SEJ441- Engineering Project A

Final Report

Project Title: Modelling the performance of a sand filter that is used

to treat a polluted pond

Department of Civil Engineering

Student Name: Busiku Silenga
Student ID: 210037589

Supervisor Name: Associate Professor Jega Jegatheesan

Submission Date: 1st June 2014

i|Page
 Plagiarism Declaration

I hereby certify that the attached work submitted for assessment is entirely my own except for
where material is quoted or paraphrased in the text; the owner of the original material is then
acknowledged. I also certify that it has not been submitted for assessment in any other unit or
course.

ii | P a g e
 Abstract

Sand filters have proven effective in achieving high removal efficiencies for sediments, biochemical
oxygen demand and fecal coliform bacteria; however their total metal removal is moderate and
nutrient removal is often low. Very few studies have prospectively examined how the performance
of a sand filter can be modeled, in order for it to be used to clean a polluted pond. The objective of
this thesis is to outline the methodologies that will be used to model the performance of a sand
filter, which is to be used to clean a polluted pond. The project proposes a method of determining
which treatment process is required to treat polluted pond water, based on the initial parameters of
the polluted pond water samples collected around the Deakin University Waurn Ponds campus and
includes an evaluation of different coagulants. Different filter media configurations to be used to
enhance the performance of the sand filter and the design of a backwash system will also be
addressed. Evaluation of the water quality before and after treatment using chlorine decay studies
will be performed using AQUASIM software. Started in March the project is expected to be finished
in October.

iii | P a g e
 Acknowledgement

My sincere gratitude goes to my supervisor, Associate Professor Jega Jegatheesan, for his guidance,
encouragement and professional assistance throughout the duration of my project. I also greatly
appreciate the technical assistance of staff in the Civil Engineering laboratory [Mrs. Leanne Farago]
who contributed immensely to this research work in their various capacities. I would also like to
thank all the staff of the Civil Engineering department whose input has made this project a success.
Also, I owe so much to my family, whose financial support, moral support, encouragement and belief
in me has helped see me this project through to completion. Last but not least I would like to thank
all my friends who have all, in some shape or form contributed to the success of this project.

iv | P a g e
Contents
Plagiarism Declaration ........................................................................................................................... ii
Abstract ................................................................................................................................................. iii
Acknowledgement ................................................................................................................................ iv
Nomenclature ....................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures ....................................................................................................................................... viii
List of Tables .......................................................................................................................................... ix
Chapter 1.Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.2 Key Objectives ......................................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Project Benefits ....................................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1 Economic benefits ........................................................................................................... 2
1.3.2 Environmental benefits ................................................................................................... 3
1.3.3 Health benefits ................................................................................................................ 4
1.3.4 Technological benefits .................................................................................................... 4
1.4 Project Scope .......................................................................................................................... 5
1.5 Project Deliverable .................................................................................................................. 5
Chapter 2.Literature Review Research ................................................................................................... 6
2.1Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Water Quality ................................................................................................................................ 6
2.3 Sand Filtration Technology ........................................................................................................... 7
2.3.1 Inflow regulation: ................................................................................................................... 7
2.3.2 Pretreatment: ........................................................................................................................ 7
2.3.3 Filter bed and filter media: .................................................................................................... 7
2.3.4 Mechanism of filtration: ........................................................................................................ 8
2.3.4 Filter hydraulics: ..................................................................................................................... 8
2.4 Limitations of Sand Filtration Technology .................................................................................. 10
2.4.1 Limitations............................................................................................................................ 10
2.4.2 Maintenance ........................................................................................................................ 10
2.5 Enhancement of Sand Filtration Technology .......................................................................... 10
2.5.1 Pretreatment........................................................................................................................ 10
2.5.2 Additional methods of enhancing sand filter performance................................................. 11
2.6 Chlorine Decay and AQUASIM Software..................................................................................... 12
Chapter 3.Materials and Methodology................................................................................................. 15

v|Page
 3.1 Methodology......................................................................................................................... 16
3.2 Raw Water................................................................................................................................... 16
3.3 Coagulation Tests ........................................................................................................................ 16
3.3 Enhancement of sand filter......................................................................................................... 17
3.4 Chlorine decay experiments (To be decided) ............................................................................. 17
3.5 Design of backwash system ........................................................................................................ 17
3.5 AQUASIM Software ..................................................................................................................... 17
3.7 Apparatus .................................................................................................................................... 17
Chapter 4.Timeline for whole project ................................................................................................... 18
4.1 Project A ...................................................................................................................................... 18
4.1 Project B ...................................................................................................................................... 22
Chapter 5.Conclusion/ Reflective Paper ............................................................................................... 25
5.1 Logbook ....................................................................................................................................... 25
5.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 25
6.2 Reflective paper/Document........................................................................................................ 25
References ........................................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix A. Water Quality Guidelines ................................................................................................ i
Appendix B. Logbook .......................................................................................................................... v

vi | P a g e
Nomenclature

NOM……………………………………………………………………………………..Natural Organic matter

BOD ……………………………………………………………………...……Biochemical Oxygen Demand

TN………………………………………………………………………………………………………Total Nitrogen

TSS…………………………………………………………………………….………… Total Suspended Solids

TOC………………………………………………………………………………….……...Total Organic Carbon

TP………………………………………………………………………………………..…………Total Phosphorus

NTU………………………………………………………………………...……Nephelometric Turbidity Unit

TCU………………………………………………………………………………………………….…True Color Unit

WQ…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…Water Quality

Cl2.........................................................................................................…...Free chlorine

FRA………………………………………………………………………………………..…. Fast reducing agents

FRN……………………………………………………… … … .. Fast reducing Nitrogenous Compounds

SRA……………………………………………………………………………………..……. Slow reducing agents

SRN……………………………………………………… … … .. Slow reducing Nitrogenous Compounds

CC……………………………………………………………………………………………………Combined chlorine

vii | P a g e
List of Figures

Figure 1………………………………………………Contrast between polluted and healthy aquatic ecosystems.

Figure 2………………………………………………Project deliverable summary

Figure 3…………………………………………….. Sand filtration system

Figure 4…………………………………………….. AQUASIM software output for 6mg/L chlorine dosage.

Figure 5…………………………………………….. AQUASIM software output for 10mg/L chlorine dosage.

Figure 6……………………………………………...Methodology strategies chart.

Figure 7…………………………………………….. Jar testing (Deakin University 2014)

viii | P a g e
List of Tables

Table 1……………………………………………………………………………………....... Mean per trip benefits per person

Table 2……………………… Common diseases transmitted through drinking contaminated drinking water

Table 3…… Considerations concerning the risk levels in surface water sources (Joseph Cotruvo, 1998)

Table 4……………………………….……………… Typical pollutant removal efficiency of sand filters (Gali 1990)

Table 5………………………………….… Estimated pollutant removal capability of different filtration systems

Table 6…………………………………………………………Common coagulants and dosage for best floc formation

Table 7…………………………………………… Comparative properties of different filtering media (Galli, 1990)

Table 8………………………………………………………………. 6mg/L dosage of chlorine (free and total) with time

Table 9………………………………………………………………10mg/L dosage of chlorine (free and total) with time

Table 10…………………………………………………………………………………………………….Project A progress timeline

Table 11…………………………………………………………………………………………………….Project A progress timeline

ix | P a g e
 Chapter 1.Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Slow sand filtration is the earliest technology to water treatment. It was initially developed by John Gibb in Scotland
in 1804 to obtain pure water. After linking outbreak of diseases such as cholera and typhoid to waterborne
contamination, slow sand filters became a legal requirement for all potable water extracted from the River Thames
in 1852 [Huisman and Wood, 1974]. The introduction of chlorination and chemical coagulation techniques in water
treatment followed by the development of rapid sand filters led to a decline in the use of slow sand filters [Bowles et
al., 1983]. The city of Austin, Texas first pioneered the use of sand filters in the early 1980’s [Richard A Claytor, 1996]
Filtration has since become one of the most important elements in traditional water treatment systems.

A large number of ponds are unfenced and multipurpose; consequently making most pond water moderately or
seriously polluted and thus cannot be considered for use without treatment. Ponds are preferred because of their
proximity to the point of use, lower turbidity and reliability. These sources may be developed using a sand filter.
Sand filters because of their simplicity, efficiency and economy are appropriate means of water treatment [Nigel
Graham and Robin Collins, 1996]. The sand filter technology relies on a straining, settling and adsorption to purify
water [Huisman and Wood, 1974].Since filters are not generally designed to remove dissolved compounds, which
can constitute roughly half of certain pollutants, and enhancement of the sand filter can greatly enhance the
removal of these compounds. When source water quality is beyond the range recommended for Sand filters used
alone, pretreatment can extend the capability of this process. Higher turbidity, color, natural organic matter (NOM)
and synthetic organic chemicals can be removed when pretreatment or post treatment processes are added [Gary S
Logsdon, 2008].

Water is one of the most important commodities which man has exploited for the sustenance of his life. The uses
we make of water in lakes, rivers, ponds and streams are greatly influenced by the water quality found in them.
Water quality is the summation of all physical, chemical, biological and aesthetic characteristics of water that
influence its beneficial use [Claude E. Boyd, 1998].Water pollution is primarily caused by human activities. Pollutants
are categorized as, point source and nonpoint sources. Point sources discharge pollutants at single specific locations
through pipelines or sewers into the surface water (factories, sewage treatment plants). Nonpoint sources are
sources that cannot be traced to a single site of discharge (agricultural runoff), [Shubinski and Tierney, 1973]. The
large number of water pollutants is broadly classified under the categories of: Organic pollutants, Inorganic
pollutants, sediments, radioactive materials and thermal pollutants [Ruth F Weiner, 2003]. The total waste load in a
water body is the sum of all point and nonpoint sources.

Water pollution is any chemical, physical or biological change in the dynamic equilibrium in an aquatic ecosystem
that disturbs the normal functioning and properties of pure water. Water pollution is caused by domestic sewage
(84%) and industrial sewage (16%), though the latter has less load on water bodies, it contains matter which is more
hazardous [Anil K and Arnab Kumar, 2009]. The symptoms of water pollution of any water body include bad taste of
drinking water, offensive smells from water bodies, unchecked growth of aquatic weeds (Eutrophication). Water
pollution has been extensively documented as a contributor to health problems in marine ecosystems, wildlife
health, and well-being.

1|Page
1.2 Key Objectives

The overall aim of this project is to model the performance of a sand filter that is to be used to clean a polluted
pond, using research and experimental techniques. AQUASIM software will be used to evaluate the water quality
before and after treatment using chlorine decay studies. The project will include the following;

 Evaluation of different coagulants

 Determination of required water treatment process based on the initial parameters of the polluted water
samples (direct filtration or coagulation, flocculation and then filtration)
 Enhancement of the sand filter using different filter media configurations
 Design of a backwash system
 Comparison of different treatment processes and filter media configurations to evaluate which is the most
effective and establishing a relationship between experimental and predicted data.
 Use AQUASIM software to evaluate the water quality before and after treatment using chlorine decay
studies. Reduction in chlorine demand will help to evaluate the performance of treatment in removing
organic compounds and others that consume chlorine.

1.3 Project Benefits

The use of any resource usually generates a waste. The immense impact of water population on people’s daily life
has increased the importance of conducting research that will enable assessment of environmental damage in
economic terms. Water (Pond) pollution control and treatment is an important topic in Environmental Engineering.
Gaining an understanding of water (pond) pollution control and how the performance of a sand filter can be
modeled in order to clean polluted ponds would have huge financial, environmental and health benefits. Principles
addressed in this project, although based relatively small scale can be applied to pollution control/treatment in
larger water bodies.

1.3.1 Economic benefits

Water pollution relates to industrialization, civilization and living standards which are all directly related to the
economic level of people. Water pollution usually causes loss in society, economy, natural environment and many
other areas. The more serious the harm by polluted water is, the more the economic loss is. For example in Florida,
$10.5 billion is spent annually on water pollution control and treatment, however clean freshwater and marine
ecosystems attract $67 billion in tourism and recreational spending [USEPA, 2002]. Many industries require the use
of fresh water, some are entirely based on it and as more water becomes polluted the price of purify this water
begins to grow as do the costs involved in those industries. Treatment methods such as sand filters and chemical
additives help to prevent pollution of nearby water bodies. These are very simple techniques that are easy to
implement, although they cost money to maintain, it is much cheaper preventing pollution than cleaning up water
that has already significantly occurred. This project will help us explore ways in which we can make treatment
methods like sand filters more cost performance and environmentally effective.

Table .1 shows how sites with higher water quality are more economically viable.

2|Page
Table 1: Mean per trip benefits per person

1.3.2 Environmental benefits

The effects of water pollution on the environment are far reaching. Water pollution has been extensively
documented as a contributor to health problems in marine ecosystems, wildlife health and well-being. For example
it is possible for the pollutants to raise the temperature of the water enough to force fish out in search of cooler
water, this in itself can create an ecological dead zone. Pollutants can also significantly increase the rate of algal
blooms. These blooms create massive fish dye-offs as the oxygen levels in the water gets depleted [Jared Skye,
2014]. If the right treatment methods are implemented such cases can be avoided, this project will help explore
more environmental, performance and cost effective ways of doing that by modelling the performance of sand filter.

The following formula and figure demonstrate how pollution affects aquatic ecosystems.

 Increase in pollutants => Increase in temperature (68-89oF) => Increase in algae blooms = Decrease in oxygen
levels (>5mg/L, aquatic life under stress) => Death of marine life.

Figure 1: Contrast between polluted and healthy aquatic ecosystems.

3|Page
1.3.3 Health benefits

One of the greatest dangers to human health is water pollution. Water pollution can pose health dangers to
humans who come into contact with it, either directly or indirectly. Risks include contaminated drinking water, high
mercury level risks and other health effects of toxic runoff. Developing cost effective ways to treat water would
result in huge health benefits especially in developing countries, where people spend more money on treatment of
sicknesses resulting from polluted waters instead of treating the polluted water which would result in solid financial
and health benefits. This project will help us gain an elementary theoretical and practical understanding of how
water treatment methods, specifically sand filters can be designed and enhanced in order to achieve high water
quality in areas affected by pollution.

The table below shows some diseases that are directly related to water pollution;

Table 2: Common diseases transmitted through drinking contaminated drinking water.

1.3.4 Technological benefits

This project will help us to expand and improve on the already existing water treatment methods specifically, sand
filter technology. Our design will explore ways in which to make treatment of polluted water using sand filters more
effective, in terms of maintenance cost, purchase cost, accessibility, ease of use and performance.

4|Page
1.4 Project Scope

The scope of the project will include;

 A literature review, to investigate and evaluate the methods and ways in which water pollution is treated by
enhanced sand filtration systems
 Experimental methods in which polluted samples will be treated in order to evaluate which process and/or
configuration is the most effective.
 An oral presentation in which the outcomes of the project will be presented
 A written report that will encompass all the findings of the report and present them in report format

1.5 Project Deliverable

The findings of this project will be presented in a formal verbal presentation and a formal written report. It is
expected that the project will provide valuable information and a clear understanding of pollution in ponds (types of
pollutants and their effects and how they behave in water bodies) and how sand filters can be enhanced in order to
make the treatment more effective. It is also expected that a clearer understanding on backwash systems and how
they can be designed will be gained. Also the project will provide an understanding of different coagulants and their
effectiveness in treating polluted water. Overall the project will produce a pond cleaning and filtering system design
that will be used to treat the provided, polluted water samples and is both cost and environmentally effective, this
design will then be evaluated by AQUASIM software in order observe the water quality before and after treatment
using chlorine decay studies.

Project Outcomes

Polluted Pond Filtration

System

Experimental/AQUASIM Formal verbal

Software evaluation of Backwash system design presentation/Formal
water quality written report(Thesis)

Figure 2: Project deliverable summary

5|Page
 Chapter 2.Literature Review Research

2.1 Introduction

Pond treatment technology is used in tens of thousands of applications serving many millions of people across the
globe because it is efficient and effective. While pond treatment technology offers relative simplicity in its
application, it incorporates a host of complex and diverse mechanisms that work to treat and cleanse polluted
waters before their return to our environment .While performance and cost are obviously key bottom line
requirements, the importance of selecting a technology that is appropriate to the needs and constraints of the local
situation where it is installed is essential to achieving long term reliability and success [Andy Shilton, 2005]. The
following literature review will take a look at how the performance of a sand filter can be modeled in order for it to
be used to clean a polluted pond. Part one of the literature review will give an overview of water quality. The second
section will give an overview of sand filters. The section that follows will look at the limitations of sand filters. The
fourth section will look at different ways in which the performance of a sand filter can be enhanced using different
methods including pre and post treatment techniques. Chlorine decay and how it relates to water quality and the
AQUASIM software will be addressed in the fifth section. The final section will conclude the literature review.

2.2 Water Quality

Water quality refers to the chemical, physical and biological characteristics of water [Diersing Nancy, 2009].It is a
measure of the condition of water relative to the requirements of one or more biotic species and/or to any human
need or purpose [A.E. Winter-Nelson, 1997].The common standards (guidelines) used to assess water quality relate
to health of ecosystems, safety of human contact and drinking water. A water quality guideline is a numerical
concentration limit or narrative statements recommended to support and maintain a designated water use
[Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, 2000].Water quality parameters can be
divided into those that have direct toxic effects on organisms and animals (insecticides, herbicides, heavy metals ad
temperature) and those that indirectly affect ecosystems causing a problem for a specified environmental value(
nutrients, turbidity and enrichment with organic matter).Appendix A shows water quality guidelines for different
water uses. Table 3 below, shows considerations concerning risk levels in surface water sources;

Table 3: Considerations concerning the risk levels in surface water sources (Joseph Cotruvo, 1998)

6|Page
2.3 Sand Filtration Technology

Filtration is one of the most important elements in traditional water treatment systems. Sand filters are intended
primarily for water quality enhancement. The effectiveness of filtration systems is determined by their ability to
remove microorganisms, turbidity and color (Color is imparted to water supplies by organic material and can be
removed by coagulation) [US EPA, 1999]. Sand filters have proven effective in removing several common pollutants
from polluted water. Sand filters generally control storm water quality (storm water runoff is a major contributor of
pollutants in water bodies), providing very limited flow rate control. Sand filters take up very little space and can be
used on highly developed sites and sites with steep slopes. Sand filters are able to achieve high removal efficiencies
for sediment, biochemical oxygen demand, and fecal coliform bacteria. Total metal removal however, is moderate
and nutrient removal is often low [EPA, 1999].

Sand filters operate in a similar manner to bioretention systems, with the exception that water passes through a
filter media (typically sand) that has no vegetation growing on the surface. Sand filters do not incorporate vegetation
because the filter media does not retain sufficient moisture to support plant growth [WSUD, 2003].Prior to entering
a sand filter, flows must be subjected to pre-treatment to remove litter, debris and coarse sediments. Following pre-
treatment flows are spread over the sand filtration media and water percolates downwards and is intercepted by
perforated pipe located at the base of the sand media. A sand filter system typically consists of three chambers: and
inlet chamber that allows sedimentation and removal of gross pollutants, a sand filter chamber and a high flow
bypass chamber. The shape of a sand filter can be varied to suit constraints and maintenance access, provided each
of the chambers is adequately sized [Richard A Claytor, 1996].In all filters the primary design/operating parameters
are quality and headloss through the filter and appurtenances [EPA, 1999].

2.3.1 Inflow regulation:

The inflow regulator is used to divert runoff from a pipe, open channels or impervious surface into the filtering
system. The inflow regulator is designed to divert the desired water quality volume into the filter. [Richard A Claytor,
1996]

2.3.2 Pretreatment:
The second key component of any filtration system is pretreatment. It is needed in every design to trap coarse
sediments before they reach the filter bed. Without pretreatment, the filter will quickly clog, and lose its pollutant
removal capability. Sediments deposited in the pretreatment chamber must be periodically removed to maintain the
system. [Richard A Claytor, 1996]

2.3.3 Filter bed and filter media:

Each filtering system utilizes some kind of media such as sand, gravel, peat, grass, soil or compost to filter out
pollutants entrained in water. The selection of the right media is important, as each has different hydraulic, pollutant
removal and clogging characteristics. The filter media is incorporated into the filter bed. The three key properties of
the bed are its surface area, depth and profile. The required surface area for a filter is usually based as a percentage
of impervious area treated and the media itself. The depth of most filtering systems ranges from 18 inches to four
feet. [Richard A Claytor, 1996]

 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 = 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠𝑠/𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 (𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸𝐸, 1999)

 𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀𝑀 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟, 𝑄𝑄 = 𝐾𝐾 ∗ 𝑖𝑖 ∗ 𝐴𝐴- darcy’s equation
 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓, 𝑉𝑉 = 𝑄𝑄/𝐴𝐴

Where;

Q; Flow through pipe; k=permeability rate of filter media; i= hydraulic gradient; A=Area of flow; V=face velocity
7|Page
2.3.4 Mechanism of filtration:
Filtration systems are affected by affected by physical characteristics such as size of the filter medium, filtration
rate, fluid temperature, size and density of suspended solids. As the particles reach the surface of the filter media, an
attachment mechanism is required to retain it. This occurs due to electrostatic interactions and chemical bridging or
adsorption.

2.3.4 Filter hydraulics:

Headloss is usually what determines time to backwashing. The loss of pressure (head loss) through a clean stratified-
sand filter with uniform porosity and laminar flow is given by;

Table 4: typical pollutant removal efficiency of sand filters (Gali 1990)

8|Page
Figure 3: Sand filtration system

Table 5: Estimated pollutant removal capability of different filtration systems.

9|Page
2.4 Limitations of Sand Filtration Technology

2.4.1 Limitations
 Sand filters usually require adequate pre-treatment (coagulation, flocculation) and post treatment(chlorine)
 Both construction and operation are cost-intensive
 Not effective in removing bacteria, viruses, fluoride, arsenic, salts and organic matter.
 Usually requires power-operated pumps, regular backwashing /cleaning and flow control of the filter outlet.
 Sand filters have no vegetation to break up the filter surface; therefore maintenance is critical to ensuring
continued performance, particularly in preserving the hydraulic conductivity of the filtration media
(McGarry and Eddie 2011).

2.4.2 Maintenance
Regular maintenance involves removing the surface layer of fine sediments that can tend to clog the filtration
media. In order to significantly increase ease of maintenance for a sand filter, direct physical access to the whole
surface of the sand filter chamber will be required to remove fine sediments from the surface layer of the filter
media as they accumulate forming a crust. Also the sedimentation chamber needs to be drained for maintenance
purposes. Having freely drained material significantly reduces the removal and disposal maintenance costs. Also
provision should be made for flushing of any sediment build up that occurs in the pipes. [McGarry and Eddie 2011].

2.5 Enhancement of Sand Filtration Technology

2.5.1 Pretreatment
The performance of a filtration technology is greatly impacted by the processes that precede it. Chemical feed,
rapid mix, flocculation and sedimentation may need upgrading to improve overall system performance or
accommodate system expansions. The three basic aspects of chemical feed systems are chemical type, dosage
management and the method of chemical application [US EPA, 1999].

 Coagulation: Coagulation is used to remove turbidity, organic and inorganic matter, colour, taste and odour
producing substances. Chemicals that assist in the removal of suspended solids are added to the untreated
water. Coagulants, rapidly add electrochemical charges that attract the small particles in water to clump
together as a floc. The initial charge neutralization process allows the formed floc to agglomerate but
remain suspended. Coagulation is usually a high energy, rapid mix unit process. Detention time of the
coagulation is about 2-3 seconds. The factors that affect coagulation are (i)kind of coagulant, (ii) Quantity of
coagulant,(iii) pH value of water, (iv) Temperature…etc. [McGarry and Eddie 2011].

Coagulant pH Range Dosage mg/L

Ferric sulphate (FeSO47H2O) 5.5-11 8.5-51

Ferric Sulphate (Fe2(SO4)3 5.5-11 8.5-51
Ferric Chloride (FeCl3) 5.5-11 8.5-51
Sodium Aluminate (Na2Al2O4) 5.5-8 3.4-34
Aluminium Sulphate(Alum)- Al2 5.5-8 5-85
(SO4)3, 18H2
Table 6: Common coagulants and dosage for best floc formation

10 | P a g e
  Flocculation: In this process the precipitates combine into larger particles “Flocs”. The large amorphous
aluminium and iron (III) hydroxides adsorb and enmesh particles in suspension. By slower mixing,
turbulence causes the flocculated water to from larger floc particles and increase in mass. These flocs are
then easier to remove via the subsequent processes of sedimentation and filtration. Large paddles as mixing
devices enhance the formation of the floc. Detention time of flocculation ranges from 10-30 minutes
[McGarry and Eddie 2011]. In the treatment of water and wastewater the degree of mixing is measured by
the velocity gradient, G. The velocity gradient is best thought of as the amount of shear taking place.

 𝐺𝐺 = √𝑃𝑃/𝜇𝜇∀

Where;

G= Velocity gradient, p=power input, ∀ =Volume of water in mixing tank, 𝜇𝜇 =Dynamic viscosity.

Note: Enough mixing must be provided to bring the floc into contact and to keep the floc from settling in the
flocculation basin. Too much mixing will shear the floc particles so that the floc is small and finely dispersed.
Therefore, the velocity gradient must be controlled within a relatively narrow range.

 Sedimentation: flocculated water is applied to large volume tanks where the flow speed slows down (the
flow is almost devoid of turbulence) and the dense floc settles to the bottom. The settled floc is then
removed after it resides at this point to remove all settleable particles from coagulation and is then treated
as waste product., i.e detention time is inversely proportional to the incoming flow rate- as the flow rate
increases, the detention time decreases [McGarry and Eddie 2011]

 𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷𝐷 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 = 𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣𝑣/ 𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖𝑖 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤 𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟

2.5.2 Additional methods of enhancing sand filter performance

In addition to pretreatment, other methods of enhancing sand filter performance can be utilized. Research on
enhancing sand filters and designing them to remove dissolved phosphorus as well is currently being researched
[Erickson et al.2012]. Research on other enhancements to remove dissolved metals is also under way [Andrew J
Erickson, 2013]. Improving filtration systems can increase plant capacity and improve effluent quality. This is usually
achieved by;

 Changing the configuration of the filter media, for example changing the filter media to dual or mixed media
or replacing the top layer of sand with anthracite coal.
 Filtration aid application is also another way in which filtration systems can be improved. These aids prevent
premature turbidity breakthroughs by controlling floc penetration into the filter.
 Addition of polymers to the backwash water can reduce the initial turbidity peaks during filter ripening
following backwash and extend filter operation before breakthrough occurs [US EPA, 1999].
 Although filters are not generally designed to remove dissolved compounds, dissolved phosphorus removal
can be significantly enhanced if the sand is amended with iron, calcium, aluminum or magnesium [Arias te
al.2001].

11 | P a g e
  Another modification that may improve sand filter design and performance that is being tested is the
addition of a peat layer in the filtration chamber. The addition of peat to the sand filter may increase
microbial growth within the sand filter and improve metals and nutrient removal rates [Arias te al.2001].

Table 7: Comparative properties of different filtering media (Galli, 1990)

2.6 Chlorine Decay and AQUASIM Software

The program AQUASIM was developed for the identification and simulation of AQUATIC systems in nature, in
technical plants and in the laboratory. It lets the user define a model using a set of predefined compartments and
links and arbitrary transformation processes and perform simulations, sensitivity analyses and parameter
estimations with this model [Sven E. Jorgensen, 1996]. AQUASIM software will be used to evaluate the water quality
of our project before and after treatment using chlorine decay studies. Reduction in chlorine demand will help to
evaluate the performance of treatment in removing organic compounds and others that consume chlorine [Jega
Jegatheesan, 2014]. When chlorine is added to water, a mixture of hypochorous acid (HOCl) and hydrochloric acid
(HCl) is formed [Gary S Logsdon,2008];

 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 (𝑔𝑔) + 𝐻𝐻20 → 𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻𝐻 + 𝐻𝐻 + 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶

Water supplies are disinfected primarily to inactivate micro-organisms that are harmful to human health. Chlorine
is possibly the most popular disinfectant because of its low cost and efficacy [D.Boccelli, 2003]. Chlorine as a non-
selective oxidant reacts with both organic and inorganic chemical species in water. Chlorine decays after it reacts
with compounds in water. Due to a complex set of reactions and an initial fast reaction, followed by a slower
reaction; it is often difficult to describe chlorine decay. Chlorine decay behavior also varies significantly depending on
the quality of water, types of treatment processes etc. Temperature has also been shown to have a significant effect
on chlorine decay characteristics, and any change in this parameter should be considered [J.C. Powell, 2000].The
general chlorine decay model includes the following reactions between chlorine and other constituents in water
(Bell-Ajy et al., 2000).
12 | P a g e
  𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 + 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)[𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹] 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 … . . … … … . . (1)
 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 + 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 [𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹] 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝐶𝐶ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 … … … . (2)
 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 + 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 (𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐)[𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆] 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 … … … … . … . (3)
 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶2 + 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟𝑟 𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛𝑛 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 [𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆] 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 … … … … . (4)
 𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶𝐶 𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼 𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝𝑝 … … … … … … . (5)

In this study, the experimental chlorine decay data are used to estimate values of chlorine demand. The total
amount of total chlorine demand which is the sum of chlorine demand for fast and slow reacting agents can be used
as an indication of the disinfection by product [DBP] precursor’s concentration in the water.

 𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹𝐹 𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 + 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 𝑐𝑐ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙 = 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐶𝐶ℎ𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙

 Combined chlorine= Combined chlorine is total chloramines. They are generated when free chlorine reacts with
contaminants in water.
 Free chlorine= Amount of chlorine available to kill microorganisms in water.

The graphs below show the AQUASIM software output of 6mg/L and 10mg/L inputs as shown in the tables below.

Time(min) 0 0.01 0.083 0.166 0.25 0.33 0.416 0.5 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 17

6 mg/L 6 1.23 1.29 1.29 094 0.9 0.89 0.8 0.67 0.56 0.55 0.39 0.34 0.34 0.07

(Free
chlorine)

6 mg/L 6 1.3 1.25 1.17 1.11 1.07 1.02 0.97 0.87 0.79 0.72 0.64 0.55 0.46 0.22

(Total
chlorine)

Table 8: 6mg/L dosage of chlorine (free and total) with time

Figure 4: AQUASIM software output for 6mg/L chlorine dosage.

13 | P a g e
Time 0 0.01 0.083 0.166 0.25 0.33 0.416 0.5 1 1.5 2 3 4 5 17

10 mg/L 10 6.4 6 6 6 6 5.8 5.7 5.2 5 4.8 4.2 4 3.6 0.63

(Free
chlorine)

10 mg/L 10 6.7 6.7 6.6 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.3 5.8 5. 5.4 4.9 4.6 4.6 4.4

(Total
chlorine)

Table 9: 10mg/L dosage of chlorine (free and total) with time

Figure 5: AQUASIM software output for 10mg/L chlorine dosage.

14 | P a g e
 Chapter 3.Materials and Methodology

This chapter describes the materials and methods used in this project. A strategies chart has been constructed and
is shown below.

Start

Experimental
Research techniques
Techniques

Books & Deakin Jar Testing(Evaluation of different

journals University Previous coagulants)
Website Research Papers

Enhance sand filter by using

different filter media configurations

Design of backwash system

Directly related
Evaluation of water quality using
AQUASIM SOFTWARE (chlorine
Data Collecting decay studies)

Data Analysis

Matching results

Establishing a
relationship between
experimental and
predicted data

Project outcomes

Writing Final Thesis

Finish

Figure 6: Methodology strategies chart.

15 | P a g e
3.1 Methodology
This project will include both theoretical study and practical experiments. The theoretical study will mainly discuss
the theories behind water pollution, its effects and information on different types of pollutants and their behavior in
water bodies(transport phenomena, chemical reactions etc),its treatment, including treatment using different filter
media configurations. This part of the project will be covered by using academic and scientific resources such as,
academic journals and papers from academic databases, as well as scientific data sheets.
The practical part of the assignment will be done in the Civil Engineering laboratory at Deakin University Waurn
Ponds Campus. It will basically be implementing the theories and designs discussed in the theoretical part.

3.2 Raw Water

All experiments were carried out with raw water collected from the different ponds located at the Deakin university
Waurn ponds Campus. Their initial parameters will be measured (pH, Turbidity.etc). pH correction is to be done
before coagulation tests are performed.

3.3 Coagulation Tests (Refer to section 2.3.2- Pretreatment; for technical aspect of Jar testing)
Jar testing will then be used to perform the coagulation experiments and evaluate the different coagulants (Alum,
Ferric chloride, etc) and coagulant doses, to see which is more effective in terms of cost and performance. These
tests were performed using jar-testing apparatus. These samples will be chlorinated at every stage in the treatment
process. Jar testing will be done in three stages which will take approximately 1 hour. After dosing, the water
samples (1.0 L) are to undergo 1 minute of rapid mixing at 200 RPM, followed by 30 minutes for slow mixing at 20
RPM and 30 minutes for settling, parameters (pH, of the effluent will then be measured)

Figure 7: Jar testing (Deakin University 2014)

16 | P a g e
3.3 Enhancement of sand filter (Refer to section 2.5- Enhancement of sand filter for more technical aspect)
Enhancement of sand filter will be conducted in Deakin University Laboratory and will be done by trying different
configurations of the filter media (adding different material) and evaluating which configuration is the most effective
after having measured the parameters of the effluent.

3.4 Chlorine decay experiments (To be decided)- (Refer to section 2.6- for more technical aspect of chlorine decay)
Although AQUASIM software will be the primary means we will use to evaluate water quality before and after
treatment using chlorine decay studies, an alternative experimental technique can be employed. Chlorine decay
experiments are to be conducted in dark brown bottles to prevent light penetration or algae growth. Thereby the
decay of chlorine is due reducing compounds present in water samples. Two treated samples (500mL) will be
transferred into the bottles and dosed with 2.0 and 2.5mg/l chlorine (as Cl2) to keep the free residual chlorine no less
than 0.3 mg/L after 30min contact. Free and total chlorine concentrations will then be measured continuously for 7
days using free & total chlorine measuring meter.

3.5 Design of backwash system

Design of backwash system to be conducted in Deakin University Laboratory, it will be used to remove solids that
accumulate in the filter media and is generally performed by backwashing clean water in the opposite direction of
flow. This will be accomplished periodically to control head loss through the filtration system.

3.5 AQUASIM Software (Refer to section 2.6- for more technical aspect of chlorine decay and AQUASIM software)
AQUASIM software will be used to evaluate the water quality before and after treatment using chlorine decay
studies. Reduction in chlorine demand will help to evaluate the performance of treatment in removing organic
compounds and others that consume chlorine.

3.7 Apparatus
In order to perform our experiments and tests, we will need the following apparatus;
• pH meter
• Stirring machine(for Jar testing)
• Volumetric flasks
• Watch or clock
• Turbidity meter
• Sand filter
• Different materials to enhance sand filter media

17 | P a g e
 Chapter 4.Timeline for whole project
4.1 Project A
Tasks Sub Tasks Description Duration
Understanding the 1 Finding references Searching for the related references Week 2
target of the to the research topic
project 2 Reading task Reading through references and Week 2
narrowing down the research topic
3 Having first meeting Identifying key questions to be Week 2
with supervisor investigated and getting a clear
understanding of the project
objectives

Understanding the 1 Contacting Technical 1. Safety induction Week 2

theoretical and officer Mrs Leanne 2. Getting a clearer
experimental Farago understanding of what is
expectations and expected from lab work,
outcomes of the gaining an understanding of
project how the equipment works.
3. Organizing materials
needed for the experiment
2 Preparing project 1. Developing a research Week 3
specification strategy
2. Defining the project outputs
3. Scheduling a timeline for
project thesis

Writing project 1 Having second meeting Narrowing down project objectives Week 3
proposal with supervisor and developing methodologies that
will help strategically meet project
aim
2 Constructing project 1. Outlining the objective of Week4-5
proposal the project
2. Defining the benefits and
outputs of the project
3. Providing a literature

18 | P a g e
 review including

Experiment 1 Gathering experiment Gathering results from previous Week 5-8

Conducting results experiments and from our own
experiments to be used for data
analysis

2 Having third meeting Get feedback on project progress Week 7

with supervisor and ideas on how to make it better

Oral Presentation 1 Powerpoint presentation Prepare a powerpoint presentation Week 7-9

preparation to express the idea of the project in
its entirety
2 Presentation of Explain and present the data we Week 7-9
outcomes have collected and analyzed
3 Having fourth meeting Get feedback on PowerPoint
with supervisor presentation and discuss ways in
which to improve it.
4 Presentation of final Present the final result, and explain Week 7-9
result how we got to choose this as the
most effective

Preparing a 1 Collecting data from 1. Gathering information Week 9-11

research report research papers about the performance of
sand filters and pollution in
ponds
2. Analyze the data to be used
in a case study
2 Surveying Literature 1. Developing extended Week 9-11
literature review about the
performance of sand filters
and pollution in ponds and
expand understanding using
recent studies.
3 Having fifth meeting Get feedback on research report Week 10
with supervisor and discuss ways in which to
improve it.

19 | P a g e
 4 Writing Final research Putting all the information gained Week 9-11
report so far in report format
Table 10. Project A progress timeline

Timeline of the project A as illustrated by a Gannt chart is shown below:

20 | P a g e
21 | P a g e
4.1 Project B
Tasks Description
Experimental process and
results analysis
Modelling performance of
sand filter to be used to
clean polluted pond
22 | P a g e
Duration
• Experiment implementation Week 1
• Observation and improvements
• Repeating experiments carefully and Week 2
concisely
• Reporting any changes
• Repeating experiment if needed to get
better results.
• Investigation and collection of data Week 2
analysis from experimental outcome
• Finalizing and analyzing experimental Week 3
data with predicted data.
• Collect enough data to start using Week 4
AQAUSIM software
• Begin using AQUASIM software
to evaluate water quality
• Start modelling performance of sand filter Week 5
using different techniques
• Discuss any issues if needed
• Modelling/design in progress Week 6
• Improvement on progress if needed Week 7
• Modelling/design still in progress
• Gathering data so far and discussing it.
4. Develop ideal (most effective) process Week 8
that is to be used to model the
performance of the sand filter
 • Writing down and finalizing modelling Week 9-10
section and providing clear explanations
using graphs, figures, etc.
• Comparing experimental observation and
prediction with modelling outcomes

Project report • Finalizing the final report of the project Wee 11

Project poster and final • Summarizing information for project Week 12

presentation presentation

Table 11. Project B progress Time line

Timeline of the project B as illustrated by a Gannt chart is shown below:

23 | P a g e
24 | P a g e
 Chapter 5.Conclusion/ Reflective Paper

5.1 Logbook
Refer to appendix B

5.2 Conclusion

In conclusion, the report outlines how polluted pond water can be treated using water treatment methods
specifically a sand filtration system and the parameters that should be considered in order to ensure that the design
is effective in terms of performance, accessibility, cost and maintenance. AQUASIM software will also play a huge
role in evaluating the water quality before and after treatment using chlorine decay studies. Reduction in chlorine
demand will help to evaluate the performance of treatment in removing organic compounds and others that
consume chlorine. The overall project will produce a sand filter whose performance has been modelled using various
techniques to treat a polluted pond.

6.2 Reflective paper/Document

The main strength of this project lies in the practicality of it. The amount of experimentation and testing that will
be done on different coagulants and different filter media configurations will give a wide range of results which will
ease the criteria for selecting the final design. It will also give a practical understanding of how the pretreatment and
filtration stages of water treatment processes work, and help outline ways in which they can be improved in order to
be more effective. Another practical aspect of the project is the use of AQUASIM software, which will reduce the
cost and time of having to experimentally evaluate the water quality before and after treatment. The project, thanks
to the amount of research involved will enable implementation of theoretical understanding in a practical way
(design).
One of the weaknesses of the project is the fact that because pond pollution and filter enhancement is not a
topic that has been intensely researched in the past, there is limited access to vital information which may not have
been researched yet, but the project does have the advantage of being one more resource to be used for future
reference.

25 | P a g e
References

1. Weiner, Ruth F, 2003. Environmental engineering. 4th ed. Amsterdam; Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

2. Kumar, Arnab, 2009. Environmental engineering. 1st Ed. New Delhi: New Age International (P) Ltd.,
Publishers.

3. Ravenscoft, Peter, 2009. Arsenic Pollution: A Global Synthesis. 1st ed. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons Ltd

4. Liu, David H.F, 2000. Groundwater and Surface Water Pollution. 1st ed. USA: Lewis Publishers.

5. Shilton, Andy, 2005. Pond Treatment technology. 1st ed. United Kingdom: IWA Publishing.

6. Logsdon, Gary S, 2008. Pond Treatment technology. 1st ed. United States of America: American water works
association.p.220

7. Erickson, Andrew J, 2013. Optimizing Storm water Treatment Practices: A Handbook of Assessment and
maintenance. 1st ed. United States of America: Springer science and business media.

8. Graham, Nigel, 1996. Advances in Slow Sand and Alternative Biological Filtration. 1st ed. United states of
America: Wiley Publishers.

9. Graham, Nigel, 1996. Advances in Slow Sand and Alternative Biological Filtration. 1st ed. United states of
America: Wiley Publishers.

10. Cotruvo, Joseph A, 1999. Providing Safe Drinking Water in Small Systems: Technology, Operations, and
economies. 1st ed. Washington D.C: Lewis Publishers.

11. Gimbel, Rolf, 2006. Recent Progress in Slow Sand and Alternative Biofiltration Processes. 1st ed. United
Kingdom: IWA Publishing.

12. AECOM + McGarry and Eadie. April 2011. Water Sensitive Urban Design for the Coastal Dry Tropics
(Townsville): Design Objectives for Stormwater Management. Prepared for Twonsville City Council.

13. Erickson, Andrew J, 2013. Optimizing Stormwater Treatment Practices: A Handbook of Assessment and
Maintenance. 1st ed. New York: Springer Publishers.

14. US EPA.2002. Technologies for upgrading existing or designing new water drinking water. United States
Environmental Protection Agency.

15. Effects of Water Pollution. 2014. Effects of Water Pollution. [ONLINE] Available
at: http://greenliving.lovetoknow.com/Effects_of_Water_Pollution. [Accessed 13 April 2014]
.
16. EPA. 2014. Stormwater technology fact sheet.
http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/upload/2002_06_28_mtb_sandfltr.pdf. [Accessed 13 April 2014]

26 | P a g e
 17. U.S. Geological Survey, 2007, USGS NAWQA glossary: U.S. Geological Survey, access date May 14, 2014.
<http://water.usgs.gov/nawqa/glos.html>

18. Diersing, Nancy (2009). "Water Quality: Frequently Asked Questions." Florida Brooks National Marine
Sanctuary, Key West, FL. Access date May 28 2014 < http://floridakeys.noaa.gov/scisummaries/wqfaq.pdf>

19. Johnson, D.L., S.H. Ambrose, T.J. Bassett, M.L. Bowen, D.E. Crummey, J.S. Isaacson, D.N. Johnson, P. Lamb, M.
Saul, and A.E. Winter-Nelson (1997). "Meanings of environmental terms." Journal of Environmental Quality.
26: 581-589. Access date May 28 2014 <http://dx.doi:10.2134/jeq1997.00472425002600030002x>

20. Logsdon, Gary S., 2008. Water Filtration Practices:Including Slow Sand Filters and Precoat Filtration. 1st ed.
United States of America: American water works association.

21. HDR, Engineering INC, 2001. Handbook of Public Water systems. 2nd ed. United States of America: John
Wiley & Sons.

22. D. Boccelli, M. Tryby, J. Uber, R. Summers, A reactive species model for chlorine decay and THM formation
under rechlorination conditions, Water Research 37(2003) 2654–2666.

23. J.C. Powell, N.B. Hallam, J.R. West, C.F. Forster, J. Simms, Factors which control
bulk chlorine decay rates, Water Research 34 (2000) 117–126.

24. National Water Quality Management Strategy., 2000. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and
Marine Water Quality. Volume 1. Australia. Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation
Council.

25. Ates, N., Kitis, M. and Yetis, U. (2007). Formation of chlorination by-products in waters with low SUVA-
correlations with SUVA and differential UV spectroscopy. Water Research,41(18), 4139-4148.

26. The CRC for Water Quality and Treatment , 2003. Optimisation of chlorine residual in a distribution system.
Research report No 30. Australia. The CRC for Water Quality and Treatment.

27. Clayto Richard A. and Schueler Thomas R. , 1996. Design of Stormwater filtering systems. Volume 1. Unites
States of America. Chesapeake Research Consortium.

28. City of Austin, TX. 1988. Water Quality Management. In Environmental Criteria Manual.
Environmental and Conservation Services. Austin, TX.

29. National Water Quality Management Strategy. 2011. Australian Drinking Water guidelines. Volume 6.
Australia. Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council.

30. Kohpaei Jabari Ahmad and Sathasivan Arumugan, 2011. Chlorine decay prediction in bulk water using the
parallel second order model: an analytical solution development. Australia. Elsevier B.V.

31. Jegatheesan Jega, 2014. AQUASIM Software and chlorine decay.Australia. Deakin university.

32. E. Chang, P.C. Chiang, S.H. Chao, Y.L. Lin, Relationship between chlorine con-
sumption and chlorination by-products formation for model compounds,
Chemosphere 64 (2006) 1196–1203.

27 | P a g e
Appendix A. Water Quality Guidelines

A.1 Guidelines for different uses

i|Page
A.2 Guidelines for recreational water quality and aesthetics

A.3 Guidelines for drinking water

ii | P a g e
iii | P a g e
A.4 Guidelines for Aquatic ecosystems

iv | P a g e
Appendix B. Logbook

v|Page
Figure B.1- Jar testing using different alum dosages.

vi | P a g e
Discussion of mass balance equation and other underlying principles of water pollution in ponds.

vii | P a g e
viii | P a g e
ix | P a g e
x|Page