Charged Activated Pressure Filter [CAPF] uses charged activated filter media, which is direct replacement of Sand. Made in Scotland from specific grade of green glass & processed to get charged by activation. Once replaced, no need to replace for its life time. No bio fouling due to negative zeta potential aroung filter media. Surface area is 1,000,000 m2/m3, which is 300 times silica/quartz sand. Can filter down to 1.0 micron & turbidity less than 0.5 NTU. The golden rule is "What goes in during service cycle needs to come out during backwash.

2. 2
Index
No Description Page
1. Charged Activated Pressure Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 03
2. What is CAFM & How it is made . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 04
3. Charged Activated Surface & -ve Zeta Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 05
4. Bio fouling of Sand & CAFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 06
5. Bacteria Levels on Sand & CAFM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 07
6. Filtration & Backwash Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 08
7. Surface Area Per Unit Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 09
8. Filtration Degree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. CAFM – Performance Summery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11. Industry Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12. Advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13. Cost Benefit Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
14. Performance Comparison – For Tertiary Sewage Treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
15. Performance Comparison – CAPF v/s Sand v/s UF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3. Uses Charged Activated
Glass Filter Media
for Fresh Water
& Waste Water

4. • CAFM is manufactured in Scotland from a specific type of glass.
• The glass is reduced to a precise particle size distribution and shape to
maximise the hydraulic flow characteristics and mechanical filtration
performance.
• The raw material is chemically processed [activated] to open up the
aluminosilicate atomic lattice and activate the surface physio-chemistry.
• An activation process increase the surface area by 300 times over
crushed glass or sand.
What is Charged Activated Filter Media [CAFM] & How it is made -

5. Net electronegative Potential on
“Charged Activated Filter Media”
[CAFM]
Positively charged hydrated ions
align over the surface of “CAFM”
Diffused layer, with a predominant
negative charges
“ZETA POTENTIAL”
Bulk Water To be filteredEnlarged View Of
“Charged Activated Filter Media”
[CAFM]
Charged Activated Surface & Zeta Potential
+vely charged coagulated, polar
& dipolar dissolved organics
+ve cationic flocculated solids

6. Bio-fouling of sand and CAFM
Electron micro graphs of sand and CAFM
Silica/Quartz Sand has 100% bacteria
coverage after 3 days in a drinking water filter
CAFM stays free of biofilm, even after 5 years
in sewage effluent
New sand Used sand
New CAFM Used CAFM

7. Wormhole Channeling
Alginates excreted by bacteria
coagulate the sand and cause
wormhole channeling.
Coagulated Alginates
of Bacteria Excreta
Channeling In
Filter Bed
Bacteria
Sand Filter

8. Bacteria levels on sand and CAFM - transient worm holes
Sand filters are biological, bio-mechanical instability results
in media coagulation, transient worm hole channel and
discharge of solids into the product water
CAFM is electro-mechanical, media does not suffer from
bacterial coagulation so no channeling of water through
the filter bed.
Media
Total colony count
(aerobic) at 37 deg C, on
5 grams of filter media
CAFM 18
Silica Sand 3,600,000
Media samples were taken just prior to a back-wash at a depth of 200mm into the bed, and 500 mm from the side of the filter.
Bacterial levels on CAFM and sand after 3 months in a clean water filter. The Table is certified data showing total bacterial levels of 3.6 million
with sand, and essentially zero with CAFM.

9. Filtration & Backwash Efficiency
CAFM v/s Quartz/Silica sand filtration
What goes into a filter must come out in the back-wash
The graph opposite is the back-wash profile for identical
sand filter and Charged Activated filter after 10 weeks.
The profile shows that 30% more solids are back-washed
out of the AFM. This means 30% more solids have there
been trapped & removed during the service phase
CAPF performance is maintained while sand filters
continue deteriorate with time.
Trials conducted on parallel systems with CAFM and Quartz/Silica Sand

10. Surface Area Per unit volume -
Surface
Area
[m²]

11. Filtration Degree -
[ % ]
At velocity – 20 m/hr ; without any coagulant or flocculent

12. Specification
CAFM – Grain 1 :
Specific Weight : 1’250 kg/m³
Effective Size : 0.6 mm
Spherizity : > 0.8
Roundness : > 0.7
Uniform Coefficient : < 1.3
Cross section Ratio : < 2.4
Specific Gravity : 2.5
Purity : 99.95 %
Chemical Composition :
Silica : 70
Magnesium : 1
Sodium : 8
Aluminum : 1.5
Antimony : < 0.001
Arsenic : < 0.0001
Barium : 0.02
Cadmium : < 0.0001
Chromium : 0.15
Calcium : 10
Lanthanum : 2
Cobalt : 0.016
Lead : < 0.005
Mercury : < 0.0005
Titanium : 0.1
Rubidium : 0.05
Iridium : 0.05
Platinum : 0.0001

13. “CAFM” - performance summary
 Typically improves performance by 30% to 50% in terms of solids removed
for both waste water and clean water applications.
 CAFM does not need to be replaced, the media may be used for the life of
the filter, and can be recycled and used again.
 CAFM does not bio-coagulate or experience worm-hole channelling.
 Performance is stable and predictable
CAFM® is certified under Regulation 31 of the UK Drinking Water inspectorate, CAFM is compliance with
European Water Directive (98/83/EC) & (80/778/EEC).

14. Applications
 Slow Gravity Filtration
 Pressure Media Filtration
 Pre-treatment to UF & RO
 Fresh Water Filtration
 Ion & Manganese Filtration
 Sewage & Effluent Filtration

15. Industry Coverage
 Pharmaceutical
 Aquaculture
 Food & Beverage
 Dairy
 Package Drinking Water
 Cosmetic
 Chemical
 Cooling Tower
 STP & ETP [Industrial Waste Water]
 Swimming Pool
 Pre Treatment to RO
 Sea Water RO

16. Advantages
 No Bio fouling
 Filtration down to < 5.0 micron
 Filtration With coagulant or Ozone < 1.0 ppm ; Turbidity < 1
 Highest Backwash efficiency
 No need to replace Media for life time
 Filters Iron & Manganese
 With Ozone extremely effective on Organics, Chlorine not required at all
 No Chlorine, so no need of de-chlorination & No Trihelo-methane
 With Ozone, no need of Activated Carbon Filter

17. Cost benefit analysis
CAFM is around 3 to 4 time, the cost of quartz/silica sand, however we are already
dealing with a relatively low efficiency, low performance & low cost product.
AFM has been confirmed to work a great deal better than sand, and will give a
return in capital out of revenue savings measured in months through savings in;
1. filter media; no need to replace AFM for the life of the filter
2. water; back wash water reduced by up to 50%
3. energy; increased run phase and reduced back-wash could give 15% savings
4. chemicals; reduced chemical consumption, chlorine, alum & flocculants

18. Performance Comparison - for the tertiary sewage treatment
TYPE OF FILTER
SS. (mg/l) Performance
%
Turbidity
[ntu] Performance
%
Bacteria cfu Performance
%
Velocity
inlet outlet inlet outlet inlet outlet m3/m2/h
RGF sand filter with sand 7.14 2.2 69 3.5 2.23 36 23,120 12,300 46 1.2
Pressure filter with sand 8.18 3.82 53 5.87 4.76 18 22,311 18,023 19 4.96
Moving bed sand filter with sand 7.08 3.82 46 2.13 1.79 16 14,067 10,307 26 5.4
Drum filter 10 micron 14.66 7.33 50 7.16 3.88 45 56,712 38,460 32 3.23
Disc Filter 10 micron 5.6 3.1 44 2.22 2.06 7 30,450 21,138 30 2.12
Ring Filter 10 micron 7.41 3.98 46 3.01 3.17 9,447 7,761 17 2.5
Charged Activated Pressure filter 10.60 0.89 96% 2.98 0.24 92 % 23,000 10,000 58 % 3.59
CAPF media in a pressure filter out-performed all other technologies, some of which were 10 times the cost
Independent tests conducted by Spanish Water Company and reported in Technology del Agua , December 2009, page 47.

19. Performance comparison of CAF + O3 with sand and UF
Parameters CAPF + O3 Ratting Sand [PSF] Ratting UF at 0.03 microns Ratting
Remove
dissolved silica
Yes  Can add free silica to water    No  
Remove phosphate Yes, when combined with NoPhos    No   No  
Remove dissolved
organics
Yes, especially when combined with APF
pre-coagulation and flocculation using
Ozone
  
 
After 6 months sand filters will be
increasing organic load through
autotrophic bacteria
  
 
No, UF cannot remove chemicals in
solution.  
Bio-fouling
No, CAFM does not bio-foul   
 
Yes, 100% coverage of every grain of sand
in 3 days
  
 
Yes, membranes need to be regularly
cleaned
  
 
Prevention of RO
membrane
bio-fouling
Yes, because it removes phosphate and
dissolved nutrients required by bacteria
  
 
No, sand is the perfect substrate to grow
bacteria. Often solids load is higher on
discharge than influent.
  
 
Phosphate, and dissolved nutrients will
react the RO membranes
   

Scaling No
  
 
Yes, with carbonates, calcite, struvite,
ferric etc
  
Yes, with carbonates, calcite, struvite,
ferric etc
  
Chlorination
Not required, AFM does not biofoul. So no
chlorine reaction products such as
THM`s, TCA, or hydrobromous acid
   

Yes, sand filters need to be chlorinated
continuously or as part of a regular
cleaning schedule.
  
 
May be required as part of the cleaning
schedule. Chemical Enhance Backwash
[CEB]
  
 
Filtration level
90% down to 0.1micron, approx. 80%
down to 0.01micron
  
 
All sand filters will channel, so membranes
are exposed to unfiltered water.
  
 
0.03 to 0.01 microns absolute, unless the
membrane ruptures
  
 
Sustainable
100% sustainable, Circular Economy
VIBES winner in the UK [50 yrs Life time]
  
 
No sustainable, needs to be replaced at 1 to
5 year intervals
   
Not sustainable, membranes need to be
replaced at 1 to 5 year intervals
   
Operation costs
Can operate at 50% higher flow rates, so
much lower capital cost than sand
filtration
  
Lower capital cost than AFM and higher
running, operation & maintenance costs
 
Much higher capital cost than AFM. Much
higher pressures and running costs.
Lower area required for installation
   
CAPF : Charged Activated Pressure Filter CAFM : Charged Active Filter Media

20. Solution Engineer : Mr. Sunil Shah
Contact : +91-93212 34527
Mail ID : sunilshah@chemtronicsindia.com
URL : www.chemtronicsindia.com
www.ozonegeneratorindia.com
www.m.chemtronicsindia.com
Thank You