The 12th World Filtration Congress

The 12th World Filtration Congress (WFC 12) will be held on April 11-15, 2016, at the Taipei International Convention Center and Taipei World Trade Center Exhibition Hall 1, Taipei, Taiwan. It is one of the most important conferences in filtration and separation field, and always attracts professionals, researches, students and exhibitors from all over the world to share information, technologies, products as well as strengthen connections and friendships.

Based on previous experiences of successful congresses, WFC 12 aims to establish international academic authority in the filtration industry, create opportunities for young scholars to participate in international academic activities as well as stimulate commercial activities and industrial development. On top of that, the exhibition will provide an excellent opportunity to display state-of-the-art technologies and instruments, as well as exchange ideas in the broad fields of Filtration and Separation.

The topics of WFC 12 are listed below:

  • Solid-Liquid Separation
  • Aerosol Filtration and Separation, Air Filtration and Gas Separations
  • Membrane Processes
  • Filter Media
  • Testing, Instrumentation, Control
  • Simulation and Modeling
  • Product Related Separation Processes
  • Special Topics

Call for Papers
All participants are invited to submit abstracts for oral or poster presentation. The organizer provides a platform for everyone to present his excellent work.

The main themes are listed below:

  • Membrane Filtration
  •  Gas Filtration
  •  Liquid Filtration

Deadline of Abstract Submission is June 30, 2015
Please visit our website for more details at

Exhibition at WFC 12

Exhibition Features

  • Fully detect and understand international market trends in filter equipment, devices and systems.
  • More than 200 booths and 3000 visitors gather together. Exhibitors can expand domestic, international as well as potential market effectively.
  • It is the best way to build up exhibitors’ corporate image advertising. More than 20 domestic and international media are expected to report this exhibition.

Why should companies support and be one of exhibitor in WFC 12?

  • Demonstrate your company’s leadership in the field of filtration
  • Reach the international platform for all industries covering every market segment
  • Great opportunities to network with experts and basic scientists
  • Access to highly targeted group within your practice area
  • Expanded value due to intensive promotional communications
  • Exhibit and distribute your marketing and promotional materials

For more information visit:

Oil Filtration Systems, LLC. Expands, Moves to New Manufacturing Facility

Oil Filtration Systems, LLC. has relocated to an enlarged and improved facility in Boerne, Texas. The new facility, about one mile from its previous location, is approximately double the size at 57,000 square feet. Over $900,000 has been invested by the company in manufacturing efficiency improvements at the facility.

In addition to manufacturing capacity, the expanded facility also includes storage space for the company’s comprehensive rental equipment inventory of over 100 systems, which are used by customers around the world. The company’s rental fleet is employed by industrial companies such as refineries, power plants and paper mills to remove impurities from oils and fuels. Systems are available for deployment 24/7 and can be shipped the same day as requested in emergency situations.

“We are proud to expand our plant in Boerne, which has been our home for the past 15 years,” said Ken Kaihlanen, vice president. “Now, with the efficiencies of our new facility, we anticipate further success with our fluid purification equipment.”

Oil Filtration Systems (OFS) manufactures purification systems for a wide range of industrial oils and fuels. By preventing the unnecessary disposal of millions of gallons of oil and fuels every year, OFS plays a significant role in helping to protect the environment. The company designs and manufacturers an extensive variety of systems to remove contaminants such as water, particulate, entrained gas, and acid from industrial fluids. OFS is located at 135 Enterprise Parkway, Boerne, Texas 78006.

Danaher to Acquire Pall Corporation for $13.8 Billion

Danaher Corporation announced May 13h that it has entered into a definitive merger agreement with Pall Corporation pursuant to which Danaher will acquire all of the outstanding shares of Pall for $127.20 per share in cash, or a total enterprise value of approximately $13.8 billion, including assumed debt and net of acquired cash.

Pall is a leading global provider of filtration, separation and purification solutions that remove contaminants or separate substances from a variety of solids, liquids and gases. Decades of work by Pall’s filtration engineers and scientists have built a highly-respected brand on which customers rely to solve their most difficult purification problems across the broad spectrum of life sciences and industry. In its fiscal year that ended July 2014, Pall generated consolidated revenues of $2.8 billion, with $1.5 billion from its Life Sciences segment and $1.3 billion from its Industrial segment. The Life Sciences segment serves customers in the fast-growing biopharmaceutical market, as well as food & beverage and medical end markets. The Industrial segment serves customers in the process technologies, aerospace and microelectronics markets.

Danaher’s President and CEO, Thomas P. Joyce, Jr., said, “Pall is a highly attractive business, with approximately 75% recurring revenues, mid-single digit organic growth and a solid margin profile. Its best-in-class technology, combined with the broadest, most technically-advanced solutions, make it the premier brand in the filtration industry. Pall will provide us a leading business with significant runway for expansion and strengthens our life sciences position in the strategically-attractive, high-growth biopharmaceutical market. With the Danaher Business System as a foundation, Pall associates will have the tools to accelerate new product development and improve operational efficiency in the years to come. We look forward to welcoming the Pall team to Danaher.”

The acquisition has been unanimously approved by the Board of Directors of each company, and the Pall Board of Directors has unanimously recommended that Pall shareholders approve the transaction. The merger is subject to customary conditions, including approval by Pall’s shareholders, receipt of applicable regulatory approvals and the absence of a material adverse effect on Pall. The transaction is expected to be completed around the end of calendar year 2015.

Danaher is a global science and technology innovator committed to helping its customers solve complex challenges and improving quality of life around the world. Its family of world-class brands has leadership positions in some of the most demanding and attractive industries, including health care, environmental and industrial. The Company’s globally diverse team of 71,000 associates is united by a common culture and operating system, the Danaher Business System. In 2014, Danaher generated $19.9 billion in revenue and its market capitalization exceeded $60 billion. For more information please visit:

Coolant Filtration Systems Need Effective Fluid Make-Up Procedures

By James Joseph

January/February 2014 | Volume 34, No. 1

A good filtration system is designed to extend waterbase coolant life by keeping it constantly clean at a tolerable level. Coolant life extension is good economics but it carries more responsibility in managing the fluid. During this extended life, coolant could be lost from the system through normal spillage, carryout on parts, or evaporation.

All or any of these affect the strategy for replenishing lost coolant known as make-up.

Effective make-up procedures are needed to maintain fluid levels but also to protect the coolant from unwanted chemical reactions. The steps are simple but often the awareness of their importance is lacking.

  1. Pre mix the concentrate with some water before adding it to the system.
  2. Use treated water such as DI or RO for the make-up.
  3. Add to the system where make-up is mixed before going to the point of work.
  4. Monitor concentration routinely.

Concentrate should be premixed with some water before it is introduced into the tank. The expectation that it will mix in the tank of dirty coolant if it is added as a concentrate will be disappointing. The free oil will not go into solution that quickly. Test this statement by adding some oil in a beaker of clean water and see that it takes some time. Also if the addition is on the top of a tank with floating tramp oil and debris, the concentrate will not make it to the solution. It will stay as a sludge or take on the characteristic of tramp oil.

As more water is added for make-up due to evaporation it carries in dissolved salts that stay in solution and grow in concentration. With continued evaporation and make-up over the extended life of the coolant, the salt content can grow to levels where they can cause an intolerable reduction of coolant performance. This is reflected in a drop in pH, parts staining, and formation of undesirable soaps and breakdown of the stability of the solution.

To protect against this, make-up water should be either de-ionized or sent through a reverse osmosis unit. The de-ionized or “RO” water will come into the system free of salts so the salt concentration will stabilize. Water softeners may not be the answer since they merely exchange one salt for another. De-ionizing and RO units are readily available in moderate capacities as complete modules. Minimizing losses wherever possible will reduce make-up water needs so a packaged water treatment unit should not be prohibitive in size and cost.

Usually RO or DI water is not used for the initial mix. It may cause foaming because the coolant is clean and the water is “hungry.” Only the makeup water should be treated.

Make-up water and soluble oil should be added in the dirty compartment or in the “dirty” side of the system. The fresh addition is to be thoroughly mixed with the older solution before it is sent to the work. If it is not mixed into the main body of coolant, the operation may be subjected to a lean coolant to hurt the operation; or too rich of a coolant where excessive foaming will occur.

When the coolant is lost through evaporation, this means the water phase is lost at a higher rate than the soluble oil. Therefore, more water must be added to the system. Concentration of the oil and water mixture must be continually monitored so make-up dosages can be adjusted to maintain the desired ratio.

When coolant is lost mainly due to carry-out or spillage, the ratio of water to oil loss is the same but with evaporation still a factor in the losses, the concentration still should be monitored.

Figures 1, 2, 3, and 4 show simple schematics for typical make-up functions. Schematics (instead of photos) are offered since they reflect how the options work for a system.

Figure 1 shows a single float valve for one liquid. It can be for water only where oil is added independently, or a premix of both fluids.filt-news-coolant -filtration-systems-1

Figure 2 reflects a dual liquid make-up unit, which can provide an automatic input of both liquids. It senses a “make-up on” level in the tank and adds a monitored amount of water and a related amount of oil. The bubbler level controller could also include two more levels for low and high level alarms.filt-news-coolant -filtration-systems-2


Figure 3 indicates an adjustable venturi educator, which pulls a controlled amount of oil from the drum (tote) as water flows through the eductor. The venturi is adjustable so the amount of oil blended with the water can be changed.

filt-news-coolant -filtration-systems-3

A metering piston pump can be used in place of the eductor to accomplish the same objective. The pump is more expensive but can be justified for critical installations.

Figure 4 is a concept where there is a larger mixing station for multiple machines or a large central system. The module has a feed pump pulling oil from a drum or tote. Most mixing stations use a relatively large reservoir with a low RPM mixer to blend the solution. The level sensing switch would automatically monitor a ratio of water and oil. Once the fluid is mixed, the make-up flow can be initiated by an operator or by a level-control to feed the blend into the system. As shown the liquid can be pump-fed or flow by gravity.

filt-news-coolant -filtration-systems-4

There are two basic options to perform the routine monitoring of the concentration.

Remote tank side monitoring

  1. There are many hand-held measuring instruments, which can be used.
  2. Routine checks should be occasionally verified with follow-up laboratory checks by the plant or coolant supplier.
  3. Caution is advised to not let dissolved tramp oil mislead the readings. Tramp oil is not always free oil since some of it may go into solution and influence the reading.

Actual concentration analysis in the laboratory with standard practices will reveal accurate readings of the oil concentration and isolate the tramp oil factor.

For more information contact:

Joseph Marketing
120 Richmond Hill Court, Williamsburg, Virginia, 23185
Tel/Fax: 1-757-565-1549

Increasing System Efficiency With Ultrafiltration In Industrial Water Applications

By Katariina Majamaa, Marketing Manager, Dow Water & Process Solutions

January/February | Volume 34, No. 1

filtration-news-ultrification-1Water is a vital commodity needed for energy-generation and commercial and industrial operations. Industrial reverse osmosis (RO) applications provide water for manufacturing, fabricating, processing, washing, steam generation and cooling, and for incorporating into the products themselves. Thus, it can be understood why industry is one of the largest consumers of water worldwide, accounting for approximately 22 percent of the total global water usage. Consequently, increasing water scarcity has driven companies to seek out both time-tested and new ways to purify water and promote water reuse that are both cost-effective and environmentally conscious. The driver for change is both the increasing price of water and the access to good quality water in close proximity to factories, especially in areas suffering from natural water scarcity.

Water demineralization using RO membranes has had a long and successful history in water treatment for industrial manufacturing. As industry strives for greater efficiency, reliability and compact system design, pressurized hollow-fiber ultrafiltration has become an increasingly appealing pre-treatment technology, both in new and existing industrial installations. With that said, there is a growing interest to evaluate ultrafiltration to replace existing pretreatment, especially in cases with varying feed water qualities, such as in regions that experience drought.

Ultrafiltration (UF) is a barrier technology with a pore size small enough to remove water pollutants, including silt, colloids, pathogens, and other organics. While other configurations are possible, UF membranes are commonly seen as hollow fibers bundled together in a pressure housing (Fig. 1). Filtration is performed by applying relatively low pressure (7-25 psi) that forces water through the walls of the hollow fibers. A wide range of polymers have been used in UF membranes, but polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) is the most commonly used today because it exhibits a strong balance of strength, elongation and chlorine and oxidant resistance.

UF modules that use an outside-in philosophy (Fig. 2) offer several advantages to inside-out configurations. First, there is more space on the outside of the fibers for solids to accumulate, so the treatment process can run longer between backwashes, making it easier to flush solids out and reduce fiber plugging. Second, there is more surface area on the outside of the fibers, so the same amount of water can be produced at lower flux, reducing the pressure drop through the fiber, thereby saving energy. Third, for vertically-mounted modules that use an outside-in flow path, an air scrub can be feasibly added before the permeate backwash and, in some cases simultaneously with the backwash, to help sweep foulants away.

The most common operation configuration with hollow-fiber UF is dead-end filtration. Low concentrations of chemicals, such as sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), can be used during the backwash to aid the cleaning impact. During a typical backwash, chemicals are in contact with the fiber for a short period of time. On a less frequent basis (approximately once every 0.5-7 days), chemically-enhanced cleaning with longer contact time is often recommended. This involves adding a chemical cleaner, such as an acid, to remove colloids and inorganic salts from the membrane pores or a mixture of caustic and chlorine to remove organics or biofoulants. Even less frequently (approximately once every 1-3 months), UF modules can be cleaned more thoroughly by an offline clean-in-place (CIP) program. By combining these various cleaning methods, the performance of a UF module can be maintained for 5-10 years or more.


Compared to conventional, non-membrane pretreatments, ultrafiltration offers higher efficiency in the removal of suspended solids, microorganisms and colloidal matter, which are all common causes of operational issues in RO systems. UF technology is more capable of handling varying feed water qualities and removes the risk of particle carry-over often seen in conventional filtration techniques. As well, UF is a suitable treatment technology for a variety of source waters, including surface water, sea water and wastewater. The more fluctuating or challenging the feed water source is, the better the benefits of UF are seen. Regardless of feed water type, UF sustains a constant supply of high-quality feed water to downstream RO, allowing a more compact and cost-efficient RO system design. By using UF systems, operators can improve uptime, water consistency and operational reliability performance.

Compared to conventional pretreatment, UF membranes provide high quality filtrate due to their fine pores, typically with turbidity below 0.1 NTU and SDI below 2 %/min. UF membranes can reject by size exclusion pathogens that are immune to chlorination techniques (e.g., Gryptosporidium and Giardia parasites). Despite requiring more focus on sustained permeability and productivity, UF systems also provide greater automation than conventional alternatives, including sand filters and multi-media filtration systems. UF produces more stable water quality without the need to monitor the filter or ripening time (breakthrough), or ensuring appropriate layering of multi-media after backwash.

The potential for lower downstream cost, based on better and more consistent water quality, can also be achieved with a UF system. UF as pretreatment allows higher design flux in the RO stage, as well as lower requirements for membrane cleaning, and, ultimately, lower replacement rates by enabling an RO feed water with lower fouling tendency. Installing an UF pretreatment to an existing RO facility could, for example, allow increased water production without expanding the RO stage itself. And, because of reduced chemical consumption and limited usage of coagulant in the UF process, there is a reduced environmental concern for wastewater disposal.


In 2010, an integrated UF-RO plant using UF technology was retrofitted to replace existing sand filters. The plant’s source water was good quality well water (approximately < 2 NTU of turbidity, <5 mg/L of TOC, < 5mg/L SS). UF was chosen as a pretreatment to ensure consistent supply of high-quality water and reduce overall operational costs. As a result of the retrofit, the RO system CIP frequency reduced from every 4-6 months when it was pretreated by the sand filters to none after more than two years of operation.

The process scheme can be seen in Figure 3. The UF system operates with a transmembrane pressure (TMP) in the range of 5.8-8.7 psi at an operational flux of 35 GFD, remaining stable by only regular, chemical free, backwash every 60 minutes with filtrate water. This corresponds to a UF plant recovery of over 95 percent. During the first year of operation, only one off-line chemical cleaning was conducted, and currently the CIP is performed every 4-6 months. The UF filtrate has an average turbidity below 0.05 NTU (100% below 0.1 NTU) and SDI15 < 0.5%/min, which makes it very suitable to feed the RO plant.

The second case study example comes from a power industry application, in which an integrated UF-RO membrane system was used to convert secondary municipal effluent to cooling towers and boiler feed water to be used in an industry that uses biomass for power generation. The main challenge of this plant was to treat water with highly variable water quality and total suspended solids (TSS) excursions, varying between 5-50 mg/L. When low pressure membrane filtration is discussed in this industry, the question centers around the difference between microfiltration and UF. Compared to RO, microfiltration and UF has much less standardization. Due to generally larger pore sizes, microfiltration membranes tend to operate at lower transmembrane pressure than UF, but sometimes it is overlooked that larger pore typically indicate less retention of contaminants. This particular plant was initially operated with a microfiltration pretreatment based on a different fiber material and pore size. The main reason for retrofit was due to the higher chlorine tolerance of the PVDF fiber material. Higher chlorine tolerance is a clear benefit when operated at waters with higher fouling potential and cleaning frequency. Apart from the membrane system, the majority of the auxiliary equipment, such as tanks, piping, feed, backwash and chemical dosing pumps, remained the same. This significantly reduced the cost of the retrofit. A two- month pilot trial preceded the final design and execution of the full-scale plant, which began operation in May 2011.

The system’s process description can be seen in Figure 4. The UF system is divided into two lines with 9 UF elements (829 ft2 active area) and operated to produce up to 350 gpm (265 gpm design capacity). The UF system operates with TMP in the vicinity of 5.8 psi at an operational flux of 26-35 GFD when membranes are clean, and can rise to 16 psi when membranes are fouled. Standard backwashes are performed with UF filtrate water are conducted every 50 minutes with regular chemically enhanced backwashes to ensure stable operation and maintain TMP. This cleaning strategy has demonstrated to be very efficient — only one offline CIP had been performed after 10 months of operation. Change of the low-pressure membrane type has brought tangible benefits in the RO stage. The CIP frequency has been reduced from 1-2 weeks, with the former membrane pretreatment to a much more sustainable frequency of 3-4 months.


Pressurized hollow-fiber UF has become as increasingly appealing as an RO pretreatment technology for industrial plants interested in cost-efficient system optimization and reliability, resulting in maximized water usage. In fact, ultrafiltration membrane treatment is likely to witness 15 percent compound annual growth from 2008 to 2015 globally, of which industrial wastewater applications are already on the rise. The use of UF provides several advantages, including improved filtrate water quality, lower footprint, lower RO stage cost, and the ability to cope with varying feed water qualities.

Increasing production volume and technological improvements have reduced capital cost of membrane systems and operating cost to the point that membrane treatment is now seen as a viable alternative in many water and wastewater applications. In addition to the more reliable water production and lower pretreated water operational costs, UF technology allows for the reduction of cleaning and maintenance frequency, as well as higher RO operational flux, ultimately leading to a potential reduction in the capital expenses of the RO system.

About the Author

Katariina Majamaa is the marketing manager at Dow Water & Process Solutions (DW&PS) for Heavy Industry markets. She is responsible for developing and implementing global short- to medium-term strategies with the objective to grow value for end users and for heavy industry applications requiring ultrafiltration, reverse osmosis, nanofiltration, ion exchange and fine particle filtration technologies. To contact her, email: