'
ENGINEERING, DESIGN, AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT
Determining Thickener Unit Areas
W. P. T A L M A G E AND E. B. FITCH
The Dorr Co., Westporf, Conn,
0 PERATION of Dorr-type thickeners was analyzed by C,oe
and Clevenger (2) in 1916. They showed how to predict
t'hickener capacity from batch settling tests. The method out-
lined in t,heir classic paper has been used without significant im-
provement to this time (1).
A recent paper (3) by Kynch presents a mathematical analysis
of batch settling tests t'hat supplements the original picture sup-
plied by Coe and Clevenger. Application of thc Kynch mathe-
matics to thickening problems makes it possible to simplify t,he
experimental procedures and interpretation of results.
Simple Geometrical Constructions Aid Direct
Determination of Unit Area Requirements
Kynch does not analyze the relationship between batch set-
tling tests and continuous thickeners. In order to apply the
Kynch analysis, it will be useful to review that part of the mech-
anism of continuous t'hickening pertinent to the problem. A c -
cording to Coe and Clevenger ( 8 ) there may be several regimes or
zones in a thickener but the thickener area required is determined
by conditions in what they designate as free settling zones. These
are defined as zones in which the floes are falling through the
liquid without pressing on layers of floc below. I n a free settling
regime, the quantity of solids which can settle through a unit
cross section in unit time i s equal to the product of bhe settling
rate and the solids concentration. Coe and Clevenger tacitly as-
sumed that, under the operating condit'ions, the settling rate
would be a function solely of the solids concentration. Therefore,
the solids-handling capacit,y of any layer is a function only of its
concentration. In a continuous thickener, the solids must, be
able to subside through any concentration layers b e t w e n the
concentrations of feed and underflow a t least as rapidly as they
are fed to the unit,. Othern-ise, a layer or zone of whatever con-
centrat,ionlimits the solids-handling capacit'y will form and a,ct'as
a barrier. If insufficient area is present to handle the solids, such
a barrier layer would build up and all solids in excess of the
amount which could subside through this zone would eventually
have to overflow the thickener. Therefore, a, thickener must' have
a t least enough area t o allow the solids to subside through which-
ever concentration layer would have the least solids-handling
capacity.
The method Coe and Clevenger used for determining the
thickener area needed was to make a series of batch settling tests
on the pulp at various concentrations and to deterniirie the area
required to handle unit flow of solids for each concentration. The
maximum unit area thus determined was used as a basis of thicli-
ener design.
Coe and Clevenger realized that in a settling test', concentration
Iayers of lower solids handling capacity than layers of initial con-
centration, if they potentially exist, must propagate up from the
bottom of the vessel and appear eventually a t the upper honnd-
arg of the settling pulp. They applied this concept to continuous
settling t,ests but did not develop it to explain the ever-decreasing
settling rate t,hey observed in the transition between free settling
and compression conditions in a batch test.
Kgnch showed how the settling rate and concentration of any
capacity-limiting concentration layer which may exist can be de-
termined from the variat,ion in setmilingrate observed in a single
batch settling test.
38 INDUSTRIAL A N D E N G I N E E R I N G CHEMISTRY
Kynch started from the postulate t,hat t,he settling velocity, ,T'
of a particle is a function only of the local solids concentration, C,
around the particle, or mathematically, V = f (C). The funct,ion
is not defined and may change in any manner as the concentration
changes. This will be recognized as the same assumption Coe and
Clevenger made for the free settling regime.
In a ba,tch test starting a t uniform concentration, all t,he solids
start eettling a t uniform velocity since V = f(C). As the settling
solids begin to collapse against, the bottom of the vessel, they
must pass through all concentrations between Rtarting concentra-
tion and that of the deposited solids. If, a t any of thePe inter-
mediate concentrations, the solids-handling capacity is less than
that a t the lower concentration occurring immediately above it in
the vessel, a zone of such intermediate concentration must start
building up, since the solids cannot pass t,hrough it as fast as they
are eettling down into it.
Kynch shovied that' the rat,e of upward propagation of each
such constant concentration zone is constant. Consider the in-
finitely thin layer a t the upper boundary of such a zone, having a
concent'ration, C, originating a t the bottom at, zero time and mov-
ing upward a t a velocity of I-7 feet per second. The solids set-
tling into this layer come from a layer having a concentration of
(C - dC)pounds per cubic foot and a settling velocity with re-
spect to the ~ e ~ sofe l( V + dT') feet per second but with respect
+
t o the layer of (Ti d V j-U )feet per second. The concentrat'ion
of solids settling out, of this layer will he C with a settling velocity
of V with respect, to the vessel and (V +
C ) Kith respect to the
layer. Since the concentration of the layer is constant, the
quantity of solids settling into the layer must equal the quantity
of solids settling out of thc layer and a material balance can there-
fore be made.
(C - dC) At (V + d V + L!) = C At ( V + U) (1)
By simplifying and solving €or U,dropping out infinitesimals
of the second order,
Since, according to the Kynch postulate V = f(C), it follows
that
u = Cf'(C) - f ( C ) (3)
Since Cis constant for the layer in question,f( C) andf'(C) have
fixcd values and therefore C must also be constant.
The constancy of U may now be used to determine the solide
concentration of the layer a t the upper boundary of the settling
pulp. Let COand Ho be the initial concentration and height, re-
spectively, of a column of pulp in a batch settling test. The total
weight of solids in this pulp column is then CoHoA. When any
capacity-limiting concentration layer reaches the pulp .water in-
terface, all solids in the column must have passed through it since
it was propagated up from the bottom of the column. If the con-
centration of this layer is C, and it reaches the interface a t time,
t., then the quantity of solids having passed through this layer,
Vol. 47, No. 1
 ENGINEERING, DESIGN, AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

C2Atz(Vs + U Z ) ,must equal the total weight of solids in the The total quantity of solids in the batch test is CJIo.4 and it
column. would take time tu for this quantity of solids to subside past a
Equating these expressions layer of concentration CZin a continuous thickener. Therefore,
the quantity of solids that could be brought through layer con-
COHd = CzAtz(V2 + Uz) (4) centration per unit time is CoHoA/t,. “Unit area” of a layer is, by
definition, the area required to allow 1 ton of solids to subside
If HZ represents the height of the interface a t time, k, and since through the layer concentration in 1 day.
it has been proved that the upward velocity of any specific layer
is constant, Unit area = A, square feet/ton solids/day
COHO (10)
Hz
uz = t, (5) I n order to obtain
HO unit area in the
Substituting in Equation 4 and simplifying specified unit8 of
square feet per ton
per day, it is neces-
t- sary in Equation
V2 is equal t o dH/dt a t the point on a plot of H versus t (Figure H: 1 10 to express tu, H ,
LL
I ) a t which the layer having a concentration of C2 comes to the I
and C in units of
surface of the pulp. VZ is then the slope of the tangent to the days, feet, and tons
t per cubic foot, re-
curve a t (Hz, t 2 ) . It follows mathematically that the intercept of I
this tangent on the H axis is Hz +
V~tz(shown as HI). By sub- 9 spectively. How-
stituting H I for Hz+ Vdz in Equation 6, it is shown that CzHl = FH2
ever, it will usually
Colla. From this it follows that H1 is the height the pulp would be convenient t o
a construct the set-
occupy if all the solids present were a t the same concentration as _I

3 tling curve and

the layer a t the pulp-water interface. For any arbitrarily chosen
value of Cz the corresponding value of HI may be calculated. Vz
can then be determined as the slope of the line drawn through
point H I and tangent to the settling curve, and a complete set of
data showing V as f ( C) can therefore be developed from one set-
tling test.
I n order to specify the area requirement of a thickener, the
concentration layer requiring the maximum area to pass a unit
weight of solids must be determined. This may be done by cal-
culating the unit area required for a series of concentrations,
using the data showing B a s j ( C ) developed in the previous para-
graph and substituting in the Coe and Clevenger formula
Unit area =
V tion, C2
Whichever conrentration lager gives the largest value of unit area
is then wed aF a design basis. With Figure 1, a simple geomet-
rical construction may be used to obtain the unit areas directly.
At time t2 the solids in the layer existing a t the surface of the
pulp are settling a t a linear rate of H I - Hz/tz. If the solids of
this layer are assumed as a datum, water is passing the solids a t a
bulk rate of A ( H , - Hz)/tz. In a continuous thickener, the
solids in any zone do not have to settle past all of the water in the
zone, since part of this water will accompany the solids to the
underflow. The amount of .ivater they must settle past is equal
rather t o the amount which would be released in bringing solids
from layer concentration to underflow concentration. The cor-
responding quantity of water for the solids present in the batch
test would be A ( H , - H,)) since Hl is the height the pulp would
occupy if all solids present in the batch test were a t layer concen-
tration and Hu is the height the pulp would occupy if all solids
present in the batch test were a t the thickener underflow concen-
tration. The time that wodd be required to release A ( H l - H,)
water through a layer of concmtration C2‘ would then be
t , -- amount of water to eliminate - A(H1 - H,) (7)
rate of eliminating water - A(H1 - H z )
t2
By the law of triangles
t‘ =i tu (9)
&H” carry out the
graphical construc-
t2 tu tions in terms of
TIME - DAYS more conventional
Figure 1 . Typical Pulp Height vs. units, using an ap-
Time Relationship for Batch Settling propriate Conver-
Test sion factor to con-
vert unit area into
the specified units.
The method for determining the unit area Corresponding t o any
pulp concentration C2 in the free settling range is therefore as
follows:
1. Determine H I and H , from the following material balances:
point H I corresponding to an arbitrarily selected concentra-
COHO= CzHi = CuHu
2. Draw an “underflow” line parallel to the time axis a t
H = H , on a plot of pulp height versus time, as shown in Figure 1.
3. Draw a tangent t o the settling curve through point H I on
the H axis.
4. Read t, a t the intersection of the tangent and the underflow
line.
5 . Calculate unit area from Equation 10.
’\TJhenthe underflow line, H,, intersects the settling curve above
the point wl ere the layer a t the surface of the pulp goes into com-
pression, the time, tu, corresponding to maximum unit area will be
the coordinate of the intersection since any other tangent will in-
tersect the underflow line a t a lesser value of I, When the under-
flow line intersects the settling curve below the point where the
layer a t the surface of the pulp goes into compression, the tangent
giving maximum unit area will be drawn through this compres-
sion point, since this tangent gives the highest value of t, in the
free settling range and only free settling zones govern the unit
area.
Batch Settling Tests Demonstrate
Validity of Kynch Analysis
It is implicitly assumed in Coe and Clevenger’s treatment that
solids in free settling pulps will obey Kynch’s basic assumption-
Le., that the settling velocity of a particle is a function only of the
local concentration. Since the Kynch conclusions are mathe-
matically certain if the basic assumption is met, the Kynch method
for determining behavior of free settling layers must be a t least as
valid a s that of Coe and Clevenger. The Coe and Clevenger test

January 1955 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY 39

ENGINEERING. DESIGN, AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT

250 350 450

CONCLNTSATIOU - G./L
COUCE\TRATION - S,/L.

Metallurgical Pulp Calcium Carbonate Cement Rock A Cement Rock B

Figure 2. Comparison of Coe and Clevenger and Kynch Methods for Analysis of Batch Settling Tests

procedure, however, entaile an additional assumption vdiich is not
necessarily valid and which is not contained in applicat,ion of the
Kynch analysis. The Coe and Clevenger test procedure of ob-
serving the initial settling rate in a series of batch tests of various
initial concentrations assumes that the settling chara,cteristics of
the floc will be independent of the initial solids concent>rationin
the pulp in which they are formed. Roberts (4)iridicated that
this i s not always true, as is also demonstrated in this paper.
I n order to compare t.he results of the Coe and Clevengcr
method and t'he Kynch method, batch settling teste were made o n
the following materials:
Metallurgical pulp, specific gravity 4.44-settled
to a high final concentration
Calcium carbonate (CaCOa), specific gravity 2.63--aettled
fairly rapidly to an intermediate final concentration
Cement rock A, specific gravity 2.56-a highly flocculent, slow-
settling material which had a low final concentration
Cement rock B, specific gravity 2.81-a segregating material
which settled E ~ O I V ~toJ ~a high final concentration
Figure 2 slio~rsthe sett,ling rate versus concentration as deter-
mined from batch tests on these materials using both the Coe and
Clevenger procedure and the Kynoh procedure. The results of
the two procedures check in the lovxx concentration ranges, dem-
onstrating that the methods are equlvalent in this range. Ilox-
ever, the results diverge as the concentration increases and this
must be due t o failure to conform to t,he additional assumption
entailed by the Coe and Clevenger procedure.
The settling velocity of a floc ma) be presumed to be a function
of the structure of the floc, as well as of the solids concentration.
In order to obtain an indication of the effect of initial pulp con-
centration on floc structure, batch tests mere made on each of the
four materials a t a series of different initial concrntrations. In
each case the solids were allon-ed to settle until the pulp line re-
mained at comtant height (final concentration). If the structure
of the floc were independent of the initial solids concentrat'ion, the
same final concentration should he reached in a11 such tests on a
given material. The results given in Table I show this is not the
case. The floc structure was apparently affected by this initial
concentration, and hence it must he assumed that the settling
rate also would be affected. Therefor?, Coe and Clevenger's ad-
ditional assumption is not necessarily valid.
It ram be concluded that results of the Kynch method will al-
il-ays be as good as those of the Coe and Clevenger method and
in many cases the results of the Kynch procedure should be more
valid. However, since settling characteristics niny vary with
rhanging initial pulp concentration, batch tests fo!lowing the
Kx-nch procedure should be made on pulp of the expected thick-
fairly rapidly caer feed concentration.
Good Correlation le Obicained
with Field Operating Results
.1 cor] elation between batch teats interpreted by the K p c h
procedure and actual field operating results was obtained during
a survey of the beet sugar industry. The operation of thickcncrs
in the beet sugar industry is subject to manv variables both from
plant t o plant and from day to day in any one plant. Some of the
more important variables with respect t o thickening area re-
quirements are tons of beets sliced per day, ciihic feet of juice per
ton of beets, amount of carbon d i o d e gas used, amount of lime
added, and quantity and type of flocculating agents added. I n
viem of these variables, the checks on unit areas, as determined
by the Kynch procedure and actual operating data, are eucel-
lrnt. These results are presented in Table II. KO tests could be
made according to the Coe and CIevenger procedure as th? floc
Etructure changed radically when the material was repulped.
Thickener unit areas have sometimes been erroneously based
solely on the initial settling rate of a cylinder of pulp a t feed con-
centration. By using this procedure, the lollowing unit area re-
quirements in pquare feet per ton solids per day of the four beet
sugar plant3 were calculated:

Plant A 2.4
Table:l. Effect of initial Concentration on Final Concentration Plant B 3.4
Plant C 2.0
________Conerntiation,
~- Grams/Liter
- ~
Plant D 2.5
hlctallulgical Pulp
Initial 182 1%: 242 203 338
Final 1082 iiin 1236 1273 1295
Ca1ciL;in Carbonate Table II. Thickener Unit Areas a t Beet Sugar Plants Deter-
Initial 27.3 70.5 1OR 201 mined from Operating Data and Batch Tests by Kynch
Final 761 795 810 859 Procedure
Unit 4rea. 8 Ft./
Initial 16 1 35.0 63 .n Ton Solids?i)ay
____^__

Final 210 202 307 Plant Location Actual Kync!i

Cement R o c b i i B A Idaho 6.98 6.88
B Colorado 19.4 16 . .5
Initial 151 BFO C Montana 5.23 5 zn
Final IO50 1265 D California 4.64 5.32

40 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY Vol. 47, No. P


T h e differences between these values and the actual values
shown in Table I1 clearly indicate the hazard of this procedure
and indicate the utility of the Kynch method.
Nomenclature
A = cross-sectional area, sq. ft.
C = Concentration, tons/cu. ft.
Co = initial concentration, tons/cu. ft.
C, = concentration of pulp at pulp-water interface, tons/cu. ft.
C , = concentration of underflow, tons/cu. ft.
Ho = initial height, ft.
H I = height of intercept of tangent t o point ( H z , ~and
) H axis,
ft.
H z = pulp height at time h, ft.
H , = height pulp would occupy if solids were at underflow
concentration, It.
t = time, days
t’ = time required to eliminate A(Hi -
H,) units of water,
days
= time at which pulp height is Hz,days
tu = time a t intersection of tangent to point (H2,h) and H.,
days
Dynamic Adiabatic Air Drying
with Bead-Type Desiccant
H. G. GRAYSON
Socony-Vacuum Oil Co., Inc., 26 Broadwoy, New York
s TRIPPED of individual refinements, dynamic gas drying
units operate on a few basic principles. The air or gas is
forced through t h e bed of desiccant until the bed reaches a certain
degree of saturation At this point the flow is directed to another
bed of desiccant while t h e first bed is being reactivated by the ap-
plication of heat. T h e most important properties of a desiccant
in dynamic dehumidification are its moisture adsorption capacity
and its ability to lower the dew point of the effluent gas stream.
When a humid gas stream passes through a bed of desiccant,
t h e first gas t h a t comes in contact Fith the desiccant is dried to
the dew point characteristic of the desiccant. The layer of
desiccant nearest the inlet becomes saturated rapidly during this
phase and little or no drying of the gas occurs as it approaches the
outlet side of the bed. As further increments of humid gas pass
through the bed, the zone of saturated desiccant progresses stead-
ily through the bed, but the dew point of the effluent gas remains
practically constant. As the zone approaches the outlet side, the
dew point of the effluent gas rises sharply and increases until it
equals t h a t of the incoming gas stream. The bed is completely
mturated at this point, and the amount of moisture adsorbed is
known a8 the equilibrium capacity. The magnitude of the equilib-
rium capacity depends on the relative humidity of the incoming
gas and is affected only slightly by temperature, as shown in
Figure 1 for the range 50’ to 150” F Furthermore, air velocity
and desiccant bed depth have no effect on this capacity (6).
I n actual operation, a drying unit is seldom run so t h a t the des-
iccant reaches its equilibrium capacity If it were, its drying
efficiency would decrease rapidly near the end of the cycle. A
typical adiabatic drying run dew point curve (Figure 2) indicates
a sharp rise in the dew point versus capacity curve. The instant
of eitluent dew point rise is known as t h e break point, and the
quantity of moisture adsorbed up t o that point is known as the
break point capacity, dry gas capacity, or capacity at maximum
efficiency. It is the break point capacity t h a t is of greatest im-
portance to the designer and operator of drying units producing
very low dew point effluents and not the equilibrium capacity
January 1955 INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
ENGINEERING. DESIGN. AND PROCESS DEVELOPMENT
U = upward layer velocity, ft./day
U A = unit area, sq. ft./ton solids/day
V = particle settling velocity, ft./day
V2 = particle settling velocity at concentration GI ft./day
Acknowledgment
T h e authors wish t o thank R. H. Van Note of the Dorr Co.,
for supplying the thickening data on the sugar beet industry.
literature Cited
(1) Anable, A., in Chemical Engineers Handbook (J. H. Perry, edi-
tor), 3rd ed., p. 397, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1950.
(2) Coe, H. S., and Clevenger, G. H., Trans. Am. Inst. Mining Engrs.,
55, 356 (1916).
(3) Kynch, G. J., Trans. Faraday SOC.,48, 161 (1952).
(4) Roberts, E. J., Mining Eng., 1, 61 (1949).
RECEIVED for review May 10, 1954. ACCEPTED October 6, 1054.
Presented before the Division of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry at the
126th Meeting of the AMERICAN CBEMICAL SOCIETY, h’ew York, X. Y .
4, N. Y.
Much of the data published on air drying by solid desiccants
have been obtained on laboratory scale equipment operated under
isothermal conditions-Le., the heat of adsorption was removed
by proper cooling to maintain a constant temperature (1,4, 6).
The equipment used for the studies described in this paper was of
sdmicommercial size containing 6.5 to 24.5 pounds of desiccant.
depending on bed depth, and runs were made under “adiabatic”
conditions.
I n industrial installations truly adiabatic adsorption is never
obtained because insulation is not sufficient to suppress heat losses
entirely. Consequently, the term “adiabatic” is considered as
meaning t h a t no attempt was made to remove the heat of ad-
sorption, and that the equipment was insulated.
Semicommercial Size Drying Tower I s
Operated under Adiabatic Conditions
The equipment, as shown in Figure 3, comprised the apparatus
used for the adsorption and desorption runs. The flow was as
follows:
Laboratory air from a 100-pound main passed through a 6 X
12 inch filter pot filled with a desiccant to remove any entrained
compressor oil or moisture, then through a fiberglass filter and
strainer to complete the cleanup. The air flow was controlled
by a hand-control valve and bypass. T h e control of the steam,
which was injected to regulate the inlet humidity, posed somewhat
of a problem, as the amount was as low as 0.04 pound per hour
for the low velocity-low humidity runs. The source of steam
from the 100-pound main was wet as the boilers were located
several thousand feet away. The steam required not only
throttling and accurate control, b u t also continuous bleeding
t o remove any condensed water. The eteam system consisted of
a hand-control valve (of the type used in instrument air throb
tling), a separator pot with bleed line and pressure gage, a needle
valve in the vapor line off the separator, and a restricting orifice
just upstream of the steam-air mixing point. The size of the
restricting orifice was determined by trial and error. Several
orifices were drilled; the smallest size was tried first and found to
be adequate to handle the total range of flows required.
41