This item is available under a Creative Commons License for non-commercial use only
2. ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, Agriculture, Fishery
In order to meet increasing demand for seafood worldwide Recirculation Aquaculture Systems (RAS) are frequently used. These systems are susceptible to contamination by waste matter including faecal material in the water. It is imperative that this material is removed from the system. The maintenance of good water quality is a pre-requisite to the success of the operation. Negligence in this area will adversely affect animal growth rates and also the economic performance of the system.
Micro-screen drum filters are a popular solution for the removal of this material (Cripps, Simon J. and Bergheim, Asbjørn., 2000). These screens are nominally rated by their screen aperture size measured in microns.
A common issue with the selection of this equipment is in relation to the many variables that influence filter performance. For simplicity, vendors have rationalised selection criteria for filters to the flow capacity at each end of the potential solids loading spectrum, without any reference to a specific culture species.
This paper outlines a technique for accurate micro-screen drum filter selection for site and species specific applications using simple equipment, allowing the identification of an optimal filtration solution, in terms of cost and filtration performance. It also evaluates the potential of cake filtration for increased filter mechanical efficiency performance,
This paper sets out to establish;
- Optimal drum filter selection
- Particle size distribution of suspended solids in a RAS
- Feasibility and effectiveness of cake filtration in mechanical efficiency and flow rate terms.
It is envisaged that this new methodology can be adopted by aquaculturists to address the need within the aquaculture industry for documented and optimised species specific filtration solutions.
Dolan, E., Oliver, R., Murphy, N., O'Hehir, M.: A Test Method for Optimal Micro-screen Drum Filter Selection. To be published in Aquacultural Engineering.
Figure 2 Normalised Cost Analysis.jpg (77 kB)
Figure 3 Test Tube.jpg (9 kB)
Figure 4 Microscreen Maximum Flow Capacities.jpg (51 kB)
Figure 5 Microscreen Mechanical Filtration Efficiency.jpg (60 kB)
Figure 6 PSD.jpg (44 kB)
Figure 7 cake_100Micron.jpg (371 kB)
Figure 8 cake_60Micron.jpg (395 kB)
Figure 9 cake_40Micron.jpg (395 kB)
Figure 10 cake_30Micron.jpg (387 kB)
Figure 11 Normalised Costs.jpg (41 kB)
Table 1 Filter Normalised Costs.jpg (29 kB)
Table 2 BW Frequency.jpg (26 kB)
Table 3 Filter Flow Capacities.jpg (39 kB)
Table 4 Filter Selection Flow.jpg (38 kB)
Table 5 Filter Selection.jpg (22 kB)
Table 6 Material Removal Rates.png (5 kB)