Pretreatment Engineering Platform (PEP) Integrated Test B Run Report--Caustic and Oxidative Leaching in UFP-VSL-T02A

Geeting, John Gh; Bredt, Ofelia P.; Burns, Carolyn A.; Golovich, Elizabeth C.; Guzman-Leong, Consuelo E.; Josephson, Gary B.; Kurath, Dean E.; Sevigny, Gary J.; Aaberg, R.L.

doi:10.2172/969738

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the recommendations in the literature review, a series of filter tests was proposed to examine 1) the long-time fouling dynamics of the Pretreatment Engineering Platform (PEP) filtration simulant used in integrated PEP testing Geeting et al 2009), 2) the fouling dynamics of individual PEP components as a function of solution pH and ionic strength, and 3) the effectiveness of chemical cleaning with nitric and oxalic acids. While these areas of research inform model development, they also provide insight into the long-term sustainability of HLW treatment operations.…”

Section: Need For Additional Fouling and Chemical Cleaning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Tests used as-prepared PEP simulant slurry developed for Integrated Tests A and B (see Guzman-Leong et al 2009;Geeting et al 2009;). Tests studied long-time fouling dynamics and flux decline by filtering the as-prepared PEP simulant slurry in continuous-recycle filtration (where all permeate collected was immediately and continuously returned to the slurry reservoir) at ~5-wt% undissolved solids (UDS) and at various AV and TMP setpoint combinations.…”

Section: Series 1 Testing: Long-term Fouling Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As stated in the introduction to this section, all Series 1 filtration tests employed an as-prepared PEP simulant slurry developed for Integrated Tests A and B (see Guzman-Leong et al 2009;Geeting et al 2009;). Supporting documentation for the production and procurement of this simulant can be found in Scheele et al (2009).…”

Section: Waste Simulantmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 4.2 in Billing et al 2009). (b) The range of particle size values is derived from PSD results reported for Integrated Tests A and B Geeting et al 2009). Unsheared values compared because of difficulty in finding PSD data for matching levels of shear to 100-hour CUF test.…”

Section: Waste Simulantmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Filtration Understanding: FY10 Testing Results and Filtration Model Update

Daniel¹,

Billing²,

Burns³

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThis document completes the requirements of Milestone 2-4, Final Report of FY10 Testing, discussed in the scope of work outlined in the EM31 task plan WP-2.3.6-2010-1. The focus of task WP-2.3.6 is to improve the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) understanding of filtration operations for high-level waste (HLW) to improve filtration and cleaning efficiencies, thereby increasing process throughput and reducing the Na demand (through acid neutralization). Developing cleaning/backpulsing requirements will produce much more efficient operations for both the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) and the Savannah River Site (SRS), thereby significantly increasing throughput by limiting cleaning cycles. Indeed, current program results derived from Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) studies indicate that a ~35% increase in filter throughput can be achieved by optimization of backpulse frequency alone. In this report, the results of FY10 testing conducted under EM31 task plan WP-2.3.6-2010-1 are presented and discussed. The scope of this work is to develop the understanding of filter fouling to allow developing this cleaning/backpulsing strategy.The overall approach to this task is:  Review previous cross-flow testing at SRS, PNNL, and other peer review journals to direct testing activities for this task. Develop a predictive model that reflects the important physical mechanisms of fouling and cleaning for use in determining effective filter cleaning strategies for a variety of feeds. Develop simulants that can result in significant irreversible fouling, but also are representative of the types of materials that are present in HLW. Test these simulants in bench-scale equipment to identify the cleaning requirements for these feeds. Develop a cleaning strategy to optimize throughput while minimizing added Na. Validate the model and operational strategy with actual waste samples as appropriate.The FY10 work discussed in the current report focused on tests that would improve understanding of filter fouling dynamics to allow development of improved filtration models. To this end, three filtration test programs were conducted to provide insight into dynamics of filter fouling and the efficacy of flux recovery operations, including both backpulsing of the filter and chemical cleaning regimens. The three testing programs were: Series 1, Long Term Fouling Tests -examined flux decline when filtering the Pretreatment Engineering Platform (PEP) waste simulant slurry for long periods of time without backpulsing. Previous filtration testing has only studied filter flux dynamics over relatively brief periods of operation (4-12 hours) with respect to expected filtration operation times at WTP (on the order of 100 hours). The aim of Series 1 testing was to answer this need. Series 2, Component Fouling Tests -determined the filtration behavior of the major components that comprise the PEP simulant. By examining each solid component separately, the nature of particle-particle and particle me...

show abstract

Section: Need For Additional Fouling and Chemical Cleaning Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Series 1 Testing: Long-term Fouling Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Waste Simulantmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Waste Simulantmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Filtration Understanding: FY10 Testing Results and Filtration Model Update

Daniel¹,

Billing²,

Burns³

et al. 2011

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The liquid viscosity reported for Simulant 1 is from Geeting et al (2009). Liquid viscosity measurements for Simulant 2 were performed at laboratory temperature with an Anton Paar MCR301 rheometer using a concentric cylinder geometry according to procedure RPL-COLLOID-02 (Daniel 2007).…”

Section: Liquid Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hanford Sludge Simulant Selection for Soil Mechanics Property Measurement

Wells¹,

Russell²,

Mahoney³

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThis report describes current work to select or develop two chemical sludge simulants for testing relative to problems of hydrogen gas retention and release encountered in the double shell tanks at the Hanford Site near Richland, Washington. Wastes from single shell tanks are being transferred to double shell tanks for safety reasons (some single shell tanks are leaking or are in danger of leaking), but the available double-shell tank space is limited.The current System Plan for the Hanford Tank Farms (Rev. 4, Certa and Wells 2009) uses relaxed buoyant displacement gas release event (BDGRE) controls for deep sludge (i.e., high level waste [HLW]) tanks, which allows the tank farms to use more storage space, i.e., increase the sediment depth, in some of the double-shell tanks (DSTs). The relaxed BDGRE controls are based on preliminary analysis of a gas release model from van Kessel and van Kesteren (2002). Application of the van Kessel and van Kesteren model requires parametric information for the sediment, including the lateral earth pressure at rest and shear modulus. No lateral earth pressure at rest and shear modulus in situ measurements for Hanford sludge are currently available.The two chemical sludge simulants will be used in follow-on work to experimentally measure the van Kessel and van Kesteren (2002) model parameters, lateral earth pressure at rest, and shear modulus. The simulants are selected via similarity to measured Hanford sludge chemical and physical properties, including liquid density, viscosity, and pH, undissolved particle size and density, and slurry rheology to maximize the likelihood that the simulants will have similar lateral earth pressure at rest and shear modulus as Hanford sludge. Simulant 1 is selected from those Hanford sludge simulants that have previously been produced and characterized, and Simulant 2 is developed based upon the chemistry of a specific retrieval SST scenario. In Section 2, pertinent Hanford sludge properties are summarized, Simulant 1 is selected, and the chemistry for Simulant 2 is developed and presented. Simulant production is described in Section 3, and simulant property measurements are presented in Section 4. A summary is provided in Section 5.

show abstract