorite Solution
Sodium hypochlorite has long been recognized as a highly effective disinfectant and can be used for the treatment of
cooling water. Hypochlorite can be added either from storage tanks or generated on site. We will discuss electrolytic
on-site generation as this system is gaining acceptance as certain state regulatory agencies limit the transportation
of chlorine either as a gas or as hypochlorite solution.
Salt, water and electricity are combined to form hypochlorite according to the following equation:
NaCl + H2O + DC Current ----> NaOCI + H2
This will produce approximately a 1 % sodium hypochlorite solution which can be stored in a tank for addition to the system
line as needed. The system consists of these major components: water softener, salt saturator, generating cell, rectifier and
hypochlorite storage tank. The process is founded on the principle of the electrolysis of sodium chloride for the
production of sodium hypochlorite. One pound of chlorine equivalent is produced from 2.51bs of salt + 11 gallons of water +
2.5 kilowatt hours of electrical power. The efficiency of the process is a function of salt quality, current density, dilution
water quality, electrolyte (brine) concentration and the cell anode coating material. Figure 4 depicts a typical hypochlorite
generation system.
All of these systems can be controlled from an on-line chlorine analyzer. By maintaining tight and proper control of the
chlorine levels in cooling towers, a more efficient system is the result. There are a variety of methods used for monitoring
and controlling chlorine.

Figure 4 - Hypochlorite Generation System

4. Methods for Measuring Chlorine

Techniques for measuring residual chlorine in cooling water vary from simple chemical tests to sophisticated on line
electrochemical methods. For efficient control of chlorine, the measurement system should be very accurate,
self-cleaning and continuous. We will review the methods used in cooling towers for measuring residual chlorine.
There are two basic lab methods which are used to verify on-line operation. The first is the DPD colorimetric method. This
method is perhaps the most popular method because of its ease of use. It has a standard deviation of about 0.04 mg/I and
is subject to certain interferences including monochloramines in the free chlorine test. Because of its ease of use, it is used
extensively as a field verification method.
The second lab method is an amperometric titrator. This procedure is the recognized standard for the true chlorine level.
All other titration, electrochemical and colorimetric methods are calibrated against the amperometric titrator and it is the
most accurate system in use today. A report by the AWWA Research Foundation indicates that “amperometric
determination of chlorine remains the standard for routine laboratory determinations. It is “sensitive and precise and
should remain as the method used for accuracy comparisons”. Some drawbacks are that it is not easily adapted to field use
and amperometric titration is also a more difficult and time consuming procedure to use. However, if an accurate
calibration is required, amperometric titration should be used.
010.3035.0 -4-
Formerly 210.9005.1
Most on-line methods are an adaptation of the lab procedures specified in “Standard Methods”. These include DPD,
amperometric, iodometric, membrane probes and ORP.
Colorimetric
The manual DPD test kit has been automated into a batch system which uses peristaltic pumps to move sample
and reagents through the analyzer. A portion of the sample is captured in the colorimeter flow cell to measure
blank absorbance (the color intensity of the unreacted sample). Reagents are then added and a stirring motor mixes the
sample and the reagents. After 2 1/2 minutes the color intensity is measured in the red wavelength and compared
to a built-in calibration curve. See Figure 5.

Figure 5 - DPD On-Line Instrument

The DPD method is relatively stable but not as accurate as some electrochemical techniques and ranges are typically
limited to 0 - 5.0 mg/I as free or total chlorine. This method is used extensively and quite adequately as a monitoring
instrument however it suffers from a few drawbacks. Since the DPD forms a free radical, it oxidizes quite rapidly. As
a result, monochloramines are readily reacted and subsequently reported as free chlorine. Additionally, this method
has problems when attempting to control chlorine addition. This is because the output of these analyzers must be held
during the reagent reaction time. So in the case above, the output is updated every 2 1/2 minutes. Finally, most of
the on-line colorimetric analyzers for chlorine do not have temperature compensation. Some manufacturers offer a sample
heater to maintain the sample at a constant temperature. Figure 6 demonstrates a comparison of the output of a continuous
method vs. batch method.
Potentiometric/lodometric
The potentiometric method measures trace materials in a solution using an electrode with two elements. This method is
only applicable to the measurement of total residual chlorine and is based on the detection of iodine, which is liberated from a
stoichiometric reaction with the total chlorine in the sample.

-5- 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
 Figure 6 - Continuous vs. Batch Output

A pH buffer is first added to the sample which lowers

the pH in the cell to between 3.0 and 4.0 pH. Potassium
Iodide is added to the sample to convert all residual
chlorine present to iodine. A platinum electrode
develops a potential that depends upon the relative
concentration of iodine and iodide in solution. At
the second electrode, the iodide sensing element
develops a potential that depends upon the iodide
ion concentration in solution. The electrode then
measures the difference between the potential at the
two sensing elements. The net potential measured is then
converted through the electronics and is displayed
directly as total residual chlorine in mg/I.
The output of the electrode is proportional to the log
of the iodine concentration and is therefore proportional
to the log of the total residual chlorine. The typical
measuring ranges are 0 - 10.0 mg/I. Accuracy is
usually specified at 10% of the reading.
Membrane Type
The membrane type analyzer is usually an in-situ probe
which is designed for submerged operation in the
process stream or tank. The membrane type probe uses
the polarographic principle of operation to measure free
or total chlorine in water, see Figure 7. Recent
adaptations offer flow cell designs that pipes the sample
to the analyzer in a similar fashion as other analyzers.
The probe contains two metal electrodes which have
a polarizing voltage applied to them and they
are immersed in an appropriate electrolyte for
measuring either free or total chlorine. A porous polymer
membrane separates the internal cell from the
solution to be measured.
Figure 7 - Membrane Probe
010.3035.0 -6-
Formerly 210.9005.1
The two electrode system uses a silver/silver chloride electrode as both the reference and anode, and a platinum or gold
measuring electrode. The measuring electrode is isolated from the sample by a membrane that is permeable to chlorine. As
the chlorine passes through the membrane, it is reduced to chloride at the cathode, generating a current that is
proportional to the chlorine content present in the water. At the cathode the reactions that occur are:
HOCI + H+ + 2e ----> CI - + H2O
OCI” + 2H+ + 2e ----> CI- + H2O
At the anode the reaction is Ag + CI- ----> AgCI + e”.
The membrane type analyzers require a minimum sample flow. This steady velocity of water past the membrane
replenishes the layer of sample which is next to it, and will become depleted of the chlorine species. Some of the problems
of membrane probes include the clogging of the membranes and maintenance requirements of replacing them and the
relatively slow response times. These units are subject to pH changes but accuracies tend to be around 5%. They are easy to
install and are generally good monitoring instruments.
Amperometric
Amperometric analyzers used to measure chlorine residual are recognized as the most precise instruments in use today.
Developed in the late 50s’, these analyzers are based on the standard lab amperometric method and rely on 3
basic features in order to achieve their high accuracy. Among these are sample size, electrode cleaning and buffering. If the
signal is strong, the electrodes are kept clean and the system is buffered adequately, the accuracy of standard
amperometric systems will be better than 2% of full scale. See Figure 8 for a brief overview of how a standard
amperometric analyzer works. This basic amperometric design has been in place since the 1960’s and has
been continuously updated over the years. Amperometric analyzers are based on galvanic cell theory. If two electrodes of
the appropriate material are immersed in an ion-containing solution, a chemical species capable of being reduced (gaining
electrons) can move toward the cathode where electrons are transferred from the cathode to the reducible species,
resulting in a cathodic current. At the same time, an oxidation reaction (where an oxidizable species loses electrons)
occurs at the anode. Electrons are transferred to the anode producing an anodic current. As the reaction occurs
the concentration of the reducible species at the cathode drops. In response to the concentration gradient created, more of
the reducible species moves toward the cathode. The rate that the reducible species arrives at the cathode is dependent on its
concentration. As the concentration increases the diffusion to the cathode increases, which increases the current. The current
is also affected by temperature. With elevated temperature, diffusion increases.
The amperometric analyzer discussed utilizes both a copper and a gold electrode. A current can be produced
by electrically connecting or shorting the electrodes. In a galvanic cell, a change in concentration is detected by measuring
the change in current flowing through the cell. The cell responds proportionally to changes in concentration. The
electrodes are large in order to maximize the ruggedness and sensitivity of the signal.
The flow is controlled through an
overflow weir. Prior to entering the
sample cell area, the solution is
mixed with pH 4 buffer to provide
a sample pH of 4.5 to 4.8. Because
disinfection control relies on an
accurate knowledge as to the true level
of chlorine, the pH is adjusted to force
the sample to 100% HOCI. All analyzers
will measure both HOCI and OCI and
report as C12. With electrochemical
analyzers, the HOCI has a much faster
response to the cells than OCI. If the
analyzer was calibrated and measuring at
6 or 7 pH, it would still give the same
indication of chlorine, but the response
time would increase and the accuracy
would suffer. The control of chlorine
relies on an accurate and immediate
chlorine input, therefore the pH is
decreased and held constant.

Figure 8 - Amperometric Chlorine Analyzer

-7- 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
The reaction that occurs at the gold cathode in a buffered amperometric analyzer is the following:
HOCI + H+ + 2e ----> CI- + H2O
The anode is copper. As electrons are exchanged, an oxide product remains on the anode. The electrodes are kept clean
through the use of cleaning balls which are agitated to remove build-up as it occurs. Current flow is affected by pH. The
most stable current is between 4 to 4.5 pH therefore a buffering solution is used to stabilize the cell current. Temperature
compensation circuitry is employed to counter the effects of accelerated diffusion. Temperature is compensated through
the use of a thermistor. If total chlorine is desired, potassium iodide can be added to the pH 4 buffer solution.
Most amperometric analyzers on the market today utilize this or a similar technology.
ORP
An alternative method of chlorine residual monitoring that uses redox chemistry is known as ORP (oxidation reduction
potential). This form of measurement is a reading of the mV (millivolt) potential across a pair of electrodes. Originally, it had
been hoped that this will be a satisfactory method of indicating chlorine and investigative work continues in this area. This
work has had its deficiencies over the past years encountering unpredictable readings and variations in accuracy and
reliability. All chemical reactions that involve an electron transfer are oxidation reduction reactions. The relative strength
of these reactions is determined by measuring the potential. ORP is the potential to transfer electrons from the oxidant to the
reductant and is used as a qualitative measure of the state of oxidation in process waters. ORP is measured with
a platinum electrode and a reference electrode. If follows the Nernst equation which is described as follows:
E = Eo +(RT/n) In oxidant/reductant
E = The measured potential in voltage Eo = The standard molar potential R = Constant
T = Temperature, Degrees Kelvin
n = Number of electrons involved in the reaction
Oxidant = Molar concentration (activities)
Reductant = Molar concentration (activities)
We see that the potential is based on the ratio of oxidants to reductants, temperature and the equilibrium in standard
conditions (where oxidants = reductants). This calculation is only useful in a relatively pure or constant system. In more complex
waters, the concentration of specific oxidants or reductants cannot be determined by the electrode potential alone.
The use of ORP as a chlorine control devise assumes that all the oxidants are chlorine and the reductants do not change. This
matrix effect can be very complex. At best, the results from ORP are qualitative. If a relationship can be established
between the ORP and the chlorine level, care should be taken to continually calibrate this system because of fouling or drift
due to sample composition variations.
The ORP sensing system is comprised of a reference and sensing electrode with a very pure platinum element.
Comparison Data
Figure 9 describes an evaluation study of several methods of chlorine detection as compared to laboratory amperometric
titration. We see that the two electrode amperometric analyzer is the closest to laboratory amperometric titration. This
chart describes a range of 0 to 10 mg/I chlorine. The data below 3 mg/I is inconclusive and was not examined in detail. This
chart shows how the different methods compare over a wide range of chlorine.
Figure 10 shows several months of data taken at a wastewater treatment plant with different analyzers. We see that if we
attempt to compare analyzers with each other, the data is meaningless. This is the kind of variability that can occur
in different analyzers. In this chart we do not know which instrument is right. A referee method must be used as the basis of all
on-line and laboratory instruments. To further illustrate, as trials are run comparing competitive equipment, there is always one
detection device that is viewed as the standard or the control. Frequently, it is another on-line analyzer or in many cases it is a
DPD test kit. Care should be given in placing confidence in one instrument over another. This is why the AWWA went
to such pains to study the accuracy of various methods. The need was recognized for a referee method that could act as
a universal control. The laboratory amperometric titrator was selected because this instrument provided the most accurate
and precise chlorine values. It would be a difficult task to pick the most accurate on-line instrument when comparing against
each other. Although ORP was not part of this study, we see that this form of chlorine control also needs a highly accurate
lab technique to verify accuracy, stability and calibration.

010.3035.0 -8-
Formerly 210.9005.1
 Figure 9 - Comparison Test With On-Line Instruments

Figure 10 - Comparison Study of On-Line and Lab Titrators

5. Case Study
Problem
Minimum Chlorine Control
Critical cooling towers often need to control the minimum chlorine level as low as 0.3 mg/I free chlorine. At these levels
the operators are assured that both microbial growth and slime is controlled. Left uncontrolled, biofilms can
form and adversely affect equipment performance by decreasing heat transfer and reducing water flow. Biofilms can also
promote metal corrosion that can perforate heat exchanger surfaces and can accelerate wood deterioration resulting in collapse
of the structure.
There are several problems to the control and measurement of chlorine at the 0.3 mg/I level. First is that there are other
measurements that affect the level of activity of these microbial organisms and the effectiveness of chlorine. Among these
are pH, temperature and organics. The critical parameter has been pH. In most of the systems approaches offered
by water treatment companies, pH is regarded as a parameter that must be controlled in order to maximize the efficiency
of the towers. For the case study described in this paper, this level is set and controlled at 6.8 to 7.2 pH. When pH is closely
controlled into a narrow margin, the effectiveness of chlorine is easily predictable based on what is known about the
-9- 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
HOCI/OCI- dissociation curve (see Figure 1). This is why amperometric analyzers try to adjust the pH of the sample
to below 4.5 pH. The signal is much stronger because almost 100% of the CI2 is HOCI. When the pH is tightly controlled, it is
easy to predict the required chlorine residual. This is how the minimum of 0.3 mg/I chlorine was established and then
proven experimentally. The question to be answered is that given the accuracy of most chlorine instruments, what method or
technique can be used to determine this low level of chlorine accurately?
Maximum chlorine control
If we were just worried about disinfection we would simply keep the chlorine residual high and let the system
run. However the other factor in this equation is that high levels of chlorine will render water treatment systems ineffective
and pave the way for corrosion and scale. Selective leaching can occur when the pH is low (below 6.0 pH) and the chlorine
is high (>1.0 mg/I CI2). Also, when the Cl2 level increases above 1.0 mg/I, tower lumber delignification can occur. We
can see that in order to keep the corrosion inhibitors working effectively and keep the structure intact, we need to keep
the pH above 6.0 pH and the chlorine below 1.0.
Figure 11 describes this relationship between pH and
corrosion. Tight control of pH will enable the corrosion and
scale inhibitors to work much more effectively, reduce
fouling and increase the effectiveness of the disinfectant.
From the information presented, we know that this will occur
above a pH of 6.0 and below a pH of 10.0. Above pH of 10.0 the
dissociation curve indicates most of the active chlorine is in the
form of hypochlorite. Various treatment systems will all have an
optimum pH. Careful control of pH means a more accurate
understanding of disinfection ability.
With controls on pH we can now turn our attention to the
control and measurement of Cl2. The following case study
describes how to best monitor and control chlorine in a critical
cooling tower.
Case Study
In this example, we will examine how precise Cl2 control can
help maintain the cooling tower at maximum efficiency. Figure 11 - Corrosion Rate
The cooling tower in this discussion is a twin cell counterflow used
in the petrochemical industry. The tower runs with a ∆T of 15° F and a 45,000 gal/min recirculating rate using river water as
makeup. The chemical additives used are supplied by a major water treatment company and uses a polyphosphate and
phosphonate blend with two separate dispersion packages. This system requires the pH to be controlled at 7.0 ±0.2 The
operators also had to make sure that the chlorine residual was between 0.3 and 0.6 mg/I CI2. This was necessary in order
to keep the heat exchanger corrosion rate below the cutoff of 1.5 millimeters/year. This control of 0.3 to 0.6 mg/I was
necessary in order to meet the chemical additive manufacturers specifications. The system proved to run much better
when the residual chlorine could be targeted around 0.47 mg/I Cl2. The following bar chart (Figure 12) describes this.
Initially the control of Cl2 was accomplished through a manual method. Samples were collected continually and a DPD
chlorine test was performed. This method did not provide the continuous control and monitoring that was necessary.
The first on-line system that was attempted was ORP. ORP theory indicates that as pH drifts the ability to disinfect
changes and the only true way to know that disinfection capability is through the oxidation-reduction potential of the water.
The theory is that since HOCI is a more powerful oxidant than OCI -, as the pH increases or decreases the relationship of
HOCI vs. OCI - changes so the ORP changes and the effectiveness of the disinfection changes. When the ORP system
is applied, the chlorine level began to drift upward and out of the upper limit without the ORP indicating this. We
discussed earlier why this can occur due to the relationship of oxidants/reductants. Another reason is drifting of the
probe from its calibration points. When the DPD method was performed, the operators noticed a very high
chlorine level. The initial thought was that the ORP was correct and no change to disinfection was correct. The
discussions ended when corrosion coupons indicated that the rate exceeded the 1.5 mil/year cutoff. Confirmation
occurred when the corrosion inhibition system failed due to high CI2 levels and a failure occurred in the heat
exchanger. In fact what had happened is that the ORP had drifted and the DPD answer was right in terms of
its high chlorine indication.

ORP failed to indicate that the chlorine residual was too high. A more sophisticated ORP system was tried with
the same inaccuracies. This second system was pulled in 3 weeks. The operators switched back to a manual
control system in order to keep the tower running.
010.3035.0 - 10 -
Formerly 210.9005.1
They realized that the chemical additive system that
controls corrosion and scaling is based on the precise
control of chlorine residual around 0.45 to 0.49 mg/I C12,
therefore a direct measurement of residual of CI2 is better
than an inferred measurement system. About one year
ago the continuous control of chlorine was attempted
using an amperometric analyzer.
Solution
The decision was made to try a microprocessor-based
amperometric analyzer to measure and control chlorine
feed.
The analyzer used in this case study incorporates the
latest technology in chlorine measurement. Most of
these additions seek to control the variables in chlorine
measurement. Among these are the flow of the sample
through the cells, the temperature compensation scheme
and the pH of the sample. The following diagrams the basic Figure 12 - Chlorine Control Band
flow of the Model 1870E Chlorine Analyzer, Figure 13.
While the general electronics of the unit is the same as other units, the ability to accurately measure low
residual levels is further enhanced by a cell pH monitoring and PID control system. The cell pH monitoring system
controls the pH level at 4.3 pH through a buffer feed system. As the pH of the buffered sample begins to increase
or decrease, the pump increases or decreases the feed rate appropriately. When the pH is controlled at those levels,
any variability resulting from dissociation is eliminated. If the flow is not kept above a certain rate, the cleaning
action of the unit can diminish and flow of sample past the electrodes will be too low to achieve an accurate signal. The
analyzer used on this cooling tower utilizes an infrared flow meter to indicate a low flow rate. Additionally, temperature
compensation is critical in the precise measurement of chlorine so this unit has a solid state temperature device
to compensate for sample temperature changes. What makes this particular amperometric analyzer work for critical
cooling towers is the independent control of each potential variant that may affect the chlorine reading. This includes
pH, temperature and flow.
When the analyzer and the residual chlorine level was maintained within the 0.45 to 0.49 level as confirmed by the lab
method the corrosion rate dropped from 1.5 mils/year to 0.6 mils/year. This represents a 60% decrease in the corrosion
rate. The benefits to this critical heat exchanger include a drop in the corrosion rate, a more efficient water treatment
process, improved heat transfer rates, and an extended life for the system.

Table 1 - ORP vs. Residual Analyzer

ORP Cl2 Analyzer

Corrosion Greater than 1.5 0.6 mls/yr
Rate mls/yr
Disinfectant Unstable ORP with 0.47+/- 0.2 mg/l
Control very high chlorine chlorine. ORP was
readings not measured.

Figure 13 - Series 1870E Analyzer Flow Diagram

- 11 - 010.3035.0
Formerly 210.9005.1
 Figure 14 - Chlorine Control in Cooling Towers

Design improvements may be made without notice.

Represented by:

De Nora Water Technologies

3000 Advance Lane Colmar, PA 18915
ph +1 215 997 4000 • fax +1 215 997 4062
web: www.denora.com
mail: info.dnwt@denora.com

®Registered Trademark. © 2015. All Rights Reserved.

SEP 2015
010.3035.0 - 12 -
Formerly 210.9005.1