Home
W&WW Blog Case Histories Books Shop Amazon Member Survey Advertise ?
Buyer's Guide News Help Forum Ask Tom! Jobs Videos Online Training

Water and Wastewater.com Help Forums

Click here now

Search

Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
Jun 19th, 2013, 5:30am
Top 10 Members
Runyan Sobisch Keenan Seghers Santa Cruz Gillen Kendall Orlebeke Ayrus Kersey
  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
quat lock (Read 703 times)
Fernando762
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline

I love Water and
Wastewater.com

Posts: 9


Company or Organization: Seaboard Foods
quat lock
Mar 04th, 2012, 8:23pm
 
Can any one tell me the response they get by using a product called QUAT-LOCK? We started using this product based on recommendations from the company but have yet to see any response but maybe I am looking in the wrong spot. Thought from the company that I would see some response throughout the system but as of yet no changes. Been using the product for over two weeks. Wondering if anyone else has experience with this product.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Jeff Naumann
God Member
*****
Offline

I love Water and
Wastewater.com

Posts: 1133
Torrance, California
Gender: male

Company or Organization: Jeff Naumann & Associates
Re: quat lock
Reply #1 - Mar 4th, 2012, 9:01pm
 
What are you trying to accomplish by using the product?
Back to top
 
 
WWW   IP Logged
Fernando762
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline

I love Water and
Wastewater.com

Posts: 9


Company or Organization: Seaboard Foods
Re: quat lock
Reply #2 - Mar 4th, 2012, 9:50pm
 
We are being told that we have very high levels of quat like compounds in the waste stream (100 to 200ppm). We have anaerobic laggoons producing methane for our plant boilers and flare off the balance. Our treating efficencies out of the anaerobic is about 70% to 80% in COD and BOD values. We are trying to locate the source of quat but have not been able to find that source as it equates back to 800 to 1000 pounds per day and or typical use by chemical inventories at the plant are only 100 to 200 pounds per week at most. We were told that this would help our anaerobic treatment and drop our nitrogen levels on our discharge. Haven't seen any decrease and thought our current treatment in the anaerobics was fairly good. The company recommending Quat Lock says it should be closer to 90%.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
The sludge judge
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 649
Wisconsin
Gender: male

Company or Organization: private
Re: quat lock
Reply #3 - Mar 5th, 2012, 9:52am
 
I'm a little doubtful you have any inhibition at those BOD/ COD removals. What is your VFA at the end of the process and how much BOD/ COD is left over?

What is the goal? to lower nitrogen?   What's your permit level, how much are you dischargng and what form is the N in. You should do a TKN and an ammonia on this to determine the organic nitrogen fraction (quats fall into the organic N category).
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Peter_McCarthy
Full Member
***
Offline

Water and
Wastewater.com is
the best!

Posts: 191


Company or Organization: ADI Systems Inc.
Re: quat lock
Reply #4 - Mar 5th, 2012, 12:09pm
 
Quaternary ammonium compounds can be inhibitory to anaerobic treatment down to low ppm in the wastewater.  Therefore, I do not think you have 100 to 200 ppm quat and still have good treatment. How are you measuring quats?   Even if you have 10 to 20 ppm quat, that is still an issue.

Please provide your lagoon effluent soluble and total COD.  Perhaps your less than ideal removal is due to solids exiting the lagoon?

I am not familiar with Quat lock but best solution is usually to replace quats in process with other less harmful chemicals.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
DoctorBug
God Member
*****
Offline

Water and
Wastewater.com is
the best!

Posts: 501


Company or Organization: Michael Richard Wastewater Mic
Re: quat lock
Reply #5 - Mar 5th, 2012, 12:17pm
 
Fernando762:

Your removals are typical for an anaerobic process. Rare to get 90% COD or BOD removal. Anaerobic efflents often have significant solids leaving which can account for much of the BOD and TSS.

As noted by Peter McCarthy, the reported treatment efficiencies are typical and quats at low ppm amounts would reduce this. Doesn't appear to be happening.

Anaerobic systems don't remove nitrogen (except anammox). You need an aerobic system to do this. So this advice is wrong.

Hope that this helps.
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
grrun
God Member
*****
Offline

WaterandWastewa
ter.Com is the best!

Posts: 3526
Pekin, IL
Gender: male

Company or Organization: Freelance Environmental Engine
Re: quat lock
Reply #6 - Mar 5th, 2012, 1:36pm
 
I agree with Peter_McCarthy and DoctorBug that some quats are biocidal. Because you know the source of quats in your plant, it seems to me that you could determine the lethality of the products to your processes. In a previous post, you were concerned with a lack of denitrification in anoxic zones in your plant. You might want to consider that the quat discharges may not be uniform (hence the discrepancy between the difference in estimates of concentration) and the need to understand how the manufacturing process affects the influent concentrations. The MSDS for these products may also yeild some useful information.

I'm not familiar with the product Quat Lock and this may or may not be reactive with your quats. However, my opinion is that you need to segregate the waste quats first to see if your process improves. You might start with a SOUR test with various concentrations of the quats.

A description of your complete treatment process would be useful for the Forum Members. Investigation of the use of quats in the manufacturing process may also lead to a change in manufacturing operations (waste minimization or reduction possibilities).

Finally, (and this is just speculation on my part), the quats may be toxic to nitrifiers and you may not be nitrifying even though you are getting BOD and COD reduction without denitrification.

grrun

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Fernando762
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline

I love Water and
Wastewater.com

Posts: 9


Company or Organization: Seaboard Foods
Re: quat lock
Reply #7 - Mar 6th, 2012, 6:06pm
 
The current system is considered an activated sludge process.  With the anoxic zones ahead of aeration tanks, and having return activated sludge and nitrified recycle streams, this process is referred to as the Modified Ludzack‐Ettinger (MLE) process.  I think it is a common nitrogen removal system.

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
grrun
God Member
*****
Offline

WaterandWastewa
ter.Com is the best!

Posts: 3526
Pekin, IL
Gender: male

Company or Organization: Freelance Environmental Engine
Re: quat lock
Reply #8 - Mar 7th, 2012, 10:19pm
 
Thanks for the information about the treatment process. Have you considered phosphorus deficiency? I would check the soluble phosphorus in the effluent to see if there is an adequate residual.

See: http://www.fwrj.com/TechArticle05/0105%20tech2.pdf

I'll continue to look for other reasons that might contribute to your problem, but this one just occurred to me.

See: http://www.fvoa-illinois.org/EPA_Nutrient_Control.pdf

grrun
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
The sludge judge
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 649
Wisconsin
Gender: male

Company or Organization: private
Re: quat lock
Reply #9 - Mar 8th, 2012, 7:14am
 
We need to know what you would like help with. What's the issue you're trying to fix? If it's N removal on the back end you need to run ammonia and TKN and then we can go from there.

Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
The sludge judge
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 649
Wisconsin
Gender: male

Company or Organization: private
Re: quat lock
Reply #10 - Mar 8th, 2012, 10:40am
 
I'm curious how lack of P would be possible problem in this case? perhaps there's something we don't know about?? It's always a good idea to know you left a little on the plate (so not bad advice in general). I'm just not sure why this would be the contributing cause here.

best regards,

Ryan
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
grrun
God Member
*****
Offline

WaterandWastewa
ter.Com is the best!

Posts: 3526
Pekin, IL
Gender: male

Company or Organization: Freelance Environmental Engine
Re: quat lock
Reply #11 - Mar 8th, 2012, 6:54pm
 
I have to admit that it was just a WAG! The nitrifiers were nitrifying, but the denitrifyers weren't denitrifying and I thought that there might possibly be a nutrient deficiency that was interferring with the biological process. I have, in the past, treated activated sludge processes with a little trisodium phosphate and had them "take off" so I thought that it was a relevant question. Fernando 762 would only need to check the effluent for P to determine if it was in excess of the biological need. The idea came to me from reading the first reference when I posed the question.

grrun
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
Fernando762
YaBB Newbies
*
Offline

I love Water and
Wastewater.com

Posts: 9


Company or Organization: Seaboard Foods
Re: quat lock
Reply #12 - Mar 9th, 2012, 2:11pm
 
Actually our effluent P is nearly nonexistent so we quit testing some time ago. We are getting ready to throw in some bioaugmentation to the system to see if we can jump start that population to alleviate our nitrogen issues. I will take a shot at adding some trisodium phosphate to see if that would also help. Any suggestions as to the amount?
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged
grrun
God Member
*****
Offline

WaterandWastewa
ter.Com is the best!

Posts: 3526
Pekin, IL
Gender: male

Company or Organization: Freelance Environmental Engine
Re: quat lock
Reply #13 - Mar 9th, 2012, 4:27pm
 
If you have no compliance limit; I'd start with about 5 mg/L of TSP and follow weekly with 5 mg/L increases until there was a detectable residual in the effluent.

grrun
Back to top
 
 
  IP Logged