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.

2. USE TREATED WATER
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.

3. ADD TO THE SYSTEM WHERE IT WILL BE MIXED
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.

4. MONITOR THE CONCENTRATION
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.

EQUIPMENT
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

MONITORING CONCENTRATION
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.

LABORATORY CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS
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
Email: josephmarketing@verizon.net

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 101
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.

filtration-news-ultrification-2

UF AS AN RO PRETREATMENT
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.

filtration-news-ultrification-3

CASE STUDY: RETROFITTING TO UF
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.

CASE STUDY: THROUGH RETROFIT
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.

filtration-news-ultrification-4

SUMMARY
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: kmajamaa@dow.com.

Water Filtration Solutions: Municipal To Industrial

By Dan Morosky, Rosedale Products, Inc.

January/February 2015 | Volume 34, No. 1

Rosedale Products, Inc. is a leading technology developer in the field of liquid filtration systems and waste minimization products for customers around the globe. Rosedale’s engineering achievements have produced an exceptional product line that includes high performance filtration solutions for multiple industries. Rosedale technicians help customers find high-performing, cost effective approaches to filtration needs.

filtration-news-rosedale-1

 

MODEL 8302P OR NCO8135
Single Stage Stainless Steel Housings

The Model 8302P and NCO8135 high-capacity filters offer an exceptional value in Giardia Cryptosporidium Removal applications. The system is approved for use in Colorado and Oregon and has met all the EPA LT2 guidelines. Each housing provides large containment capacity combined with a rugged design rated to 150 psi. It incorporates an eyenut cover that is easily removed, reducing time spent on cartridge change-out.

 

FEATURES

  • NSF 61 listed
  • Low pressure drops
  • Permanently piped housings
  • Covers are O-ring sealed
  • 304 stainless steel construction
  • All housings are electro polished to resist adhesion of dirt and scale
  • Adjustable-height legs, standard
  • ASME code stamp available

filtration-news-rosedale-2
MODEL 4
Basket Strainer and Bag Filtersfiltration-news-rosedale-3

Model 4 strainer/filter housings are made in two sizes and four pressure ratings. In all cases, covers are easily removed without special tools, and the basket or bag is easily cleaned or replaced.

Choose between straining (removing particles down to 74 micron size) or filtering a fluid (removing particles down to 1 micron). This will direct users to choose the correct basket when ordering.

FEATURES

  • Low pressure drops
  • Permanently piped housings
  • Covers are O-ring sealed
  • Carbon steel, or stainless steel (304 or 316) construction for housings
  • All housings are electro polished to resist adhesion of dirt and scale
  • Easy to clean
  • Adjustable-height legs, optional
  • O-ring seals: Buna N, EPR, Viton® and Teflon®
  • ASME code stamp available on select models
  • Liquid displacers for easier servicing
  • Four pressure ratings: 200 psi (with clamp cover) and 150, 300, or 500 psi (with eyenut cover)
  • Duplex units are available
  • Pipe sizes 3/4 thru 2-inch, NPT or flanged (standard 150 class flange)
  • Two basket depths: 6, or 12 inches (nominal)

Model 4 offers an optional T-bolt closure, which includes an integrated handle within the hinged coverlid.

ADDITIONAL HOUSING OPTIONS

  • Bag filter hold-down devices
  • Sanitary construction
  • Different outlet connections
  • Higher pressure ratings
  • Extra-length legs
  • Heat jacketing
  • Epoxy coating
  • Displacers
  • Magnets

filtration-news-rosedale-4MODEL OT
Bag Filter Housing guarantees a 360° positive seal for flows to 100 gpm*

PERFORMANCE
Model OT filter provides optimum filtration performance when combined with Rosedale’s high capacity filter bags. This unique design ensures a 360-degree positive seal and media compression, eliminating the potential for bypass. Unfiltered liquid and debris does not accumulate above the filter bag and contaminate the clean fluid area during change-out. Fluid passes through the bag from inside to outside. The Rosedale Model OT filter ensures an even flow into the filter bag where contaminate is contained for easy disposal.

CONSTRUCTION
The Model OT housing is a durable, high capacity filter with an uncompromising welded construction to meet ASME Section VIII Code requirements. The cover is hinged and fastened with swing bolts for quick access and easy bag change-out. They have a high quality electro polished finish to resist adhesion of dirt and scale, making routine maintenance fast and simple. Model OT filters are available in two sizes with flanged or threaded connections.

It can be customized with several options, including gauges and switches. A wide range of filter bags or cartridges (rated 0.5 absolute to 100 nominal) with various surface areas can be utilized in this housing.

FEATURES

  • Accepts all major competitive brands of bags
  • Permanently piped housings are opened without special tools
  • Carbon or stainless steel housings
  • Covers are O-ring sealed
  • All sealing surfaces are blancher ground
  • O-ring seals: Buna N, EPR, Viton® and Teflon®
  • 150 psi rated housing
  • ASME Code Stamp available
  • Uses standard #1, #2 or 500 series PL cartridges
  • 1/4-inch NPT gauge ports and vent connection
  • 1/2-inch NPT drain connection
  • Adjustable-height tripod leg assembly

FILTER MEDIA OPTIONS
Rosedale offers a wide range of high quality low cost utility grade bags, basic filter cartridges, and high performance filter cartridges.

Filtration News Rosedale 740 CartridgeFILTER CARTRIDGE FEATURE
PS-740-PPP-356 maximizes dirt- holding capacity and meets LT2 requirements.

PS-740-PPP-356 elements are manufactured in a unique “Y” pleat arrangement that optimizes physical size and maximizes effective surface area. The large surface area provides a low fluid flux rate maximizing dirt containment. The element fits into the Rosedale NCO8135 housing or can retrofit 8302P housings with an adaptor basket. The end caps are heat sealed for high efficiency performance. The O-ring seal insures sealing and eliminates bypass.

*Based on housing only. Fluid viscosity, filter bag used, and expected dirt loading should be considered when sizing a filter.

For more information contact:

Rosedale Products, Inc.
3730 West Liberty Road
Ann Arbor, MI 48106
Tel: 800-821-5373 or 734-665-8201
Fax: 734-665-2214
Email: Filters@RosedaleProducts.com | Website: www.rosedaleproducts.com

Tiny Particles And The Bigger Picture

Topics Covered At Edana’s Filtrex 2014 Conference In Berlin Ranged From Sector Specific And Immediate Issues To The Broader Future of Transportation And Manufacturing

BY Adrian Wilson, European Correspondent

November/December 2014 | Volume 33, No. 6

filtration-news-edanas-Filtrex-2014

Discussing fuel filtration at Filtrex were (left to right): Philippe Wijns, Hollingsworth & Vose; Harald Banzhaf, Mann+Hummel; Andrew Shepard, Hollingsworth & Vose; Mark Wolfinger, Lubrizol; and Tobias Asam, SGS Germany.

Single-stage nonwoven filter media are no longer sufficient for meeting water separation efficiency requirements in modern fuel tanks and diesel fuel systems. This was one of the key messages to be taken away from the EDANA Filtrex 2014 conference held in Berlin, Germany, from October 1-2.

Another couple of messages were rather bigger in terms of their implications — that the continued growth of the global automotive industry can no longer be taken for granted, and that digital industrialization is poised to change everything anyway.

RETHINKING DESIGN
During a panel discussion on fuel filtration, Andrew Shepard, director of global market management at Hollingsworth & Vose Engine and Filtration said that new regulations for diesel and other fuels are currently impacting all along the supply chain in respect of:

  • Emissions requirements
  • Fuel quality
  • Biofuel impact
  • Sustainability
  • Service intervals
  • Compliance testing

All of this, he said, is resulting in the need to rethink filter design, because at the moment, particulate removal is the key goal.

In diesel engines, however — and those with bio content, which are even more vulnerable — water removal needs to be the first priority.

Water enters the fuel tank and diesel fuel in a number of ways. Sub-standard fuel with a high water content can be a possible cause, as can misfuelling, the ingress of water via the fuel tank ventilation or condensation.

The consequences include corrosion and cavitation on injectors, valves and the injection pump — which can ultimately lead to a system failure. In addition, free water can cause microbiological growth and corrosion processes, which frequently lead to premature blockage of the fuel filter or pitting corrosion of the filter housing.

Today, commercial vehicle engines are developed for global use. Modern fuel filter systems must therefore meet a variety of demands in terms of fuel quality, contamination, water content and use with regard to their filtration and separation requirements.

filtration-news-edanas-Filtrex-2014-2

Mann+Hummel’s Multigrade introduces a three-stage filtration concept to cope with new fuel demands.

SINGLE-STAGE CONCEPTS
In the past, single-stage concepts were sufficient to meet the requirements for water separation efficiency. For this purpose, the filter element was equipped with a water barrier layer on the flow side. This concept, however, is no longer adequate for pressure side filter operation or for the use of modern low-sulphur fuels, which contain biofuels and have a high additive content, in order to effectively protect the injection system from damage.

If water from the fuel tank enters into the fuel circuit, it is broken up into small droplets in the low-pressure fuel pump. After several fuel cycles, extremely small droplets may form. A stable fuel/water emulsion then forms, which does not separate, even over several days.

Separating small droplets presents a challenge for fuel filter systems — filter elements that are based on a water repellent effect on the flow side of the filter cannot ensure water separation in the long term. The small droplets are not separated at the surface but as a result of their size, are forced through the pores of the filter medium. The hydrophobic properties are impaired to such an extent, particularly by additive components in biofuel and separated impurities, that the water separation capability is completely lost over the service life of the filter.

MULTIGRADE
“The more contaminated the fuel, the greater the filtration requirement,” said Harald Banzhaf, director of R&D in liquid filter elements at Mann+Hummel, headquartered in Ludwigsburg, Germany. “The injection technology in common rail systems already operates at 2,500 bar pressure and now Bosch, for one, is talking about going up to 3,000 bar, which will require even cleaner fuels.”

In order to ensure reliable water separation over the service life of the filter element, Mann+Hummel has developed a three-stage filtration concept, which is used in its latest Multigrade filtration modules.

With this concept, the fuel flows from the outside to the inside of the filter element. In the first stage, solid particles are filtered out and it’s crucial that the coalescer and the hydrophobic fabric are not contaminated by particles. The coalescer then retains the water droplets and combines them to form much larger drops. In the third stage, the hydrophobic screen fabric prevents the drops from following the fuel into the injection system. The separated water itself is collected in the filtration module, detected there and emptied out either manually or automatically. Thanks to the high water separation efficiencies that can be achieved, the injection systems and commercial vehicle engines are reliably protected.

MOBILITY
But while there may be currently more than fifty filters in an average passenger car or truck — contributing to functions ranging from the performance of the engine, oil and fuel consumption through to the quality of the air in the cabin — Philip G. Gott, of leading U.S. analyst IHS Automotive, based in Lexington, Mass., said that the world is in the early stages of a massive shift in consumer preferences for personal mobility.

Congestion, he said, now costs cities billions each year. It impedes the efficient movement of goods and as a result manufacturing within them stalls, with employers moving out.

“At the same time, it’s beneficial to keep people clustered in cities, so mass transportation infrastructure and alternatives to the car are essential for progress. Car ownership peaks as a function of population density and at ten thousand people per square kilometer it starts to go down.”

The growth of the new light vehicle market, he predicted, may soon level out at an annual 100 million units, which will mean 30 million less of them will be produced each year than has previously been forecasted going forward. And by 2035, this will mean there will be 260 million fewer light vehicles on the roads than there are today, as older cars reach the end of life and are not replaced.

Asian cities, Gott suggested, will not grow to the motorization rates of the West, and indeed, Beijing has already imposed a cap on new vehicle registrations to keep the overall number of vehicles down to 150 per thousand people.

“Such measures will mean slower growth for replacement filters in the next 20 years, but at the same time, systems that improve air quality in mass transit and other shared vehicles will provide new opportunities,” he concluded.

NEW MANUFACTURING
Another keynote speaker at Filtrex 2014, Robert Glaze, of the Brenva Institute, based in Colorado Springs, Colo., believes even greater changes are in the pipeline.

Five years ago, said Glaze, overall technology R&D could be divided into one third biotech, one third new energy and one third communications and computation.

“Today, it’s one third biotech, one third computational science and one third new manufacturing, and digital industrialization is the next revolution,” he said. “3D and 4D printing is leading to a rapid materials evolution and machines are becoming ever smarter. There will be end-to-end automation as machines replace humans at an ever faster rate.”

Some of the things that are coming next, he suggested, include:

  • Brain-computer interface and affective technologies
  • Multi-functional additive manufacturing and molecular recombination
  • Predictive and anomaly analytics
  • Increasingly rapid prototyping for speed to market
  • 3D bio-printing, bio-chips and neuro-technologies

4D PRINTING
“MIT has already developed context-aware materials via 4D printing, and 3D printing is already more sophisticated than you think,” said Glaze. “Machines will soon become co-workers and colleagues. The major chemical companies, meanwhile, are very worried about molecular recombination technology because it threatens to put them out of business. This all implies changes in corporations and manufacturing companies as much as it does manufacturing methods.

“We’re going to see the disintermediation of labor as flow analytics replaces individual metrics and organizations evolve into non-human-based ecosystems, along with distributed intelligence in networks, systems and, ultimately, humans. This will be a major challenge, and already, Apple has plans in place to eliminate its entire existing supply and retail chains — involving a million people around the world — in the next five years. Instead of holding inventory, it now plans to install its own huge 3D printing machines strategically around the world.”

 

AFS Attendance Reaches Post-Recession Record At Fall Conference

November/December 2014 | Volume 33, No. 6

Attendence at the AFS Fall Conference was more than double that of last year’s, signaling that perhaps the long recession in the USA is over and the industry is upbeat about the future.

Attendence at the AFS Fall Conference was more than double that of last year’s, signaling that perhaps the long recession in the USA is over and the industry is upbeat about the future.

The 2014 American Filtration & Separations Society Fall Conference realized double attendance compared to the 2013 event covering the topic of filtration media. This is a positive sign the recession is drifting into the rear-view mirror and the industry is beginning to look forward to the future with a positive embrace. The 2014 Conference titled “Next Generation Filtration Media…Embracing Challenges” was held at the Hilton Rosemont at Chicago O’Hare Airport, October 13-16. Conference co-chairs were Andrew Goodby, Ahlstrom Filtration, LLC; Sebastian Stahl, DuPont; and Sneha Swaminathan, Hollingsworth & Vose.

The conference began with broad contingent of both domestic and foreign attendees taking part in eight in-depth courses, all taught by industry specialists at its half- and full-day short courses. The AFS has been offering these courses on various filtration, separation and coalescing subjects since its inception in 1988. This fall’s offerings were (1) Introduction to Liquid Filtration, (2) Filter Media Design for Liquid Filtration Applications’ (3) Filtration, Separation & Coalescing Media Use and Markets; (4) Ultrafiltration Membranes; (5) Liquid Filtration Testing Basics; (6) Microfiltration Membranes; (7) Nanofiber Technology In Filtration; and (8) Advanced Engine Filtration. Each AFS course provides CEU credits. As an added conference activity, AFS offered two tours; one at the University of Illinois (Chicago) Filtration Facility and another following the conference at the Stickney Water Reclamation Facility with transportation provided for those attending.

KEYNOTERS
The conference introductory plenary speaker was VP Technology and Chief Technology Officer, Dr. John Fitzgerald, from Hollingsworth & Vose. The AFS luncheon speakers were the National University of Singapore, Director of Center of Nanofibers and Nanotechnology, Dr. Seeram Ramakrishna and Darrell Reneker, University of Akron, who spoke on the topic Nanofiber Morphology of PVDF.

NEW AFS CONFERENCE TOPICS
This fall’s conference once again consisted of three concurrent tracks with 72 presentations including a specific AFS on-going plan to offer at least one complete track on Air Filtration, not limited to this conference but for future conferences as well, in addition to its historical Liquid Filtration Separation and Coalescing tracks. Beginning in the spring of 2015 in Charlotte, N.C. and future spring and fall events, the AFS will also add, in addition, one more new track — the Theoretical, Applied Science and Design track specifically for those who have specific interests in academic and/or industrial basic research, applied science and design subjects.

The leadership of the AFS has felt for some time that it needs additional tracks based on requests of varied tailored interests by its members and is responding accordingly with Air Filtration and the Theoretical, Applied Science and Design tracks to start. As interest grows in one or more of these or other areas and there appears to be a large enough and growing demand, the society will add new subjects and/or multiple tracks on related subjects at both its future spring and fall conferences. The society anticipates growth on a number of fronts in future years and is developing the needed infrastructure at this time in anticipation of evolution and expansion of the Society.

CORPORATE SPONSORS

At the Corporate Sponsors meeting, a review of existing and new programs were revealed, including the announcement of booths at future conferences beginning modestly with a limited number of booths at the 2015 AFS Power Generation Conference in Charlotte, N.C. Immediately prior to the recent business recession, the AFS typically had 70-80 booths at its events and well over 120 booths, just shy of 500 presentations when it hosted the World Filtration Congress in 2004 in New Orleans. With continuing growth of Corporate Sponsorships and the addition of a number of new benefits, the leadership of the AFS feels it’s time to begin once again, in a modest way, to offer booths as well as continuing to offer tabletop locations for those sponsors and non-sponsors who wish to have tabletops. For the 2016 spring Houston conference, which will focus on oil, gas and chemical industry filtration needs, the AFS is also exploring the possibly of much larger displays in addition to booths as the conference organizer has had substantial interest in even larger exhibits.

The AFS is fortunate to have a strong loyal industry following and leadership of many dedicated companies and individual volunteers. The Society is now managed by a small, but highly focused management company, XMi in Nashville, and administered by Lyn Sholl and Betsy Hilt. Industry volunteers provide AFS leadership on the executive committee, board of directors, and on fifteen committees at the local chapter level. The society is growing and continues to seek assistance in many ways, so people who have some time or interest and want to feel part of something important can contact either Lyn (Lyn@afssociety.org) or Betsy (betsy@afssociety.org), or call 615-250-7792.

The American Filtration & Separations Society is the largest Filtration Society in the world and the principal educator of the industry.

For more information visit: www.afssociety.org