What causes the circulating water concentration ratio not to increase? It’s always been around 2.

That’s great; it saves a lot of water resources. I wonder what chemicals the original poster is using? It is possible to operate without emitting pollutants.

No waste discharge – it’s not good if the concentration ratio can’t be increased?

The circulation volume is 1400, the water retention volume is 1000, and the water addition amount is 300 t/d. What is the heat exchange temperature difference? The water replenishment amount per hour is also around 12.5 cubic meters. If the concentration ratio is 2, then the evaporation rate per hour is only 6-7 cubic meters, which doesn’t seem reasonable, does it? The temperature difference for heat exchange is too low. Even so, the residence time of the agent is over about 150 hours, which is too high. As a result, the concentration of inorganic phosphates in such a recirculating water system should be very high, while the effective concentration of organic phosphorus in the system should be very low, which is highly detrimental to the system. There must be an issue with the data. For example, if there is a problem with the water source used for replenishment, and this source keeps changing, the calculated concentration factor will be much lower than the actual concentration factor. I hope you can verify again the values regarding the circulation volume, water storage volume, water replenishment volume, and heat exchange temperature difference.

The system temperature difference is around 10 degrees Celsius

These data are provided by the manufacturer, so there should be no problems. As for the concentration factor, it seems that the manufacturer has issues with the testing procedures.

Under conditions of a circulation rate of 1400, a water retention volume of 1000, and a temperature difference of 10 degrees, the hourly evaporation rate of this system in winter is generally between 13 and 17 cubic meters (the evaporation latent heat varies depending on the region). If the water replenishment amount is over 300 cubic meters per day, it can be basically determined that there are no leaks or losses in the system, resulting in virtually zero emissions. At this point, it’s absolutely impossible if the concentration factor is only 2 times. There must be an issue with the data. It is recommended to determine whether the source of water used for replenishment is fixed. Additionally, it is necessary to find out what basis the manufacturer uses to calculate the concentration factor; it would be good to have quality test reports for both the recycled water and the water used for replenishment. We can offer you some suggestions.

Bro, could you leave me your QQ or some other contact information? I can ask you questions if I have any in the future.

The evaporation volume and the discharge volume are roughly equal, resulting in zero emissions; the concentration factor is by no means 2. Are there any issues with the data? And how is the concentration factor calculated?

The concentration ratio detected is too low; there’s no waste water discharge, so it must be due to high air loss, or someone is stealing water… :lol;P

The original poster probably hasn’t worked in an enterprise for very long – the system doesn’t produce waste, and system leaks are unlikely to occur at such a high rate. So ask the owners whether their backwash is done frequently Where did the rinse water go?