Download New Process for Preventing Free Liquids During Transport

Dewatering Innovation
FOR SEDIMENTS, SLUDGES, & FILTER
MEDIA PACKAGING
PRESENTED BY:
WILLIAM BOGGIA, UCOR LGWO
Dewatering Innovation
 The Liquid and Gaseous Waste Operations (LGWO)
project, located at the Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, generates various sludges during their
wastewater treatment process that requires
dewatering.
 Original process consisted of placing PVC tubing in
the bottom of a 90 ft3 box and sluicing the sludge
into the box. Suction was then applied to the PVC
tubes to remove water that would settle out of the
material.
Dewatering Innovation
 Issues with the old process were:
 Process took several evolutions


Worker radiation exposure


60 to 65%
Transportation issues


Unnecessary exposure due to repeating the process
Near High Moisture content remained after dewatering


6 to 8 evolutions of pulling water
Potential for liquid to be released during transport
High disposal cost

$4,616/container
Dewatering Innovation
 Solutions for the “Old” disposal process
 Use Liquid-rated Super Sack - $1,652
 Additional Absorbent
 Evaluate containers for liquid at TSDRF
 Process/disposal cost of $4,616 per container.
Dewatering Innovation
 New method needed that would:
 Drain sludges more efficiently
 Decrease time for dewatering
 Decrease worker dose rates
 Reduce absorbent on top of sludges
 Reduce absorbent under the sludges
 Proof of process at outside TSDRF (one time only)
 Send future like-materials to NNSS
 Reduce costs
 Eliminate Liquid-rated Super Sacks
Dewatering Innovation
 Met with SPS, our vendor, to evaluate options
 Tests with angular sand and dewatering bags showed promise
Liquid Draining
Dewatering Innovation
 The first test with the new system
 Placed bags inside of frames
 Secured with 4” wide “hook and loop”
 Sluiced Zeolite into the bags
 Applied temporary lids when not in use
 Placed a Vacuum on the frames
 Drained for 72 hours
Dewatering Innovation
 The results:




Material was very dry
Zeolite was pulling away from the sides of the bag
Zeolite was at 44.4% moisture
Less time spent around the containers
Dewatering Innovation
 Loading the bags into the shipping containers
 Added absorbent on top of the zeolite
Dewatering Innovation
 Loading the bags into the shipping containers
 Closed bags to prepare for removal
Dewatering Innovation
 Loading the bags into the shipping containers
 Lifted bags from frames into shipping containers using a crane
Dewatering Innovation
 Desired versus actual results

Moisture content dropped from 60-65% to 44%

Dewatering time decreased from 2 months to 72 hours

Worker rad dose did not change significantly

Added absorbent on top and below the sludges
Dewatering Innovation
 Desired versus actual results (continued)

Annual cost savings (12 containers) of:

$49,494 savings for the first year and $81,281 for subsequent
years
$17,564 for liquid-rated vs dewatering bags
• $55,392 for disposal
• $1,890 in absorbent
• $6435 in labor
• Initial cost of $19,250 for 5 dewatering frames the first year
• Initial cost of $12,5370 proof-of-process (one-time)
Dewatering Innovation

Other uses for dewatering bags
Sump sediment
 Granular Activated Carbon
 Zeolite
 Filtering tank-bottoms
 Sewage treatment



This process can be utilized in many different operations.
The sieve size of the bags can be changed to promote optimal
drainage while retaining the waste material.
Dewatering Innovation
 Questions