Solutions Manual 412

Solutions Manual
Water Supply and Pollution Control

Eighth Edition
Warren Viessman, Jr., P.E.

University of Florida
Mark J. Hammer, Emeritus Engineer

Lincoln, Nebraska
Elizabeth M. Perez, P.E.

Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Paul A. Chadik, P.E.

University of Florida
This work is protected by United States copyright laws and is provided solely for the use of instructors in teaching their courses
and assessing student learning. Dissemination or sale of any part of this work (including on the World Wide Web) will destroy
the integrity of the work and is not permitted. The work and materials from it should never be made available to students except
Solutions Manual
Water Supply and Pollution Control, Eighth Edition
Page 2
by instructors using the accompanying text in their classes. All recipients of this work are expected to abide by these restrictions
and to honor the intended pedagogical purposes and the needs of other instructors who rely on these materials.
CHAPTER 1
NO SOLUTIONS REQUIRED
CHAPTER 2
WATER RESOURCES PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
2.1 The Internet is an excellent source of information on this topic. The level of integrated
water resources management varies by state.
2.2 Virtually all of the laws listed in Table 2.1 provide some protection for preventing and
controlling water pollution. Information on each law may be found on the Internet. It is
also important to note that the EPA only regulates at the Federal level and much of the
cleanup and protection is now delegated to states and local governments.
2.3 Point source pollution = Pollution that originates at one location with discrete discharge
points. Typical examples include industrial and wastewater treatment facilities.
Nonpoint source pollution = Pollution that is usually input into the environment in a
dispersed manner. Typical examples include stormwater runoff that contains fertilizers,
pesticides, herbicides, oils, grease, bacteria, viruses, and salts.
2.4 Adverse health effects of toxic pollutants are numerous and can include a variety of
conditions. Some pollutant-related conditions include asthma, nausea, and various
cancers—among many others.
2.5 Agencies that are responsible for water quantity and quality significantly vary by state.
2.6 This is a subjective question and one that has been and will continue to be debated in the
water resources community.
2.7 Integrated water resources management is difficult to achieve because it involves both a
financial and resources investment over time. It is also important to obtain concensus on
this approach from all of the involved stakeholders. This difficulty is perhaps why there
are so few examples of true integrated water resources management.
2.8 This question is subjective but the student should research specific examples to support
their argument.
Solutions Manual
Page 3
CHAPTER 3
THE HYDROLOGIC CYCLE AND NATURAL WATER SOURCES
3.1 The answer to this question will vary by location.
3.2 reservoir area = 3900/640 = 6.1 sq. mi.

annual runoff = (14/12)(190 – 6.1)(640) = 137,704 ac-ft
annual evaporation = (49/12)(3900) = 15,925 ac-ft
draft = (100 X 365 X 106)/(7.48 X 43,560) = 112,022 ac-ft
precipitation on lake = (40/12)(3900) = 13,000 ac-ft
gain in storage = 137,704 + 13,000 = 150,704
loss in storage = 112,022 + 15,925 = 127,947
net gain in storage = 22,757 ac-ft
3.3 reservoir area = 1700 hec = 17 X 106 sq. meters

annual runoff = 0.3(500 X 106 – 17 X 106) = 144 X 106 sq. meters
annual evaporation = 1.2 X 17 X 106 = 20.4 X 106 sq. meters
draft = 4.8 X 24 X 60 X 60 X 365 = 151.37 X 106 m3
precipitation on lake = 0.97 X 17 X 106 = 16.49 X106 m3
gain in storage = 144 X 106 +16.49 X 106 = 160.49 106
loss in storage = 151.37 X 106 + 20.4 X 106 = 171.77 X 106
net loss in storage = 11.28 X 106 m3
3.4 To complete a water budget, it is first important to understand how the water budget will be
used and what time step will be necessary to successfully model the system. Once the
budget is conceptually designed, a variety of online sources can usually be used to collect
the data. These sources include—but are not limited to:
 state regulatory agencies

 special water districts
 weather agencies,
 local governments
 geological surveys
 agricultural agencies
Historical data and previous reports can also yield important information on the system.
Verification and calibration data should also be considered as part of the data collection
effort.
3.5 The solution for this problem will vary based on location.
Solutions Manual
Page 4
3.6
Event (n) Precip (inches) Tr = n/m Freq. (% years)
1 33 10 10
2 29 5 20
3 28 3.33 30
4 28 2.5 40
5 27 2 50
6 26 1.67 60
7 22 1.4 70
8 21 1.25 80
9 19 1.1 90
10 18 1 100
n = 10, m = rank, Tr = n/m, Freq = (1/Tr) X 100 Then plot precipitation versus frequency.
3.7
Event (n) Precip (inches) Tr = n/m Freq. (% years)

1 89 10 10
2 75 5 20
3 72 3.33 30
4 70 2.5 40
5 69 2 50
6 66 1.67 60
7 56 1.4 70
8 54 1.25 80
9 48 1.1 90
10 46 1 100
n = 10, m = rank, Tr = n/m, Freq = (1/Tr) X 100 Then plot precipitation versus frequency.
Solutions Manual
Page 5
3.8 Once the data is organized in a table (see below), the solution can be found. Note that the
cumulative max deficiency is 131.5 mg/mi 2, which occurs in September. The number of
months of draft is 131.5/(448/12) = 3.53. Therefore, enough storage is needed to supply
the region for about 3.5 months.
Month Inflow I Draft O Cumulative Deficiency Cumulative

Inflow Σ I O-I Deficiency
Σ (O – I)*
Feb 31 37.3 31 6.3 6.3

March 54 37.3 85 -16.7 0
April 90 37.3 175 -52.7 0
May 10 37.3 185 27.3 27.3
June 7 37.3 192 30.3 57.6
July 8 37.3 200 29.3 86.9
Aug 2 37.3 202 35.3 122.2
Sep 28 37.3 230 9.3 131.5
Oct 42 37.3 272 -4.7 126.8
Nov 108 37.3 380 -70.7 56.1
Dec 98 37.3 478 -60.7 0
Jan 22 37.3 500 15.3 15.3
Feb 50 37.3 550 -12.7 2.6
* Only positive values of cumulative deficiency are tabulated.
3.9 S = 128,000/10*100*640 = 0.20
3.10 S = 0.0002 = volume of water pumped divided by the average decline in piezometric
head times surface area
0.0002 = V/(400 X 100)

Noting that there are 640 acres per square mile
V = 0.0002 X 400 X 100 X 640 = 5120 acre-feet
Solutions Manual
Page 6
3.11 Draft = (0.726 mgd) X (30 days/mo) = 21.8 mg/month
Month Inflow I Draft O Deficiency Cumulative
O-I Deficiency
Σ (O – I)*
April 97 21.8 -75.2 0
May 136 21.8 -114.2 0
June 59 21.8 37.2 0
July 14 21.8 7.8 7.8
Aug 6 21.8 15.8 23.6
Sep 5 21.8 16.8 40.43
Oct 3 21.8 18.8 59.2
Nov 7 21.8 14.8 74
Dec 19 21.8 2.8 76.8
Jan 13 21.8 8.8 85.6
Feb 74 21.8 -52.2 33.4*
March 96 21.8 -74.2 0
April 37 21.8 -15.2 0
May 63 21.8 -41.2 0
June 49 21.8 -27.2 0
*Maximum storage deficiency is January 85.6 mg/mo/sq. mi.
Storage capacity = 85.6 mg/mo/sq.mi.
3.12 Pn = (1 – 1/Tr)n
log Pn = n Log (1 – 1/Tr)
n = log Pn/log (1 – 1/Tr)
A straight line can be defined by this equation and the following probability curves will
appear.
Solutions Manual
Page 7
3.13 20 month flow equals the sum of 12 + 11 + 10 + 12 + … + 6 + 7 + 9 = 169 cfs
3.14
Solutions Manual
Page 8
3.15
3.16 Reservoir capacity = 750 acre-feet

Reservoir yield is the amount of water which can be supplied during a specified time
period. Assume the reservoir is to be operated continuously for 1 year without recharge.
Also assume that evaporation, seepage, and other losses are zero.
Max continuous yield is 750 acre-ft/year
Or 750 X 43,560 X 0.304 = 917, 846 cubic meters per year
Or 750 X 43,560 X 7.48 X 365 X 24 X 60 = 465 gpm continuously for 1 year
3.17 Constant annual yield = 1500 gpm

Reservoir capacity = ? Time of operation without recharge = 1 yr
Res. Capacity = 1500 X 365 X 24 X 60 X 0.134 X (1/43,560) = 2,425 ac-ft/yr
This storage will provide a yield of 1,500 gpm for one year without any recharge
3.18 mean draft = 100 mgd, catchment area = 150 sq. mi., reservoir area = 4000 acres
rainfall = 38 inches, runoff = 13 inches, evaporation = 49 inches (mean annual)
(a) gain or loss in storage = ?

ΔS = rainfall + runoff – evaporation – draft
rainfall = 38 X 4000 X (1/12) = 12,667 ac-ft
runoff = [(150 X 640) – 4000] X 13 X (1/12) = 99,967 ac-ft
evaporation = 49 X 4000 X (1/12) = 16,333 ac-ft
draft = 100,000,000 X 365 X 0.134 X (43,560) = 112,282 ac-ft
ΔS = 12,667 + 99,667 – 16,333 – 112,282 = -16,281 ac-ft
The net loss in storage is 16, 281 ac-ft
Solutions Manual
Page 9
(b) volume of water evaporated = 16,333 ac-ft
given a community of 100,000 people, assume a consumption of 150 gpcd
water demand = 100,000 X 150 X 365 = 5,475 mg/year
volume evaporated = 16,333 X 43,560 X 7.48 = 5,304 mg/year
evaporated water could supply the community with their water needs for
5304/5475 = 0.97 or for about one year
3.19 Use equation 3.29

K = 0.000287
h = 43
m=8
n = 15
q = 0.000287*8*43/15 = 0.006582
Total Q is therefore 50*0.006582 = 0.325 cfs
3.20 q= 000084*8*22/15 = 0.000986

Q = 0.0007872*35 = 0.0345 m3/s
3.21 u = (1.87r2Sc)/Tt
= (1.87 * 1 * 6.4 * 10-4)/(6200 * 7.5 * 24 * 60) = 8.58 x 10 -10
Interpolating, W(u) = 20.3
S = (114.6 * 60,000 * 7.5 * 20.3)/(6,200 * 7.5 * 24 * 60) = 15.6
528Q log(r2 / r1 )
3.22 Kf 
m( h 2 h1 )
528 *850 * log(10) gpd

Kf   554 2
90 * (10  1) ft
3.23 Equation 3.20 is applicable
2 2
K f (h2  h1 )
Q
1055 log(r2 / / r1)
r 235
log( 2 )  log( )  0.37107
r1 100
h2  100  21  79 ft
h1  100  22.2  77.8 ft
Solutions Manual
Page 10
1320(792  77.82 )
Q  634.44 gpm
1055 * 0.37107
3.24 Using Equation 3.35, u can be computed
1.87 * 2002 * 3 *104

u  6.23 *10 5
3 * 104 * 12
Referring to Table 3.5 and interpolating, we estimate W(u) to be 9.1. Then using
Equation 3.34, the drawdown is found to be:
114 .6 * 9.1 * 300

s  10.41 ft
3 *104
3.25 (a) Using Equation 3.35, u can be computed as follows:
90 * 90 * 0.00098
u  0.71
4 * 1000 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, W(u) is found to be 0.36. Applying Equation 3.33, the drawdown
can be determined
0.0038 * 0.36
s 0.039m
4 *  * 0.0028
(c) Follow the procedure used in (a)
90 * 90 * 0.00098
u  0.0098
4 * 72000 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, W(u) is found to be 4.06. Applying Eq. 3.33, the drawdown can be
determined
0.0038 * 4.06
s  0.44m
4 *  * 0.000028
100 * 100 * 0.001

u  0.25
4 * 3600 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, the drawdown can be determined,
0.004 *1.07
s  0.12m
4 *  * 0.0028
Solutions Manual
Page 11
(b) Follow the procedure used in (a)
100 * 100 * 0.001

u  0.01
4 * 24 * 60 * 60 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, W(u) is found to be 4.04
Applying Equation 3.33, the drawdown can be determined
0.004 * 4.04
s  0.46m
4 *  * 0.0028
150 * 150 * 0.001

u  0.46
4 * 12 * 60 * 60 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, the drawdown can be determined,
0.003 * 0.36
s  0.05m
4 *  * 0.0028
(b) Follow the procedure used in (a)
500 * 500 * 0.001

u  0.023
4 *12 * 60 * 60 * 0.0028
Then from Table 3.5, W(u) is found to be 3.24
Applying Equation 3.33, the drawdown can be determined
0.003 * 3.24
s  0.28m
4 *  * 0.0028
K f * 2 *  * ( h2  h1 ) 600 * 2 * 3.1416 * 100 * 8

3.28 Q   13,392 gal/min
528 * log10 (120 / 45) 528 * log10 (120 / 45)
528 * Q * log10 ( r2 / r1 ) 528 * 1200 * log10 (500 / 75)

3.29 Kf    407.62 gpd/ft2
m( h2  h1 ) 100 * 1.28
264 * Q
3.30 T 
h
From a plot of drawdown versus t, drawdown per log cycle is 28.2 – 10.5 = 17.1
T
Q *17.1 
264
Converting T to gal/day/ft
Solutions Manual
Page 12
T=5100
5100
Q *17.1  330 gpm
264
3.31 From plot of data, t0=1.25 minutes = 20.87 x 10-3 ft/day, and from plot,
Dh 14 feet
264 * 300
T   5657 gpd/ft
14
0.3 * T * t0 0.3 * 5657 * 0.87 * 103
Sc    0.00041
r2 602
1.87 * r 2 * Sc
3.32 u  0.00011
Tt
W(u)=-0.577216-ln(u)
Substituting and solving, using loge(u)
W(u)=8.537
114.6 * Q *W (u ) 114.6 * 280 * 8.537
S   8.84 feet
T 3.1 *104
3.33 Use Equation 3.22
r
ln( 2 )  0.477
r1
600 * 2 *  *100 * 9
Q  13,468 gpm
528 * 0.477

500
528 * 1300 * ln( )
Kf  65  433.2 gpd
130 * 10.8 ft 2
3.35 Use Equation 3.37 and refer to figure which follows
Solutions Manual
Page 13
T=700*7.5 = 5250 gpd/ft
From Fig change in head is 9.53 feet
5250 * 9.53
Q  189.5 gpm
264
Solutions Manual
Page 14
r
log 10 ( 2 )  0.41683
r1
1300 * (79.4 * 79.4  77.5 * 77.5)
Q=  881 gpm
1055 * 0.41683
3.37 Use Equations 3.34 and 3.35 refer to the following figure determine s and r2/t from the
figure = 1.36 and 20,000
Determine u and W(u) from the figure = 0.09 and 1.9
114 .6 * 500 * 1.9 gpd
T   80,050
1.365 ft
0.09 * 80050
Sc   0.1926
1.87 * 20000
Solutions Manual
Page 15
50 (100 2  60 2 )

66 100 2  y 12
y12  1560 , y1=39.5
Drawdown is 100-39.5=60.5 feet

Log of the ratio = 0.1856
528 * 700 * 0.1856 gpd
Kf   428.8 2
80 * (97  95) ft
Solutions Manual
Page 16
CHAPTER 4
ALTERNATIVE SOURCES OF WATER SUPPLY
4.1 Varies by location—students should be encouraged to research this on the Internet and in
other local publications. It is useful for the student to learn what technologies are used in
their community since they will be explained further in later chapters of the book and this
will provide them with a vested interest.
4.2 The Internet is a good source of baseline information on this topic, in addition to the
many water publications that are available to students in the library that will provide a
more in-depth coverage. The social, political, and financial constraints of any water
conflicts should also be discussed—in addition to the technical challenges.
4.3 The Internet is a good source of baseline information on this topic, in addition to the
many water publications that are available to students in the library that will provide a
more in-depth coverage. The social, political, and financial constraints of any conflicts
should also be discussed—in addition to the technical challenges. This problem was
included in the text to encourage students to contrast their local conditions with the many
pressing water issues throughout the world.
4.4 Water conservation can include the following measures, among many others:
 shutting off the water while brushing your teeth

 low-flow shower heads
 the many water conservation toilets
 loading water-based appliances to full capacity before running
 using intelligent irrigation measures and generally reducing irrigation
 rain barrels and cisterns
 rain gardens
 washing your car in a facility that recycles the water
 conserving, recycling, and preserving in general (it is important to note the water
that goes into creation of our consumer goods and food)
Solutions Manual
Page 17
CHAPTER 5
WATER USE TRENDS AND FORECASTING
5.1 2.75 x 106 ac-ft = 0.90 x 1012 gallons

Time = (0.90 x 1012)/(180 x 100,000) = 49,913 days
= 136.7 years
5.2 Q = 200 x 0.1 = 20 cfs = 12.93 mgd

Population = 12.39 x 106 / 175 = 73,886 people
5.3 Answers will vary.
5.6 Irrigation water use = 3 ac-ft/acre

Assume irrigation season = 180 days (about 5 months)
Irrigation water use only on a daily basis during the irrigation season is
(1,500 x 3)/180 = 25 acre ft/day
Converting to mgd
43,560 x 1 x 7.7 = 326,700 gallons per acre ft
25 x 326,700 = 8.2 mgd
For the city, the water use is
130,000 x 180 = 23.4 mgd
Thus during the irrigation season, the municipal water use per day is
23.4/8.2 = about 2.9 times greater than the irrigation water use
5.9 (a) Assume lot sizes = 10,000 sq ft

Using Figure 5.2, find a max day value of 800 gpd/dwelling unit
For 4400 dwelling units, 4000 * 800 = 3,520,000 gpd
Or 3,520,000/(24*60)=2,444 gpm
The combined draft is therefore 1,000+2,444=3,444 gpm
(b) From Fig 5.3, for 4400 dwelling units, and a density of 4, find peak hour = 5,000 gpm
Therefore, the peak hour controls.
5.11 number of dwelling units = 1000 x 4 = 4000

Use Fig. 5.3 and read up from a = 4000
Solutions Manual
Page 18
Find 5000 gpm as peak hourly flow
5.12 Using Figure 5.2, find an average annual water use of 250 gpd/dwelling unit,
Lot size = 10,000 sq ft (4 lots per acre)
Thus annual urban water use is
Q=100*4*250*365=36,500,000 gal/year
Irrigation water use is
Q=100*2.5*43,560*7.47=81,457,200 gal/year
This makes for a difference = 44,957,200 gal/year (decrease)
5.13 7/2.5 = 9/X

X = 9*2.5/7=3.2 bgd
Assume 15% reduction in per capita use
Then in 2010, the requirement would be 3.2*0.85 = 2.72 bgd
5.14 1995 = 200,000 = 43 mgd

2010 = 260,000
180 gpcd given
(a) No change in use rate
260,000*180 = 46.8 mgd
Expansion is needed
(b) 160 gpcd
260,000*160 = 41.6 mgd
Less capacity required.
5.15 Treatment capacity in 1995 = 35 mgd

Year 2010 use rate = 140 gpcd
(a) 260,000*140 = 36.4 mgd capacity required
Thus capacity in 2010 would not be adequate
(b) Population increase in 15 years = 60,000
Assume annual increase =4000
4000*140x(X) = 1.4 mgd
X = 2.5 years
New treatment facilities would already be needed – in 2007 (2010 – 2.5)
(c) 260,000(X) = 35 mgd
Rate would have to be reduced to about 134 gpcd, a fairly achievable reduction
Solutions Manual
Page 19
5.16 Industrial
1.5*0.1+1.5 = 1.65 bgd in 2010
Municipal
Assume 180 gpcd
2,000,000*180 = 360 mgd increase
Thus in 2000, use = 1.0 + 0.36 = 1.36 bgd
Steam electric
Plant factor = 0.6
3,000,000 KW * 50 gal/KWh*24h/d*0.6 = 2.16 bgd
Steam electric in 2000 = 2.0 +2.16 = 4.16 bgd
Total Year 2010 Withdrawal
1.65+1.36+4.16 = 7.17 bgd
5.18 450 x 4 = 1800 dwellings

Use fig 5.3 and find the peak hour water use = 2300 gpm
Peak hourly sewage flow
Peak hr = 3x avg
Assume avg water use = 105 gpcd and 75% return
Thus avg sewage flow = 78.8 gpcd
Peak hr = 78.8 x 3 = 236.4 gpcd
Solutions Manual
Page 20
CHAPTER 6
CONVEYING AND DISTRIBUTING WATER
6.1 This is one potential solution:

Assume the channel is lined with concrete, n = 0.015
Using the geometry given in the problem, the side channel length is found to be 8.49 feet
A 0.5 *12 * 6
R   2.12 feet
P 2 * 8.49
2 1
1.49
V * (2.12 3 ) * (0.0012 )  5.18 fps
0.015
Q = VA = 5.18 * 36 = 187 fps or 187*0.0283 = 5.28 cubic meters per second
6.2 Using the given channel geometry, the side channel length is found to be 1.8 m
R = A/P = [(2.5 x 0.5 x 1 x 1.5) + (1 x 1.5)] / [(2 x 1.8) + 1] = 0.652
V = (1/n)(R2/3S1/2)
= (1/0.012)(0.6522/3)(0.0051/2)
= 4.43 m/sec
Q = AV
= 4.43 x 3 = 13.3 cubic meters/sec
6.3 Want capacity of 45 cfs, use Figure 6.1 to find a diameter of 30 inches.
6.4 V = (1/n)(R2/3S1/2)
R = (Vn/S1/2)3/2
= [(10.2 x 0.013)/(0.0151/2)]3/2
= 1.13 m
A = Q/V = 150/10.2 = 14.7 m
R = A/P; P = A/R = 14.7/1.13 = 13.0 m
Let Y = depth of channel, X = width of channel
Set up two simultaneous equations for wetted perimeter and area
2Y +X = 13 XY = 14.7
X = 14.7/Y
2Y  14.7 / Y  13
2Y 2  13Y  14.7  0
Y 2  6.5Y  7.35  0
Y  [ ( 6.5)  ((6.5) 2  ( 4  1  7.35))1 / 2 ] /( 2  1)
Y = 5.04, 1.46
X = 14.7/Y = 2.9, 10.1
There are two possible solutions:
depth = 5m, width = 2.9 m
depth = 1.46 m, width = 10.1 m
Solutions Manual
Page 21
6.5 Using Equation 6.1 (rearranged)
V *n 2
S ( 2 ) , choose n = 0.012
R3
2
 
  2
 3 * 0.012   0.036 
S  2
3 
    0.023
 0.46    .236 

   
 4  
H L  0.023 * 40  0.93 meters
6.6 Use Equation 6.15 in the second form

Q  0.432 * C * D 2.63 * S 0.54 , choose C=120
2.63
 24 
Q  0.432 *120 *   * 0.004 0.54  16.3 cfs
 12 
6.7 (1) Initially assume that the elevation of the hydraulic grade line at P is 90 ft
and therefore there is no flow in pipe 2. Then using the Darcy-Weisbach equation
for head loss, Q is determined for pipes 1 and 3.
Since V2 = Q2/A2, the Darcy-Weisbach equation can be restated as
HL = fLQ2/D2gA2 ; Q = (HLD2gA2/fL)1/2
For Pipe 1
(150  90)(8 / 12)(64.4)[( )(4 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q1  = 2.86 cfs
(0.016)(2400)
For Pipe 3
(90  40)(21 / 12)(64.4)[( )(10.5 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q3  = 19.2 cfs
(0.016)(5500)
Since Q3 > Q1, assume flow is out of reservoir B. By continuity, assume that
Q1 + Q2 = Q3
or Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 0
The objective of the trial and error solution is to determine P such that
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 0. In performing a trial and error solution, it is helpful to plot
trials of elevation at P versus Q3 – (Q1 + Q2). For trial 1, P = 90, Q2 = 0, and
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 16.3 cfs.
(2) For trial 2, choose P = 50.

(150  50)(8 / 12)(64.4)[( )(4 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q1  = 3.69 cfs
(0.016)(2400)
Solutions Manual
Page 22
(90  50)(12 / 12)(64.4)[( )(6 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q2  = 8.14 cfs
(0.016)(1500)
(50  40)(21 / 12)(64.4)[( )(10.5 / 12) 2 ]2
Q3  = 8.61 cfs
(0.016)(5500)
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 8.61 – (3.69 + 8.14) = - 3.22 cfs
This point is plotted and joined by a straight line with the point from trial 1. This
line intersects the P axis at approximately P = 56.
(3) For trial 3, try P = 56

(150  56)(8 / 12)(64.4)[( )(4 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q1  = 3.57 cfs
(0.016)(2400)
(90  56)(12 / 12)(64.4)[( )(6 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q2  = 7.50 cfs
(0.016)(1500)
(60  40)(21 / 12)(64.4)[( )(10.5 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q3  = 10.9 cfs
(0.016)(5500)
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 10.9 – (3.57 + 7.50) = - 0.17 cfs
(4) For trial 4, chose P = 56.5

(150  56.5)(8 / 12)(64.4)[( )(4 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q1  = 3.57 cfs
(0.016)(2400)
(90  56.5)(12 / 12)(64.4)[( )(6 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q2  = 7.45 cfs
(0.016)(1500)
(56.6  40)(21 / 12)(64.4)[( )(10.5 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q3  = 11.06 cfs
(0.016)(5500)
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 11.06 – (3.57 + 7.45) = 0.04 cfs  0.

Therefore P = 56.5 ft, Q1 = 3.57 cfs, Q2 = 7.45 cfs, and Q3 = 11.06 cfs.
Solutions Manual
Page 23
6.8 (1) Initially assume that the hydraulic grade at the intersection of the pipes is
at an elevation of 55 ft, and therefore there is no flow in pipe 2. Using
Equation 6.17 and f = 0.010, determine Q1.
Q1 = (HLD2gA2/fL)1/2
(125  55)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q1  = 16.8 ft
(0.010)(3000)
Since 125 ft > 55 ft, flow is out of reservoir 1. Since Q1 > Q3 assume that by
continuity Q1 = Q2 + Q3 or Q1 – (Q2 + Q3) = 0
For trial 1, 16.8 – (0 + 15) = 1.8. Plot [Q1 – (Q2 + Q3)] vs. P.
(2) By continuity, flow must be into both B and C. Since we know that the elevation
of B is 55 ft, then the elevation of the intersection must be greater than 55 ft for
water to flow to B. Therefore in choosing another value for P, try 60 ft.
(125  60)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q1  = 16.2 ft
(0.010)(3000)
Solutions Manual
Page 24
(60  55)(10 / 12)(64.4)[( )(5.0 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q2  = 1.905 ft
(0.010)(2200)
Q1 – (Q2 + Q3) = - 0.705
(3) Plot this value and join with a straight line to the plotted point from trial 1.
Estimate P where the line crosses [Q1 – (Q2 + Q3)] = 0. Try P = 58
(125  58)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q1  = 16.4 ft
(0.010)(3000)
(58  55)(10 / 12)(64.4)[( )(5.0 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q2  = 1.48 ft
(0.010)(2200)
Q1 – (Q2 + Q3) = - 0.075 ft.
(4) Since the flow into C is known, the head loss can be determined:
H L  fLQ 2 / D 2 gA 2
(0.010)(1600)(15) 2

(18 / 12)(64.4)[ (9 / 12) 2 ] 2
= 12 ft
Since the flow is into C, the elevation of C must be lower than P, therefore the elevation
of C is 58 – 12 = 46 ft.
Solutions Manual
Page 25
6.9 (1) Using the data from problem 6.8 trial 1 for P = 55ft:
Q1 = 16.8 cfs
Q2 = 0
Q3 = 15 cfs
Because 125 ft > 55 ft, flow is out of Q1. But we know that flow is out of Q3 also,
so the continuity relationship must be:
Q1 + Q3 = Q2 or Q1 + Q3 – Q2 = 0
In this case Q1 + Q3 – Q2 = 31.8
(2) We want Q2 to be much larger, so choose P >> 55 ft. This is consistent with the
flow being toward B. Try P = 130 ft.
Solutions Manual
Page 26
(130  125)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2
Q1  = 4.5 cfs
(0.010)(3000)
(130  55)(10 / 12)(64.4)[( )(5.0 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q2  = 7.37 cfs
(0.010)(2200)
But now the flow is into A. This changes the continuity expression to:
Q3 = Q1 + Q2 or Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 0
15 – (4.5 + 7.37) = 3.13 cfs
Plot P vs. [Q3 – (Q1 + Q2)].
(3) Try P = 140
(140  125)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q1  = 7.79 cfs
(0.010)(3000)
(140  55)(10 / 12)(64.4)[( )(5.0 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q2  = 7.85 cfs
(0.010)(2200)
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = - 0.064 cfs
(4) Connect the plotted points of the last two trials with a straight line and estimate
where the line intersects.
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 0. Try P = 138 ft.
(138  125)(15 / 12)(64.4)[( )(7.5 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q1  = 7.25 cfs
(0.010)(3000)
(138  55)(10 / 12)(64.4)[( )(5.0 / 12) 2 ] 2

Q2  = 7.76 cfs
(0.010)(2200)
Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = - 0.009 cfs
Therefore the elevation of the intersection of the hydraulic grade line is 138 ft.
Solutions Manual
Page 27
(5) To determine the elevation of reservoir C, first determine the head loss in pipe 3
from Equation 6.17. This was determined in the solution to problem 6.8 to be 12
ft.
Since water flows from reservoir C, its elevation must be higher than P, therefore
the elevation of C is 138 + 12 = 150 ft.
6.10 Choose f = 0.0125. Writing the head loss equation in terms of total flow:
H L  fLQ 2 / D 2 gA 2
Since the total head loss of the system is the sum of the head losses for each section,
H L  H L1  H L 2  H L 3
Solutions Manual
Page 28
Substitution the head loss equation for each section:
fL1Q12 fL2 Q22 fL3Q32

HL   
D1 2 gA12 D2 2 gA212 D3 2 gA32
And since by continuity Q = Q1 + Q2 + Q3, the equation for head loss can be rewritten as:
 fQ 2  L1 L L 
H L    2
 2 2  3 2 
 2 g  D1 A1 D2 A2 D3 A3 
 (0.0125)(1.2) 2  ( 400) (450) (750) 

      2 2 
  (0.60)( (0.30) ) (0.40)( (0.20) ) (0.54)( (0.27) ) 
2 2 2 2
 19.6
= 97. 3 m
6.11 Using the same procedure as for Problem 6.10
H L 2g
Q
 L L2 L3 
f  1 2   

 D1 A1 D2 A2 D3 A32
2

(60)(19.6)

 (400) ( 450) (750) 
(0.0125)   
 (0.60)( (0.30) ) (0.40)( (0.20) ) (0.54)( (0.27) 2 ) 2
2 2 2 2

= 0.94 m3/s
6.12 (a)(1) Keep in mind that

Q AB  Q BED  Q BCD  Q DF
and
H L  H LBED  H LBCD
and
H LBCD  H LBC  H LBD
(2) From Fig. 6.8, assuming C = 100, the head loss in a 12 in. pipe
for 6 cfs is 25 ft/1000 ft. The total head loss for BC is therefore
HLBC = (25 ft/1000 ft)(450 ft) = 11.25 ft
Solutions Manual
Page 29
Similarly the head loss for CD is
HLCD = (12 ft/1000 ft)(300 ft) = 3.6 ft
The total head loss for BCD is 11.25 ft + 3.6 ft = 14.85 ft
(3) Since HLBED = HLBCD, the head loss for BED is 14.85 ft. Over a length of 850 ft,
(14.85)(1000)
this amounts to = 17.5 ft/1000 ft
850
Entering this value in Fig. 6.8 for an 8 in. pipe, the flow rate in BED is
determined to be 14 cfs.
(b) The total flow is therefore 14 + 6 = 20 cfs.
(c) To calculate the length of equivalent 16 in. pipe:
For QBED at 14 cfs HL = 30 ft/1000 ft for 16 in. pipe;
L16 = (14.85)(1000)/(30) = 495 ft
For QBCD at 6 cfs, HL = 6 ft/1000 ft for 16 in pipe;
L16 = (14.85)(1000)/(6) = 2475 ft
The equivalent pipe length for the parallel pipe system is therefore
495 ft + 2475 ft = 2970 ft
6.13 Writing the head loss equation in terms of Q and solving for Q:
H L D 2 gA 2
Q
fL
And since Q  Q1  Q2  Q3
2 2 2
H L1 D1 2 gA1 H L 2 D2 2 gA2 H L 3 D3 2 gA3
Q  
fL1 fL2 fL3
But H L  H L1  H L 2  H L 3 in a parallel pipe system. Therefore;
Q
H L 2g
f
*  D1 A12  D2 A22  D3 A32 
Solutions Manual
Page 30
And in terms of HL this becomes:
Q2 f
HL 
(2 g )  D1 A12  D2 A22  D3 A32  2
(1.1) 2 (0.015)
 2
 (0.3)( (0.15) 2 ) 2 (0.2)( (0.1) 2 ) 2 (0.45)( (0.225) 2 ) 2 
(2 * 9.8)   
 30 40 25 
 
= 0.99 m = H L1  H L 2  H L 3
(0.99)(0.3)(2)(9.8)( (1.5) 2 ) 2
Q1  = 0.26 m3/s
(0.15)(30)
(0.99)(0.3)(2)(9.8)( (0.1) 2 ) 2
Q2  = 0.08 m3/s
(0.15)(40)
(0.99)(0.3)(2)(9.8)( (0.225) 2 ) 2
Q3  = 0.77 m3/s
(0.15)( 25)
Check: Q1  Q2  Q3 = 1.11 m3/s (0.01 m error due to rounding)
6.14 Using the formula developed for problem 6.13
Q
H L 2g
f
*  D1 A12  D2 A22  D3 A32 
(45)(64.4)  (18 / 12)( (9 / 12) 2 ) 2 (8 / 12)( (4 / 12) 2 ) 2 (21 / 12)( (10.5 / 12) 2 ) 2 
 *   
0.024  50 95 60 
= 259 cfs
6.15 In order to use Figure 6.8, one must convert metric units to FPS units:
600 m = 1970 ft 10 cm = 3.9 in 24 cm = 9.5 in
1200 m = 3940 ft 5 cm = 2.0 in 6 cm = 2.4 in
550 m = 1800 ft
Assume flow rate of 0.2 cfs. Then Q AB  Q BC  QCD from Figure 6.8
HLAB = (12/1000)(1970) = 23.64 ft

HLBC = (300/1000)(3940) = 1182 ft
HLCD = (110/1000)(1800) = 198 ft
Total head loss = 23.64 + 1182 + 198 = 1404 ft
For 9.5 in. (24 cm) pipe, HL = 0.15 per 1000 ft
Solutions Manual
Page 31
Therefore the equivalent pipe length is
L = 1404/0.00015 = 9.36 x 106 ft or 2.85 x 106 m
6.16 From problem 6.15, the total head loss is 1404 ft. If the total pipe length is 1000 m =
3281 ft, then the head loss in ft/ft is 1404/3281 = 0.428 ft. If it is assumed that Q = 0.2
cfs, using Figure 6.8, the equivalent pipe diameter is about 1.9 in = 4.8 cm.
6.17 Make assumptions about magnitude and direction of flow in each pipe, as shown in the
figure on the next page. At each junction, continuity must be satisfied.
Set up a table (see page after figure) for Hardy-Cross computation. Designate the
clockwise flows as positive and the counter-clockwise as negative. Since there are two
loops involved, each is analyzed separately. Note that flow in pipe 3 is common to both
loops. It is designated as positive for loop I and as negative for loop II.
Head loss (column 6) is calculated using the Hazen Williams nomograph of Figure 6.8
for each given flow and pipe diameter (columns 3 and 5) to obtain head loss in ft/1000 ft,
which is then multiplied by pipe length in feet. The sign of Q is maintained for each
corresponding value of HL.
n is taken to be 1.85 for column 8
For column 10,  ’s are added to the Q ’s from trial 1 to obtain the Q ’s for trial 2.
The number of trials is sufficient when Q  0 , as in trial 3.
Solutions Manual
Page 32
Solutions Manual
Page 33
Solutions Manual
Page 34
6.18 The problem could be solved as described in 6.17, or it could be solved using software,
like EPANET. A sample EPANET solution is shown below.
Solutions Manual
Page 35
6.19 HD = Z B + H L; ZB = 110 ft HL = fLV2/2gD; V = Q/A
6
Q = 25 x 10 / 7.5 x 24 x 3600
V = Q/π x 4.52 = 2.42 fps
Use Figure 6.9 to obtain f
HL = 0.0182 x (9 x 5280) x (2.42)2/ 4.5 x 64.4 = 17.5 ft
HP = 110 + 17.5 = 127.5 ft
Theoretical power = QwH = 38.6 x 62.4 x127.5 = 307,102 ft-lb/sec
Actual power = 307,102/0.8 = 383,877 ft-lb/sec
P = 383,877(3.766 x 107 kwh/ft-lb)(60 x 60 x 24)(930 day/mo)
P = 375,118 kwh/mo
Power cost = 375,118 x 0.3 = $11,254/mo.
6.20 Change to equivalent 24 in. pipe

Use nomograph, C = 100
Assume Q = 2.6 mgd
Q100 = (100/130) x 2.6 = 2.0 mgd
Q100 = from nomograph
S24 = 0.25 ft/1000 = 0.25 x 1.3 = 0.33
S20 = 0.60 ft/1000 = 0.60 x 2.0 = 1.2
Total head loss = 1.53 ft
Equivalent length of 24 in.
0.25/1000 = 1.53 /L24 = 6120 ft
Actual head loss = 700 – 460 = 240 ft
Q100 = 45 cfs
Q130 = 59 cfs
6.21 – O + HP = (PB/w) + 150 + HL

= (38 x 62.4)/62.4 + 150 + fV2L/2gd
20 in. pipe = 1.67 ft diameter, area = πd2/4 = 2.18 sq. ft.
V = Q/A = 6000/(60 x 7.48 x 2.18) = 6.13 fps
V2 = 37.6 f = 0.017
HP = 38 + 150 + (0.017 x 410 x 37.6)/(64.4 x 1.67)
= 188 + 2.45 + minor losses (2.5)
HP = 192.95 ft (max lift)
P = QwH/550 = (13.4/0.76) x (62.4 x 192.95)/550 = 386 hp
6.22 This problem is included to encourage students to solve using both spreadsheets and
computer models and to compare results.
6.23 hL/1000 = 137/11 =12.45 ft/1000

use nomograph for C = 130
(100/130) x 5.0 = 3.84
Select 12 in. pipe
Solutions Manual
Page 36
6.24 hL/1000 = 120/11 = 10.9 ft/1000
Use nomograph for C = 130
(100/130) x 4.5 = 3.46
Select 12 in. pipe.
6.25 hL = fLV2/2gd
hL36 = hL20
(0.022 x 2800 x Q236) / (3 x 64.4 x (π x 9/4)2)
= (0.024 x 5000 x Q220)/(12.67 x 64.4 x (π x 2.79/4)2)
Q36 = 6 x Q20
Q36 + Q20 = 79
Q36 = 67.7 cfs Q20 = 11.3 cfs
6.26 Approximate V2/2g = 0

PB/w + V2B/2g + ZB = PC + V2C/2g + ZC + hL(B-C)
hL = (fL/2gD)(Q/A)2
hL(B-C) = (80 x 144)/ 62.4 – 155 = 30 ft
for (B-C): Q2 = 30 x 64.4 x π2/(0.022 x 2400 x 16) = 22.5
Q = 4.7 cfs
hL(B-C) = hL(A-B) = 30 = HP + 1390 - 150 - 1320
HP = 110 ft
P = QwH/550 = 4.74 x 62.4 x 110/550 = 59.3 HP
6.27 Use Manning’s formula, S = 1/1400 = 7.15 x 10-4

R = A/P; A = 4 x 18 + 4 x 8.8 = 107.2 sq. ft.
P = 18 + 2 x 4 (1 + (2.2)2)0.5 = 37.4; R = 2.87 ft
R2/3 = (2.87)2/3 = 2.02
V = (1.49/0.013) x 2.02 x (7.15 x 10-4)0.5 = 6.2 fps
6.28 A = Q/V = 200/2.5 = 80 sq. ft.

A = 80 = 2d x d where b = 2d
2d2 = 80, d2 = 40, d = 6.31 ft
b = 12.62 ft
R = A/P = 80/25.24 = 3.17
R2/3 = 2.16
s1/2 = nV/1.49R2/3 = (0.013 x 2.5)/(1.49 x 2.16) = 0.001
6.29 dE/dd = q2/gd2 = 0

d3 = q2/g = 10 x 10/32.2 = 3.21
dc = 1.48
Emin = dc + (1/2g)(q2/dc) = 1.48 + 10 x 10/64.4 x 1.48 = 2.19
Alternate depths for Es = 5.0
d1 = 0.59, d2 = 4.9
Solutions Manual
Page 37
6.30 Assume Q1-2 = 3 cfs
hL ( AB )  7 * 5  35 ft
hL ( B C )  1.7 *1  1.7 ft
hL ( ABC )  36.7 ft
Equivalent pipe = 36.7/7 * 1000 = 5,230 ft, 12 inches
Assume Q2  2cfs
hLAD  25 * 2  50 ft
hLDC  8.1 * 3  24.3 ft
hLADC  74.3 ft
Equivalent pipe = (74.3/49)*1000 = 1520 feet, 7 inches
Assume head loss across new system = 100 feet
S1 = 19.1 ft/1000
S2 = 65.7 ft/1000
Q1 = 5.0 cfs
Q2 = 2.4 cfs
Total Q = 7.4 cfs
Equivalent pipe = (100/7)*1000 = 5880 feet, 14 inches
6.31 Q1  2.6  Qa  Qb
H fABC  H fADC
Q  0.279 * C * D 2.63 * S 0.54
Assume Q ABC  1.1 cfs, Q ADC  1.5 cfs
H LAB  0.16 * 4  0.64 , H LBC  2.8 * 2.7  7.55
H LAD  0.5 * 3.1  1.55 , H LDC  2 * 3.6  7.2
H LABC  0.64  7.55  8.19
H LADC  1.55  7.2  8.75
Thus increase Q ABC and reduce Q ADC
Q ABC  1.15 , Q ADC  1.45 approximately
Total head loss A to C using nomograph = 8.5 feet
PA  25  8.5 * 0.433  28.68 psi
6.32 Assume Q=3 cfs

H LAB  0.25 * 4.0  1.0
H LBC  3.4 *1.8  6.13
H LCD  17.0 * 2.0  34.0
Total head loss = 41.13
For 18-inch pipe, head loss = 0.95
Length = (41.13/0.95)*1000 = 43,300 feet
6.33 This problem can be solved using the table and figure that follows.
Solutions Manual
Page 38
Totals
Average hourly demand = 6,740,000/24 = 280,000 gallons
Solutions Manual
Page 39
6.34 Solve for different hourly input similar to problem 6.33.
6.35 TDH = HL + HF + HV =50 + 5 + 10 = 65 ft
6.36 HP = QwH/550
Assume water temp. = 60F
Solutions Manual
Page 40
HP = (25 cfs)(62.37 lb/ft3)(65 ft)/550 = 184
6.37 From the plotted data, the pump should operate at 1120 gpm, 80 feet TDH. This is about
64% efficiency, requiring 23.5 HP.
Solutions Manual
Page 41
CHAPTER 7
WASTEWATER COLLECTION AND STORMWATER ENGINEERING
7.1 Varies by location—students should be encouraged to research this on the Internet and in
other local publications. Nonstructural BMPs may include various aspects of planning,
inspection, public and stakeholder involvement and education, and compliance actions.
Structural BMPs should vary based on the type of agricultural activity.
7.2 HEC-HMS = Hydrologic model

HEC-RAS = Hydraulic model
SWMM = Hydrologic and hydraulic Model
TR-55 = Hydrologic model (could be roughly considered hydraulic)
FLDWAV = Generally considered hydraulic
All of the models above are non-proprietary models. Each has many constraints on how
it should be used that students can readily explore using the Internet. Hydrologic models
generally generate hydrographs based on rainfall and hydraulic models generally route
flow through various manmade and natural systems and structures.
7.3 Q = 25 cfs
Q 25
q  5
w 5
1 1
 q2  3  52  3
y c        0.92
 g   32.2 
1 1
Vc  ( g * y c )  (32.2 * 0.92)  5.44 fps
2 2
If flow velocity is 2.5 fps, find slope, assume n = 0.013

Q 25
A   10 sq. ft
V 2.5
Depth of water = 10/5 = 2 ft
6*2
R  1.2
622
2 1
 1.49 
2.5    * 1. 2 3
* S 2
 0.013 
S = 0.00039
7.4 16-inch pipe flowing full, Qmax  5.5 cfs

n = 0.011
1
minimum flow Qmin  * Qmax  0.46 cfs
12
Solutions Manual
Page 42
Entering text Fig 6.2 corresponding to (0.46/5.5)*100 = 8.36%
% depth of flow = 19 %
Depth at minimum flow = 0.19*16 = 3.04 inches = 0.253 ft
At minimum flow R = 0.13
At maximum flow R = 0.33
2
Vmax R  0.33  3
 max     1.87
Vmin Rmin  0.13 
Q 5.5
Vmax    3.96 fps
A 1.39
Velocity at minimum flow = 3.96/1.87 = 2.12 fps
7.5 Study area = 350 acres

w
Serviced by circular pipe  2.5 fps
Vmin
Population density = 16 persons/acre
Number of people = 350 * 16 = 5600 people
Considering average use of 160 gpcd of which 70% becomes wastewater
Average flow (daily) of area = 5600*160*0.7 = 627,200 gal/day
Max hourly flow = 3*627,200 = 1.88 mgd = 2.91 cfs
Min hourly flow = 0.33*627,200 = 0.21 mgd = 0.32 cfs
Allowing a max velocity of 10 fps:
Qmax  a *Vmax
A= 2.91/10 = 0.291 sq. ft.
1
This would require a pipe diameter of  4 * 0.291  2 inches

d    0.61  7.32
  
Use an 8-inch pipe: A = 0.35 sq. ft.
2.91
Vmax   8.31 fps
0.35
2
 8.31 * 0.013 
For this flow, slope of pipe is: S     0.056
2  ft/ft
 1.49 * 0.17 
3
Now for a minimum flow = 1/9 of max flow = 11.11% max flow
Depth of flow = 23% * 8 = 1.84 inches
R = 0.09
2 1
 1.49 
V   * 0.09 3 * 0.056 2  5.45 cfs, which is greater than 2.5 fps
 0.013 
So, use an 8-inch pipe at a slope of 0.056 ft/ft
7.6 A = 9.5*d
P = 2d + 9.5
2 1
 1.486 
Q  * A* R * S 2
3
 n 
Solutions Manual
Page 43
2
 9.5d n  3
189  34.3d n   (need to solve for normal depth)
 2 d n  9. 5 
Solve equation above iteratively or using computer, d n  3.46 ft
1 1
 Q2 3  1892 3
d crit   2
   2
  2.31 feet
 g * width   32.2 * 9.5 
Since the normal depth is greater than critical depth, the slope is mild
At intersection with the canal; depth of flow = d = 7.1 feet
Backwater curve is then of type M1
Calculations for the surface profile appear in the table that follows.
Solutions Manual
Page 44
Solutions Manual
Page 45
7.7 Maximum discharge for full flow
2 1
 1.486 
Q  * A* R * S 2
3
 n 
2 1
 1.486 
Q  * 15. 9 * 1 .13 3
* 0 . 0017 2
 81.3 cfs
 0.013 
When flowing full at 28.15 cfs
Percentage of full flow = 35%
From Figure 6.2 in textbook, depth of flow is 43% of full flow
Or normal depth = 0.43*4.5 = 1.94 feet
Critical depth = 1.58 feet
Since normal depth is greater than critical depth, the slope is mild.
At junction of two pipes, depth of flow is 3 feet, therefore the profile will be an M1
profile. The surface profile can be solved for similar to the table shown in Problem 7.6.
7.8 γgravel = γg = 180 lb/ft3
w
g
w
k g   w 1
1.486 6
Minimum velocity = vmin = c d c R
w n
Assuming pipe flows 1/3 full at low flow: A = 3.21 ft2
Depth at 37 percent of 42 in. = 15.5 in.
P = 4.57 ft
R = 0.70
1.486
c (0.94)  107.77
0.013
(180  62.4)3
Therefore, vmin = 107.77 0.05
624  16  12
vmin = 4.14 ft/sec
2 1
1.486 3 2
v= R s
n
v2n2 ( 4.14) 2 (0.013) 2

s= 4
 4
2 2
1.486 R 3
(1.486) (0.94) 3
Solutions Manual
Page 46
s required = 0.001421 ft/ft
7.9 24-hour maximum annual stream flows
1 100
(a) For a return period of 5 years, P    *100   20%
 Tr  5
From graph that follows, for P=20, Log Q = 2.17
Q  10 2.17  148 cfs
Which is the peak flow for Tr  5 years
(b) For a return period of 15 years,
1  100
P    *100   6.67%
 Tr  15
From graph that follows, P=6.67, Log Q = 2.36
Q  102.36  229 cfs, the peak flow for Tr  15 years
Solutions Manual
Page 47
Solutions Manual
Page 48
7.10
Solutions Manual
Page 49
7.11 Use straight-line baseflow separation.
Solutions Manual
Page 50
Solutions Manual
Page 51
Solutions Manual
Page 52
7.12 Use unit hydrograph from Problem 7.11 to develop direct runoff hydrograph. The
solution is provided in the table below.
Composite
Time UHG P1 P2 P3 P4 Hydrograph
0.5 1.1 1.5 0.8
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 82 41 0 0 0 41
2 279 139.5 90.2 0 0 230
3 324 162 306.9 123 0 592
4 245 122.5 356.4 418.5 65.6 963
5 153 76.5 269.5 486 223.2 1055
6 74 37 168.3 367.5 259.2 832
7 35 17.5 81.4 229.5 196 524
8 9 4.5 38.5 111 122.4 276
9 0 0 9.9 52.5 59.2 122
10 0 0 13.5 28 42
11 0 0 0 7.2 7
12 0 0 0 0 0
7.13 Use Manning’s Equation to calculate the discharge for the portion of flow in the
rectangular subsection. From Table 6.1, choose n = 0.017.
5 *12
R  5 feet
12
 1.49 
Q  * 55 *
 0.017 
2 1 2 1
 1.486   1.486 
Q  * A * R 3
* S 2
   * 60 * 5 3
* 0.0012
 485 cfs
 n   0.017 
Use Manning’s Equation to calculate the discharge for the grassy portion of flow in the
channel. From Table 6.1, choose n = 0.025
10
R  0.94 feet
10.77
2 1 2 1
 1.486   1.486 
Q  * A* R 3 * S 2    * 5 * 0.94 3 * 0.0012  9.02 cfs
 n   0.025 
Therefore, total Q = 485 + 9 = 494 cfs
Q 494
7.14 V    7.1 fps, the channel does not meet the stability requirement
A 70
7.15 Q = (1.49/n) x AR2/3 x S1/2

assume n = 0.013
Solutions Manual
Page 53
A = 6 x 10 = 60 ft2
R = A/P = 60/22 = 2.73
Q = (1.49/0.013) x 60(2.73)2/3 x (0.0015)1/2
Q = 515.4 cfs
7.16 First determine the rational C value

(a) For the overland flow portion, use the data given and Table 7.10, C is found to be 0.15
(b) For the residential portion, from Table 7.12, C is found to be 0.4
The weighted average C value for the entire area is thus
0.75 * 0.4  0.25 * 0.15
C  0.34 , where 0.75 and 0.25 are the areal weights of the two
1.0
areas and the denominator is the sum of the weighting factors.
Now calculate time of concentration.

(a) For the overland flow area, use the Federal Administration Equation
1.8(1.1  C ) * L0.5
tc  , where C is the rational C, L = overland flow length in feet, and S is
S 0.333
the surface slope in percent
1.8(1.1  0.15) *1800.5
tc   16.9 minutes
2.500.333
(b) For the main channel, from the channel geometry and assuming a depth of 2 feet, R is
calculated to be 1.27 feet. Then, using Manning’s Equation:
 1.49 
V   * 1.27 * 0.012  6.38 fps
0.66 0 .5
 0.03 
L 1900
tc    4.96 min
V * 60 6.38 * 60
The total time of concentration is then 16.9 + 4.96 = 21.9 or 22 minutes
Calculate the peak runoff for the 50-year storm event: From Figure 7.7 and using a time of
concentration of 22 minutes the rainfall intensity is found to be 6.3 in/hr. Now the Rational
Equation can be solved:
Q  CiA  0.34 * 6.3 * 45  96.4 cfs
7.17 First determine the rational C value

(a) For the overland flow portion, use the data given and Table 7.10, C is found to be 0.15
(b) For the residential portion, from Table 7.12, C is found to be 0.5
The weighted average C value for the entire area is thus
0.75 * 0.5  0.25 * 0.15
C  0.41 , where 0.75 and 0.25 are the areal weights of the two
1.0
areas and the denominator is the sum of the weighting factors.
Now calculate time of concentration.

(c) For the overland flow area, use the Federal Administration Equation
1.8(1.1  C ) * L0.5
tc  , where C is the rational C, L = overland flow length in feet, and S is
S 0.333
the surface slope in percent
Solutions Manual
Page 54
1.8(1.1  0.15) *1250.5
tc   14.09 minutes
2.500.333
(d) For the main channel, from the channel geometry and assuming a depth of 2 feet, R is
calculated to be 1.72 feet. Then, using Manning’s Equation:
 1.49 
V   * 1.72 * 0.016  9.01 fps
0.66 0 .5
 0.03 
L 2000
tc    3.69 min
V * 60 9.01 * 60
The total time of concentration is then 14.09 + 3.69 = 17.78 or 18 minutes
Calculate the peak runoff for the 10-year storm event: From Figure 7.7 and using a time of
concentration of 18 minutes the rainfall intensity is found to be 4.9 in/hr. Now the Rational
Equation can be solved:
Q  CiA  0.41* 4.9 * 20  40.18 cfs
Solutions Manual
Page 55
7.18
7.19
7.20
7.21 Assume a 5-minute time of concentration and design for a 10-year storm event.
 2.10 * 0.5  3.0 * 0.4 
C A1 A2     0.44
 2.1  3.0
 2.10 * 0.5  3.0 * 0.4  4.1 * 0.7 
C A1 A 2 A3     0.56
 2.1 * 3.0  4.1
Determine design flows using the table below.
Flow time
(min)
Pipe Tributary Area Q design
Section Area (Acres) Inlet Pipe Total I (in/hr) C (ft3/sec)
I1-M4 A1 2.1 5 0.2 5.0 7.0 0.50 7.35
M4-M3 A1 2.1 - 0.8 5.2 7.0 0.50 7.35
M3-M2 A1+A2 5.1 - 0.8 6.0 6.9 0.44 15.48
M2-M1 A1+A2 5.1 - 0.7 6.8 6.8 0.44 15.26
M1-outfall A1+A2+A3 9.2 - 7.5 6.6 0.56 34.00
7.22 At the time of concentration, Q is calculated from:

Q  CiA  0.6 * 2 * 90  108 cfs
Between the time of concentration and the end of the storm, the discharge will be 108 cfs. At
t=40 minutes, rainfall ceases and the hydrograph recedes to 0 over the time of concentration.
7.23 The modified rational method was used to build the table below to solve the problem.
Average
Incremental Σ P(t) Raingall Runoff
Time, Rainfall Σ P(t), from T - Intensity I, Rate Q,
(minutes) Depth, (in.) (in.) Tc to T (in/hr) (cfs)
0 0 0 0 0.0
5 0.1 0.1 1.2 1.8
10 0.18 0.28 1.68 4.9
15 0.29 0.57 2.28 10.0
20 0.6 1.17 3.51 20.5
25 0.64 1.71 5.13 30.0
30 0.51 1.53 4.59 26.9
35 0.3 1.54 4.62 27.0
40 0.17 1.11 3.33 19.5
45 0.07 0.54 1.62 9.5
50 0 0 7.1
55 0 0 4.7
60 0 0 2.4
65 0 0 0.0
70 0
Solutions Manual
Page 58
7.24 Assume a minimum pipe size of 8-inches. Invert of MH-F is 937 ft. Assume a drop of 0.2 feet
across a manhole. Assume pipes flow full. MH-A invert not less than 978 – 8.5 = 969.5. Pipe E-
F must carry 3000*0.002228 = 6.84 cfs.
Try optimum pipe size and reduce depth of cut.

Invert elevation at A: 978 – 8.5 = 969.5, 6.00/180 = 0.0333 = 3.33%
Invert elevation at B: 972 – 8.5 = 963.5
Try 10-inch pipe at 3.33% to carry 1200*0.002228 = 2.67 cfs
2 1
 1.49  D D 2
Q  * A* R 3 * S 2 , R  , A 
 n  4 4
2
 1.49   * 0.833  0.833  3 1
 2.67 cfs
Q * *  *  0.0333S  2  4.01 cfs
 0.013  4  4 
Thus A-B: Use 10-inch pipe at 3.33%
7.8
Invert elevation out of B = 963.5 – 0.2 = 963.3,  0.26  2.6%
300
Invert elevation into C = 964 – 8.5 = 955.5
Try 10-inch pipe at 2.6% to carry 1450*0.002228 = 3.23 cfs
2
 1.49   * 0.833  0.833  3
2
 2.67 cfs
1
Q * *  *  0.0260S  2  3.54 cfs
 0.013  4  4 
Thus B-C: Use 10-inch pipe at 2.60%
Try 12-inch pipe at 1.29% to carry 2200 * 0.00228 = 4.9 cfs
2
 1.49   *1.0  1.0  3
2
 4.90 cfs
1
Q * *  *  0.0129 S  2  4.06 cfs
 0.013  4  4 
So, a 12-inch pipe at 1.29% is inadequate.
2
 
 Q * 0.013 
 1.49   0.0196  1.96%
Slope required: S 2 
  * 1 3 
 4  4  
Thus, for C-D, use 12-inch pipe at 1.96%.
0.0196*450 = 8.81 feet, C: 955.3 – 8.81 = 946.5 = D
Invert out of D = 946.5 – 0.2 = 946.3
E: 954 – 8.5 = 945.5
2500*0.002228 = 5.57 cfs
Try 15-inch pipe at 0.75%
2
 1.49   *1.25  1.25  3
2
 5.57 cfs
1
Q * *  *  0.0075S  2  5.61 cfs
 0.013  4  4 
Thus D-E = 15 inches at 0.75%
For E-F, try 15-inches at 1.73
2
 1.49   *1.25  1.25  3
2
 6.68 cfs
1
Q * *  *  0.0173S  2  8.52 cfs
 0.013  4  4 
Thus E-F is 15-inch pipe at 1.73%
Solutions Manual
Page 59
7.25 Inlet area = 2.5 acres
Imperviousness = 0.5
Assume a square area with inlet located at one corner with a fairly flat grade (2%)
From Figure 7.6, for I = 0.50, C = 0.565
Assume tc  3.5 minutes
For a 5-year storm, for tc  3.5 minutes, i = 6.8 in/hr (from Fig 7.7)
Q  CiA  0.565 * 6.8 * 2.5  9.61 cfs
For a 10-year storm, for tc  3.5 minutes, i = 7.6 in/hr
Q  CiA  0.565 * 7.6 * 2.5  10.73 cfs
For a 20-year storm, for tc  3.5 minutes, i = 9.0 in/hr
Q  CiA  0.565 * 9.0 * 2.5  12.71 cfs
7.26 Domestic: 100*20*1000 = 2.0 mgd

Commercial: 15*20*1000 = 0.30 mgd
Infiltration: 650*1000 = 0.65 mgd
Total = 2.00 + 0.30 + 0.65 = 2.95 mgd
Select a peak hour to average day ratio of 3.0.
7.27 Average monthly withdrawal = 430/12 = 35.8 Mg/sq. mi/month
Solutions Manual
Page 60
The maximum cumulative deficiency is 129.8 Mg/sq. mi. Therefore, the required storage
is about 130 Mg/sq. mi. The composite hydrograph ordinates are determined as follows:
Solutions Manual
Page 61
7.28 Unit hydrograph ordinates are as follows:
1 2 3 4 5
Hydrograph Ordinates for Total Outflow
Rainfall Units Hydrograph
1-3 Ordinates
(cfs) (cfs)
Time
Unit
Sequence 1 = 1 in 2 = 3 in 3 = 2 in (2)+(3)+(4)
0 0 - - 0
0.5 1.3 - - 1.3
1 15.3 0 - 15.3
1.5 66.7 3.9 - 70.6
2 167 45.9 0 212.9
2.5 268 200 2.6 470.6
3 319 501 30.6 850.6
3.5 271 804 133 1208
4 205 957 334 1496
4.5 157 813 536 1506
5 107 615 638 1360
5.5 74.7 471 542 1087.7
6 59.3 321 410 790.3
7 28 178 214 420
8 13.3 84 119 216.3
9 0 39.9 56 95.9
10 0 0 26.6 26
11 0 0 0 0
The composite hydrograph ordinates are determined as follows.
Solutions Manual
Page 62
Solutions Manual
Page 63
7.29 The effective precipitation is (1.9 – 4) = 1.5 inches. Plot the discharge hydrograph.
Separate baseflow from measured discharge to obtain an runoff hydrograph. Divide the
remaining ordinates by 1.5 inches to obtain the 2-hour hydrograph.
1 2 3 4 5
Unit
Discharge Base Flow Runoff (2) Hydrograph
Time (hr) (ft3/s) (ft3/s) - (3) (ft3/s) (4)/1.5 in.
0 73 73 0 0
6 75 75 0 0
12 900 75 825 550
18 3400 75 3325 2217
24 4350 75 4275 2850
30 2900 80 2820 1880
36 1450 90 1360 907
42 600 100 500 333
48 450 103 347 231
54 375 105 270 180
60 250 110 140 93
66 180 115 65 43
72 135 135 0 0
Design storm = 10 inches/8 hours = 1.25 inches/hour or 2.5 inches/2 hours.
To obtain the composite inflow hydrograph for the design storm, multiply the ordinates of
the 2-hour hydrograph by 2.5, then lag four 2.5 inch hydrographs by 2 hours (four 2-hour
hydrographs are needed to obtain an 8-hour storm).
Note that the unit hydrograph has been interpolated at 2-hour intervals.
Solutions Manual
Page 64
Solutions Manual
Page 65
Solutions Manual
Page 66
7.30
(a) Lag the 2-hour hydrographs by 2-hours, sum the ordinates, and divide by 2. This
yields the 4-hour hydrograph, as shown in the table and figure below.
1 2 3 4
(2)+(3)/2 = 4-hr
2-hr Unit Second 2-hr Unit
Hydrograph UHG lagged by Hydrograph
Time Unit Ordinates (cfs) 2 hrs (cfs) Ordinates (cfs)
0 0 0
1 200 100
2 400 0 200
3 300 200 250
4 200 400 300
5 100 300 200
6 0 200 100
7 100 50
8 0 0
Solutions Manual
Page 67
(b) S-Hydrograph Method. First construct a 2-hour hydrograph by lagging many 2-hour
hydrographs by 2 hours and summing their ordinates. Then, a 4-hour hydrograph is
derived from lagging two 2-hour S-hydrographs by 4 hours, subtracting their ordinates,
and multiplying them by D/t (2/4 = 0.5).
Lagged Unit Hydrographs

(cfs)
Sum of Second S- 4-hr UHG

Ordinates = 2 hr Hydrograph (B) Ordinates
S-Hydrograph lagged by 4 hr = (D/t) x
Time Unit #1 #2 #3 #4 (A) (cfs) (cfs) (A-B) (cfs)
0 0 0 0 0
1 200 200 0 100
2 400 0 400 0 200
3 300 200 500 0 250
4 200 400 0 600 0 300
5 100 300 200 600 200 200
6 0 200 400 0 600 400 100
7 100 300 200 600 500 50
8 0 200 400 600 600 0
Solutions Manual
Page 68
Solutions Manual
Page 69
This problem demonstrates that the same results are obtained by either method when
deriving a unit hydrograph of a different time duration which is an integral multiple of the
original unit hydrograph.
7.31 Calculate the average daily flows from each contributor.

Domestic: 100*20*1500 = 3.0 mgd
Commercial: 15*20*1500 = 0.45 mgd
Total = 3.00 + 0.45 + 0.975 = 4.425 mgd
Peak hourly flow = 3.0 * 4.425 = 13.275
= 13.275*0.044 = 0.58 cubic meters/second
7.32 The fall of the sewer in 450 feet is 2.2 feet if the street grade is used as the slope. The
initial assumption for S will be 0.005 ft/1000. If this slope is not sufficient to sustain a
velocity of 2 fps, it will be modified. In a similar manner, if the calculated velocity
exceeds 10 fps, the slope will have to be reduced.
(a) Using the nomograph in Figure 6.1, and using the values of Q = 11, and S = 0.005, it
is determined that a 21-inch pipe will be required. This pipe will support a discharge
somewhat higher than the design value of 11, but it is the closest standard size. The
velocity associated with a 21-inch pipe flowing full at a slope of 0.005 is between 4 and 5
fps and thus meets the design criteria. For full flow, the solution is to choose a 21-inch
pipe laid at a slope of 0.5 feet/100 feet.
(b) For flow at d = 0.5dm, Manning’s Equation, Figure 6.2 and Table 7.2 are used. From
Figure 6.2, it can be seen that for one-half full depth, the velocity is the same as for full
depth and geometrically, A and R are one-half their full-depth values.
The pipe size for one-half flow is calculated using the equation
2 1
 1.49 
Q  * A * R 3
* S 2
 n 
2
AR 3
Inserting values for Q, n, and S and noting from Table 7.2 that 8
 0.156 for
dm 3
d
 0.5 , the above equation can be solved for d m .
dm
 1.49   8

m  *  0.005
0.5
11    
* 0.156 * d 3
 0.013   
8
d m  8.73 , and d m  2.56 feet
3
Solutions Manual
Page 70
Select the closest standard pipe size of 30-inch diameter. Using Figure 6.1, it can be seen
that for a 30-inch pipe laid at a slope of 0.005, the velocity at full flow (or also at half-
flow) would be 5.8 fps. This satisfies the specifications. Flow in the 30-inch pipe at half-
full conditions is calculated to determine how close it comes to the design flow of 11 cfs.
 1.49  8
 *  0.156 *  0.005 * d m 3
0.5
Q
 0.013 
Q = 14.6 cfs at half-full flow, and thus the 30-inch pipe would be flowing at slightly less
than half-depth under design conditions of Q = 11 cfs. For this pipe and slope, the full-
Q 11
flow would be 14.6*2 = 29.2 cfs. Using Figure 6.2 and entering the ratio Q  29.2 ,
full
it can be seen that the actual flow depth under design conditions would be about
0.38d m .
Solutions Manual
Page 71
7.33
Residential flow = 50*100 = 5000 gpad. Infiltration = 650 gpad, average flow = 5000 + 650 = 5650 gpad, peak flow = 5650*3 = 16,950
gpad. Converting to mgd, the design flow per acre is 0.017 mgd/acres. This value and the data from Figure 7.3 are entered into a
spreadsheet and the solution appears in the previous table. See the solved solution in Example 7.3 for further details.
7.34 Solution is shown below.
105.10 – (0.0063*470) = 102.14 invert at entrance to MH 5
102.14 – 0.1 = 102.04 drop across MH 5
102.04 – (0.006*330) = 100.06 invert at entrance to MH 4
100.06 – 0.25 = 99.81 invert out of MH 4
A drop across a manhole of 0.1 was applied where to change in pipe size occurred. At
MH 4, the upstream pipe is 12 inches and the downstream pipe is 15 inches. In this case,
a drop of 15-12 = 3 inches or 0.25 feet was used.
7.35
Residential flow = 40*100 = 4500 gpad. Infiltration = 625 gpad, average flow = 4500 + 625 = 125 gpad, peak flow = 5125*3
= 15,375 gpad. Converting to mgd, the design flow per acre is 0.015 mgd/acres. This value and the data from Figure 7.3 are
entered into a spreadsheet and the solution appears in the previous table. See the solved solution in Example 7.3 for further
details.
Solutions Manual
Page 76
7.36 Calculate the average daily flows from each contributor.
Domestic: 100*25*700 = 1.75 mgd
Commercial: 18*25*700 = 0.32 mgd
Total = 1.75 + 0.32 + 0.42 = 2.49 mgd
Peak hourly flow = 3.0 * 2.49 = 7.47 mgd
= 7.47*0.044 = 0.33 cubic meters/second
7.37 The fall of the sewer in 380 feet is 1.1 feet if the street grade is used as the slope. The
initial assumption for S will be 0.003 ft/1000. If this slope is not sufficient to sustain a
velocity of 2 fps, it will be modified. In a similar manner, if the calculated velocity
exceeds 10 fps, the slope will have to be reduced.
(a) Using the nomograph in Figure 6.1, and using the values of Q = 8, and S = 0.003, it is
determined that a 21-inch pipe will be required. This pipe will support a discharge
somewhat higher than the design value of 8, but it is the closest standard size. The
velocity associated with a 21-inch pipe flowing full at a slope of 0.003 is between 2 and 3
fps and thus meets the design criteria. For full flow, the solution is to choose a 21-inch
pipe laid at a slope of 0.5 feet/100 feet.
(b) For flow at d = 0.5dm, Manning’s Equation, Figure 6.2 and Table 7.2 are used. From
Figure 6.2, it can be seen that for one-half full depth, the velocity is the same as for full
depth and geometrically, A and R are one-half their full-depth values.
The pipe size for one-half flow is calculated using the equation
2 1
 1.49 
Q  * A* R * S 2
3
 n 
2
AR 3
Inserting values for Q, n, and S and noting from Table 7.2 that 8
 0.156 for
dm 3
d
 0.5 , the above equation can be solved for d m .
dm
 1.49   8

 *  0.156 * d m 3  *  0.003
0.5
11  
 0.013   
8
d m 3  8.16 , and d m  2.19 feet
Select the closest standard pipe size of 24-inch diameter. Using Figure 6.1, it can be seen
that for a 24-inch pipe laid at a slope of 0.003, the velocity at full flow (or also at half-
flow) would be 3.9 fps. This satisfies the specifications. Flow in the 24-inch pipe at half-
full conditions is calculated to determine how close it comes to the design flow of 8 cfs.
 1.49  8
Q  *  0. 156  *  0.003 0.5
* d m
3
 0.013 
Q = 6.4 cfs at half-full flow, and thus the 24-inch pipe would be flowing at slightly less
than half-depth under design conditions of Q = 8 cfs. For this pipe and slope, the full-
Q 8
flow would be 6.4*2 = 12.8 cfs. Using Figure 6.2 and entering the ratio Q  12.8 , it
full
can be seen that the actual flow depth under design conditions would be about 0.63d m .
Solutions Manual
Page 78
7.38
Solutions Manual
Page 79
Solutions Manual
Page 80
7.39
Solutions Manual
Page 81
Solutions Manual
Page 82
CHAPTER 8
WATER QUALITY
8.1 Pathogens are disease-producing organisms including viruses, bacteria, protozoa, and
helminthes (parasitic worms). A variety of pathogens are present in domestic wastewater
with the kinds and concentration relating to the health of the contributing community.
The fecal-oral route is transmission of pathogens in the feces of an infected person into
the mouth of another person by person-to-person contact with contaminated fingers or
through water and food contaminated by feces.
8.2 Latency, persistence, and infective dose are defined in Section 8.1 under Factors Affecting
Transmission of Diseases.
Pathogen Category Latent Period Persistence Infective Dose

Ascaris III 10 days persistent single egg
8.3 Salmonella II none moderate medium-high Hu
ma
n carriers exist for all enteric diseases and are significant sources in the spread of
infectious diseases since carriers may not exhibit any symptoms of illness. Human
carriers without symptoms of disease are primarily responsible for continued
transmission of the intestinal protozoa, Giardia lamblia and Cryptosporidium. Beavers
are known to have transmitted Giardia, and cattle and sheep feces can transmit
Cryptosporidium.
8.4 Typhoid, cholera, and dysentery were virtually eliminated in the U.S.A. by pasteurization of
milk and chlorination of water supplies. Waterborne giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis can
be prevented by removal and disinfection of protozoan cysts during treatment of surface
waters including coagulation, filtration, and the use of chemical disinfectants or
ultraviolet radiation.
8.5 The symptom of these protozoa infections is diarrhea described as gastrointestinal distress
ranging from no symptoms to hospitalization for giardiasis and profuse and watery
diarrhea for cryptosporidiosis. The common mode of transmission is the fecal-oral route
by close person-to-person contact among family members, day-care children, and nursing
home residents. Drinking water is the largest potential common source of transmission.
8.6 Refer to Section 8.2. Coliform bacteria and pathogens of enteric diseases both originate from
human feces; therefore, presence of coliforms indicate the possible presence of
pathogens. The major limitation of coliforms as indicators is that viruses, protozoan
cysts, and helminth eggs are more persistent than coliform bacteria and are more difficult
to inactivate. A positive test for fecal coliforms is more serous because they originate in
Solutions Manual
Page 83
human or animal feces. In a positive test for total coliforms, the coliform bacteria may
have originated from soil or from some other non-fecal origin.
8.7 Escherichia Coli is a species of coliform bacteria that resides in the intestinal tract of humans
and warm-blooded animals. Most strains of this bacterium are nonpathogenic. E. Coli
0157:H7 is an antibiotic-resistant mutant strain of E. Coli that is pathogenic to humans
and is found in the feces of infected cattle. Transmission is by contaminated ground beef,
unpasteurized fruit juices, person-to-person contact, and drinking contaminated water.
8.8 A community water system serves at least 35 people at their primary residences (or at least
15 residences which are primary residences). A nontransient-noncommunity system
regularly serves at least 25 of the same people for at least 6 months (for example a school
with its own water treatment system), while a transient-noncommunity system serves 25
or more people for at least 60 days but not the same people or not on a regular basis (for
example, a highway rest area). Transient-noncommunity systems are required to meet the
MCLs of those contaminants with health effects caused by short-term exposure such as
nitrate and coliforms.
8.9 The following are the three phases in testing for enteric viruses.
1. Extraction from water by pumping a large volume, (100 to 1000 liters) through
a cartridge or a large disc filter.
2. Concentration of the eluate from the filter can be by adsorption, adsorption-
precipitation, of hydroextraction-dialysis.
3. Identification is by using two or more cell culture systems, such as monolayers
of African green monkey cells, and perhaps suckling mice.
To determine the precision of separation, the procedure must be conducted on water
samples to which known suspension concentrations of one or more test virus types have
been added to a water sample to establish recovery efficiency. Testing for enteric viruses
is recommended for water quality investigations in special circumstances such as
research studies, wastewater reclamation, or disease outbreaks.
8.10 The general process in testing for Giardia cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts is filtration
from a water sample through a very fine filter, extraction of cysts or oocysts from the
filter and separation from particulate debris, extract concentration, and staining with
indirect fluorescent antibody for identification by microscopic examination The accuracy
of EPA Method 1622 for detection and enumeration of Cryptosporidium oocysts was low
because of the interference from turbidity in natural surface waters. Cryptosporidium
oocysts are difficult to identify from other organisms of similar size and shape. Two case
histories in major cities mentioned (without names) are examples of laboratory failures in
proper identification of Cryptosporidium oocysts resulting in false public health
concerns.
8.11 Risk is calculated as follows:
Solutions Manual
Page 84
1�105
Risk   1�10 5
2 d �5 l
l μg
The number of excess cases of cancer after a lifetime exposure equals 1 per 100,000
persons so exposed.
8.12 Refer to Section 8.5. Children and fetuses are most vulnerable to lead toxicity. Lead is
not a natural contaminant of water but a by-product of the corrosion of high-lead solder
joints in copper plumbing, old brass fixtures, and lead pipes. The concentration of lead in
water drawn from a service connection is highest in first-flush samples in the morning
after extended contact time between the water and the pipe.
8.13 The health risk of nitrate in drinking water is methemoglobinemia in infants under the
age of three months. Healthy older children and adults are not affected by
methemoglobinemia.
8.14 The most frequently detected VOCs in groundwater are: trichloroethylene,

tetrachloroethylene, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1,1-trichloroethane, 1,2-dichloroethane, and
vinyl chloride. The pesticide SOCs are alachlor, aldicarb, atrazine, carbofuran, ethylene
dibromide, and dibromochloropropane.
8.15 The chemical formulas for trihalomethanes are CHCl3, CHBrCl2, CHBr2Cl, CHBr3. Five
haloacetic acids (HAA5) are also regulated: CH2ClCOOH, CHCl2COOH, CCl3COOH,
CH2BrCOOH, and CHBr2COOH. Trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids are formed by
the reaction of natural organic matter (NOM) with chlorine and to a much lesser extent
with chloramine. If bromide ion is present in addition to NOM, brominated
trihalomethanes and haloacetic acids may form. The bromate ion and the chlorite ion are
also regulated disinfection by-products. The bromate ion is the result of a reaction of
ozone with the bromide ion. The chlorite ion is a by-product of the chlorine dioxide
disinfection process.
8.16 The current federal primary drinking water standards are shown in Table 8.2 and on the
EPA web site: www.epa.gov/safewater/contaminants/index.html
Individual state web sites (departments of environmental protection, health, etc.) are the
best source of up-to-date regulatory information.
8.17 Iron and manganese cause red, brown or black colored stains of laundry and porcelain.
8.18 The objectives of the Clean Water Act are to maintain the chemical, physical, and
biological quality of surface waters, seawater, and groundwater by placing ecological
considerations and protection of human health ahead of economic concerns.
8.19 NPDES is an abbreviation of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit
program. Since its inception
Solutions Manual
Page 85
 changes have been made to effluent standards, water-quality based standards, and
seawater discharge criteria
 toxic substances are controlled
 industrial waste pre-pretreatment programs are required
 changes have been made to monitoring and inspection requirements.
Permit holders are required to monitor and record discharge data and report any
violations. Regulatory authorities (federal or state) monitor reported data and enforce the
permits. Many states are authorized to implement NPDES programs.
8.20 The solution is:

mg ft 3 s l lb lb
TMDL  0.02 �200 �86400 �28.3 3 �2.2 *106  21.54
l s d ft mg d
lb
WLA  21.54  10  4  7.54
d
8.22 In developing a TMDL the following load allocations can be made:
 background
 groundwater inflow
 diffuse runoff
 agricultural runoff
 atmospheric deposition
The following wasteload allocations can be made:

 wastewater treatment plant effluent discharges
 stormwater point source discharges
 industrial point source discharges
8.22 The technology standards for secondary treatment are given in Section 9.1, Purpose of
Wastewater Treatment. When limited dilution in a surface water of treated effluents
defined by technology-based standards results in water quality impairment, the NPDES
permits are rewritten as water quality-based standards to meet the desired water quality in
the receiving surface water without impairment.
8.23 The major steps in the Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) test are:
1. fill one laboratory container with a prepared 24-hour composite effluent sample and a
second container with uncontaminated water as a blank
2. Place a specified number of test organisms, such as minnows, in each container
3. Keep the containers in a controlled laboratory environment with dissolved oxygen
near saturation and at a temperature of 25 oC
4. After a 24-hour exposure, the test result is expressed in terms of mortality
Solutions Manual
Page 86
5. Usually a 25% reduction in survival is defined as the threshold of biological
significance indicating probable impairment of the receiving water.
8.24 If an effluent biological toxicity test indicates toxicity, a chemical evaluation of the
effluent is required. Since release of toxic substances is likely to be contributed by
industries, a survey of industrial wastewater discharges is the best way to start. Chemical
testing can be very costly unless the toxic substances that may be present can be reduced
to a reasonable number. A proper pretreatment program requires industries to sample and
test wastewater discharges to the sewer system. After toxic pollutants have been
quantitatively identified, remedial measures can be taken for additional industrial
pretreatment and improved municipal wastewater treatment.
8.25
mg
Dry solids =  69.049  68.942  g �1000  107 mg
g
1 mg
Total solids = 107 mg �  1070
0.1liters l
mg
Ignited Solids =  69.003  68.942  g �1000  61mg
g
Volatile solids =107  61  46 mg
mg
Total volatile solids =46 / 0.1  460
l
8.26
mg
 85.490  85.337  g �1000
g mg
TS   1800
0.085liters l
TVS 
 85.490  85.375  �1000  1350 mg
0.85 l
SS 
 0.1530  0.1400  �1000  65 mg
0.200 l
VSS 
 0.1530  0.1426  �1000  52 mg
0.200 l
8.27
Solutions Manual
Page 87
mg
 8.2  2.9 
BOD  l  16 mg
100 l
300
8.28
Time D2 D1-D2 P BOD
(days) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
0 8.7 0 0.1 0
2.0 6.7 2.0 0.1 20
4.0 5.7 3.0 0.1 30
6.0 4.9 3.8 0.1 38
10.0 3.9 4.8 0.1 48
14.0 0.7 -------------DO too low, invalid test-----------
8.29
Bottle Time D1-D2 P BOD
(days) (mg/l) (mg/l)
1 0
2 0
3 1.0 2.2 0.027 81
4 1.0 2.5 0.027 93
5 2.0 3.2 0.027 120
6 2.0 3.2 0.027 120
7 3.0 4.0 0.027 150
8 3.0 3.8 0.027 140
9 5.0 4.6 0.027 170
10 5.0 4.9 0.027 180
Solutions Manual
Page 88
8.30 f = 1.0/10 = 0.1; P=2.7/300 = 0.009
Time D1 – D2 (B1 – B2) f BOD

(days) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
1.0 2.5 0.09 270
2.0 3.8 0.12 410
3.0 4.5 0.15 480
4.0 5.1 0.20 540
5.0 5.6 0.21 600
6.0 6.1 0.25 650
7.0 6.3 0.24 670
8.31 The fermentation tube technique can be used to test for total coliforms in either drinking
water or wastewater. Nevertheless, for testing effluent from biological treatment of
wastewater the most popular is the membrane filter technique. For drinking water, the
test recommended by the EPA is the presence-absence technique, which can be extended
to detect E.Coli by fluorescence. Presence of thermotolerant fecal coliforms can also be
determined following the fermentation tube technique and membrane filter technique by
a secondary fermentation tube test.
Solutions Manual
Page 89
CHAPTER 9
SYSTEMS FOR TREATING WASTEWATER AND WATER
NO SOLUTIONS REQUIRED
CHAPTER 10
PHYSICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES

2
� �� lb �
� �� 128in �62.4 3 �
π 6in ft ft
10.1 Q  0.93 � �� 2 �32.2 2 � � 4.8cfs
4 � in �� s in lb
12 12 �62.4 3 �
� ft �� ft ft �
0.026
5.56  4 �1.5 �h1.522�(1.5)
10.2
h  0.95ft
10.3
Q  at 0.1 ft   4 �1.5 �0.11.522�(1.5)
0.026
 0.174cfs
Q  at 2.5 ft   4 �1.5 �2.51.522�(1.5)
0.026
 24.6 cfs
ft 2.00in
10.4 Velocity = 2.0 �  2.28fps
s 1.75in
10.5
gal d ft 3
V  10 7
�10s � �  154.7 ft 3
d 86400s 7.48gal
 800 
2
Ns m3 kw
Pwater  �1.307 *103 �154.7 ft 3
� �  3.66 kw
 3.281 ft 103 N m
3
s2 m 2 3
s
3.66
Pmotor   5.23kw
0.70
10.6
Pwater  5.0 kw �0.75  3.75 kw
0.5
� Nm �
� 1000
G�
3.75 kw
� s �  574s 1
Ns �
�
1.139*103 2 �10 m3 kw �
� m �
10.7 P = 10 hp, V = 400 ft3, efficiency = 80%

Pwater  10 hp �0.8  8.0 hp
Ns
for 10 o C μ=1.307*10-3
m2
0.5
� Nm �
� kw �
0.5 � 8.0 hp �0.746 �1000 s �
�P � � hp kw �  635s 1
G� � 
�μV � � 3 N s 3 m3 �
1.307
� *10 �400 ft �0.0283 �
m2 ft 3
� �
� �
Solutions Manual
Page 91
10.8
V  60 ft �45ft �14 ft  37800 ft 3  282, 744 gal
282744 gal 1440 min
t �  40.7 min
6 gal day
10*10
day
60 ft
v  1.5ft / min
40.7 min
lb �sec
for 50 o F μ =2.73*10-5
ft 2
0.5
� ft �lb �
� 930 �
G� s 1
lb �s �  30s
�2.73*10-5 2 �37800 ft 3 �
� ft �
10.9
V  25 m �12 m �5 m  1500 m 3
min
1500 m3 �1440
t d  31min
3
m
70, 000
d
rev min m
v p  2π � 1.8 m �2 �  0.38
min 60s s
m m
v   1  0.30  �0.38  0.26
s s
3
� rev �
� 2 �
4 �4 kg N
2π � min ��1.8 m  �
�1.8 � 11.5 m �0.25 m  �999.7 3 � 1  0.30  ��
3 3
P
2 m s kg � m
� 60 � 2
� min � s
N� m
P  761
s
0.5
� N� m �
� 761 �
G� s  20s1
N� s �
1.307 *103 2 �1500 m3 �
�
� m �
Solutions Manual
Page 92
10.10
V  96 ft �96 ft �14.5ft  134, 000 ft 3  1.0 million gallons
1.0 Mgal 1440 min
t �  29 min
Mgal d
50
d
try 4 blades at radii of 6.5, 5.5, 4.5 and 3.5 ft
ft
2.5
N= s  0.061 rev
2π �6.5ft s
all blades have the same area
3
4 �36 lb �s2 3 � rev �
P �1.8 � 15ft �0.5ft  �1.936 4 � 1  0.30  �� 2π �0.061 ��
�
2 ft � s �
ft �lb
�6.5 m   5.5 m   4.5 m   3.5 m  �
� 3 3 3
‫��״‬ 21,100
� s
0.5
� ft �lb �
� 21,100 �
G� s 1
lb �
s �  76s
�2.735*105 2 �134, 000 ft 3 �
� ft �
Try 3 blades at radii 6.5, 5.5, 4.5 m G  73s 1
Try 2 blades at radii 6.5 and 5.5 m G  66s 1
Try 2 blades at radii 6.5 and 4.5 m G  61s 1 Use this arrangement
10.11
ft gal s gpd
v0  0.0014 �7.48 3 �86, 400  905 2
s ft d ft
10ft
t minimum   2.0 hr
ft s
0.0014 �3600
s hr
Solutions Manual
Page 93
10.12 The minimum detention time for flocculation is 30 min (0.5 hr). Therefore:
hr
0.10 mil gal �24
Flocculator Design Capacity  d  4.8 mgd
0.5 hr
gal
4.8*106 �30s
Rapid Mix Volume  for t = 30 s   d  1667 gal
s
86, 400
d
mil gal
4.8 �4 hr
Sedimentation volume  for t = 4 hr   d =0.80 mil gal
hr
24
d
Solutions Manual
Page 94
10.13
ft 3 ft 3
Flow  40 mgd  27, 760 gpm  5.35*106  3710
d min
Detention time in the rapid mixer:
855ft 3 s
t 3
�60  14s (< 30s, OK)
ft min
3710
min
Detention time and horizontal velocity in flocculator:
140 ft �58ft �14.5ft
t  32 min (> 30 min . OK)
ft 3
3710
min
3
ft
3710
v min  1.8 ft �
> 1.5
ft �
� �
140 ft �14.5ft min � min �
Sedimentation overflow rate, detention time, and dimension ratios:
gal
40*106
Q d  1020 gpd

A 140 ft �280 ft ft 2
140 ft �280 ft �17 ft
t  180 min  3.0 hr
ft 3
3710
min
L 280 ft
  2.0 (low)
W 140 ft
L 280 ft
  16.5 (OK)
D 17 ft
gal
40*106
Weir loading  d  31,750 gpd (high)
1260 ft ft
Solutions Manual
Page 95
10.14
gal hr
2 �30 ft �15ft �10 ft �7.48 3
�24
t ft d  4.0 hr
gal
400, 000
d
gal
400, 000
d ft
v horizontal   0.25
gal min min
7.48 3 �15ft �10 ft �1440
ft d
gal
400, 000
Weir loading  d  6700 gpd
60 ft ft
10.15
gal hr
π � 20 ft  �10 ft �7.48
2
3
�24
t total  ft d  2.1hr
gal
1,100, 000
d
gal min
π � 10 ft  �10 ft �7.48 3 �1440
2
t floc  ft d  31min (for a depth of 10 ft)

gal
1,100, 000
d
gal min
π � 10 ft  �6 ft �7.48 3 �1440
2
t floc  ft d  18.5min (for a depth of 6 ft)

gal
1,100, 000
d
gal
1,100,000
Q d gpd
 overflow rate (or upflow rate) =  1170
π ���20 ft    10 ft  � ft 2
2 2
A
�
gal
1,100, 000
day gpd
Weir loading =  8750
π �40 ft ft
Satisfactory operation of a solids-contact unit is impossible without an isolated
flocculation chamber that provides mixing of the influent water, after addition of lime,
with accumulated chemical precipitates. By a combination of agglomeration, mechanical
entrapment, and sedimentation, solids separation is enhanced by passing the effluent
through the flocculated solids layer that forms near the bottom of the tank. The depth of
the blanket for solids contact is controlled by wasting of sludge. Not only is the
flocculation time short for the 6-ft depth of the flocculation well, but the configuration
does not promote the contact of treated water with solids. Figure 10.9 illustrates a
flocculator-clarifier with a proper flocculation chamber. The appearance of the clarifier
Solutions Manual
Page 96
in Figure 10.30 may imply suitability as a flocculator-clarifier for solids contact, but
when compared to units of proven performance, the tank does not have the proper
configuration.
10.16
A  2 unitsπ� (10  m 2
� m) 2 628
Weir length = 2 unitsπ� 18 
�m 113m
m3
12,900 3
Q d  20 m  20 m
 overflow rate =
A 628 m 2 m2 � d d
hr
628 m 2 �2 m �24
t d  2.3hr
3
m
12,900
d
m3
12,900 3
Weir loading  d  114 m
113m m� d
10.17
Q m s m
overflow rate =  0.00024 �86, 400  20.7
A s d d
m3
3800
A d  183m 2
m
20.7
d
0.5
� �
�183m 2 �
d�  15.3m
π �
� �
� 4 �
m3
3hr �3800
Depth = d  2.6 m
hr
183m 2 �24
d
Solutions Manual
Page 97
10.18
π
A  2 units � � 60 ft   5650 ft 2
2
4
gal
3, 400, 000
Q d  600 gpd
 2
A 5650 ft ft 2
V  5650 ft 2 �11ft  62,150 ft 3
gal hr
62,150 ft 3 �7.48 3 �24
t ft d  3.3hr
gal
3, 400, 000
d
weir length = 2 unitsπ� 55ft
�  ft
346
gal
3, 400, 000
weir loading  d  9840 gpd
2weirs �346 ft ft
The weir length of weirs on each side of an inboard channel is computed as double the
length of the centerline of the channel.
10.19
Q gal s gpd
 0.00077 fps �7.48 3 �86, 400  500 2
A ft d ft
gal
1, 000,000
A d  2000 ft 2
gpd
500 2
ft
A  2w �w  2w 2
1
�2000 ft 2 �
2
w � �  32 ft L  2w  64 ft
� 2 �
Solutions Manual
Page 98
10.20
π
� 24 m   452 m 2
2
A
4
V  452 m 2 �2.3m  1040 m 3
hr
1040 m3 �24
t d  2.5 hr
3
m
10, 000
d
m3
10, 000 3
Q d  22 m

A 452 m 2 m2 � d
10.21
A  2 units �40 ft �12 ft  960 ft 2
gal
387, 000
Q d  400 gpd
 2
A 960 ft ft 2
gal
387, 000
weir loading = d  4300 gpd
2 �45ft ft
10.22 The final clarifier for use with biological aeration (Figure 10.12) has uptake pipes along
the collector arm for rapid return of activated sludge. The rapid return through the uptake
pipes increases solids concentration and returns “fresher” activated sludge. The water
depth is greater to accommodate zone settling, and the inboard weir channel reduces the
approach velocity of the overflow to reduce carryover of solids. The primary clarifier
(Figure 10.11) has a collector arm with scrapers to push denser settled solids to a central
hopper and a single outboard weir. The proposed renovation of a wastewater plant to
consider the use of existing primary clarifiers as activated-sludge final clarifiers is not
recommended. First, the water depth of the existing primary clarifiers is very likely to be
inadequate for zone settling of activated sludge. Refer to the discussion of minimum
side-water depth of wastewater clarifiers in Section 10.11. Furthermore, the scraper
mechanism and weir channel in the primary clarifier would not be proper for an
activated-sludge final clarifier.
10.23 Maximum overflow rate = 800 gpd/ft2 based on average daily flow (max. day)
Maximum overflow rate = 1600 gpd/ft2 based on peak hourly flow
Minimum side-water depth = 12 ft
Maximum weir loading = 20,000 gpd/ft
Maximum solids loading = 40 lb/(ft2 d) under average flow
Maximum solids loading = 50 lb/(ft2 d) under peak flow
Solutions Manual
Page 99
20 mgd
Design flow (each clarifier) =  5 mgd
4
gal
5, 000, 000
A d  6250 ft 2
gal
800
d�ft 2
0.5
�6250 ft 2 �
d� �  89.2 ft or 90 ft
� π/4 �
Side-water depth = 12 ft
gal hr
6250 ft 2 �12 ft �7.48 3
�24
t= ft d  2.7 hr (OK)
gal
5, 000, 000
d
Assume the inboard weir channel has a mean diameter of 80 ft
gal
5, 000, 000
weir loading = d  9,900 gpd (OK)
π �80 ft �2 weirs ft
Mgal mg lb
6.5 �2500 �8.34 mgMG
d l lb
solids loading = l
 21.3 2
π ft � d
� 90 ft 
2
10.24
gal
V  12 ft �12 ft �8ft �7.48  8600 gal
ft 3
8600 gal min
t �1440  16 min
gal d
800, 000
d
ft 3
3 yd 3 �27 3
yd
storage time =  34 days
Mgal ft 3
0.8 �3
d Mgal
10.25 Refer to Section 10.13. For a turbid water, chemical coagulation, followed by
flocculation and sedimentation, reduces the suspended and colloidal solids content before
filtration. Even if sedimentation is not practiced the nature of the suspended solids and
turbidity will be affected by coagulation. For any water, residual coagulant in the water
is essential for filtration action to remove microscopic particulate matter that would
otherwise pass through the filter bed. Continuous chemical coagulation is required in
Solutions Manual
Page 100
treatment of surface water prior to granular-media filtration to ensure removal of Giardia
cysts and cysts and Cryptosporidium oocysts.
10.26 Refer to Section 10.13 under “Direct Filtration”. Turbidity < 5 NTU, color < 40 units
(pcu), iron < 0.3 mg/l, manganese < 0.05 mg/l, and algal counts < 2000 per ml.
10.27 Refer to Section 10.14. Dual-media coal-sand filters allow higher rates of filtration and
longer filter runs than plain sand filters.
10.28 Refer to Table 10.3. For air scour: pipe laterals with nozzles, vitrified tile block, plastic
block (Figure 10.20), and plastic nozzles (Figure 10.28). For air-water scour: plastic
block (Figure 10.20). For no air scour: pipe laterals with orifices and vitrified tile block.
10.29 Refer to Section 10.15 under “Rate of Flow Control” and Figure 10.23. The maximum
hydraulic head (pressure plus suction) is the elevation difference between the water
surface above the media and water level in the clear well, commonly 9 to 12 ft.
10.30 When the treatment plant referred to in this question was expanded, the filter boxes were
constructed at an additional depth of 4 ft, so the operating water depth above the filter
media was 8 ft. The traditional flow control system was maintained. An alternate would
have been to redesign the filtration system for flow control by influent flow splitting for
constant-rate filtration as illustrated in Figure 10.24 and described in Section 10.15. If
used, this news arrangement would have to be evaluated for compatibility with the
existing plant.
10.31 Refer to Section 10.15. and Figures 10.24 and 10.25. Similarities of influent flow-
splitting and declining rate filtration are the deep filter box and simple effluent flow
control system. The major difference is the location and type of influent arrangement. In
influent flow-splitting, the filters operate at the same rate but at different water levels. In
declining rate, the filters operate at the same water levels but at different filtration rates.
Solutions Manual
Page 101
10.32
ft 2
At 50 o F,ν 1.410*10 5
s
gal
2.5
Q min� ft 2
V   5.57 *103 fps
A 7.48 gal �60 s
ft 3 min
using equation 10.13:
ft 2 ft
� 1  0.42  �5.57 *10 3 � 6.0 
2 2
18in �6 �1.410*10 5
h= s s  1.4 ft
in ft
 
2
12 �32.2 2 � 0.42  �1.6*10 ft
3 3
ft s
10.33 Use equation 10.13.

Q gal ft 3 min ft
V   4.0 2
� �  0.0089
A min �ft 7.48gal 60sec s
ft 2
5
ν 60 oF  1.217 *10
s
in ft
d anthracite  2.0 mm � �  0.00656 ft
25.4 mm 12in
ft 2 ft
� 1  .40  �0.0089 � 7.5 
2 2
1.0 ft �6 �1.217 *105
h anthracite  s s  0.15ft
ft
32.2 2 � 0.40  � 0.00656ft 
3 2
s
in ft
d sand  1.0 mm � �  0.00328ft
25.4 mm 12in
ft 2 ft
� 1  .40  �0.0089 � 6.0 
2 2
2.0 ft �6 �1.217 *105
h sand  s s  0.76 ft
ft
32.2 2 � 0.40  � 0.00328ft 
3 2
s
Total head loss  h anthracite  h sand  0.15ft  0.76 ft  0.91ft
Solutions Manual
Page 102
10.34 Use equation 10.13
m2
ν10 o C  1.306*106
s
Q l m3 m
V   2.7 2 �  0.0027
A m �s 1000 l s
m2 m
� 1  0.42  �0.0027 � 7.5 
2 2
0.3 m �6 �1.306*106
h anthracite  s s  0.165 m
m
9.807 2 � 0.42  � 0.001m 
3 2
s
m2 m
� 1  0.42  �0.0027 � 6.0 
2 2
0.3 m �6 �1.306*106
h sand  s s  0.423m
m
9.807 2 � 0.42  � 0.0005 m 
3 2
s
h total  h anthracite  h sand  0.59 m
Solutions Manual
Page 103
10.35
Sieve Geometric Mean Fraction of sand Pi

designation diameter retained di 2
number (mm)
(mm)-1
12 1.41 0.05 0.03
16 4.00 0.22 0.22
20 0.70 0.51 1.04
30 0.50 0.20 0.80
40 0.35 0.02 0.16
50 Σ = 1.00 Σ = 2.25
Pi
�d 2
 2.25 mm 2  2.25*106 m 2
i
m2
ν10 o C  1.306*106
s
Q l m3 m
V   2.7 2 �  0.0027
A m �s 1000 l s
m2 m
� 1  0.45  �0.0027 �2.25*106 m 2
2
36 �5 �1.306*10 6
h s s m
  0.86
l m m
9.807 2 � 0.45  � 0.75 
3 2
s
m
h  0.86 �0.7 m  0.6 m
m
Solutions Manual
Page 104
10.36
kg kg

at 10 o C :ρ 999.7 3

μ 1.307 *10 3
m m� s
using Equations 10.17 through 10.19,
kg kg m
 0.00084 m  �999.7 3 � 2650  999.7  3 �9.807 2
3
Ga  m m s  5614
2
� kg �
�1.307 *10 3 �
� m�s�
0.5
Re mf  � 33.7    0.0408  � 5614  �
2
 33.7  3.24
� �
kg
3.24 �1.307 *103
Vmf  m� s  0.00505 m  5.05 l
kg s m2 �
s
0.00084 m �999.7 3
m
l l
Recommended backwash rate = 1.3 �5.05 2  6.6 2
m � s m � s
10.37
kg 3 kg

at 20 o C :ρ 998.2 3

μ 1.002*10
m m� s
using Equations 10.17 through 10.19,
kg kg m
 0.0012 m  �998.2 3 � 2650  998.2  3 �9.807 2
3
Ga  m m s  27,830
2
� kg �
� 1.002*103 �
� m�s�
0.5
�33.7    0.0408  � 27,830  �
Re mf  �
2
 33.7  13.96
�
kg
13.96 �1.002*103
Vmf  m� s  0.00117 m  1.17 l
kg s m2 �s
0.0012 m �998.2 3
m
l l
Recommended backwash rate = 1.3 �1.17 2  15.2 2
m � s m � s
Use Equation 10.15 for the pressure drop.
kg m
Δp  1.0 m � 2650  998.2  3 �9.807 2 � 1  0.40   9720 N
m s
Solutions Manual
Page 105
10.38
kg 3 kg

at 20 o C :ρ 998.2 3

μ 1.002*10
m m�s
using Equations 10.17 through 10.19 for sand,
kg kg m
 0.0009 m  �998.2 3 � 2650  998.2  3 �9.807 2
3
Ga  m m s  11, 740
2
� kg �
� 1.002*103 �
� m� s�
0.5
Re mf  �  33.7    0.0408  � 11, 740  �
2
 33.7  6.48
� �
kg
6.48 �1.002*103
Vmf  m� s  0.00723 m  7.23 l
kg s m2 � s
0.0009 m �998.2 3
m
using Equations 10.17 through 10.19 for anthracite,
kg kg m
 0.0015 m  �998.2 3 � 1670  998.2  3 �9.807 2
3
Ga  m m s  22,120
2
� kg �
�1.002*103 �
� m� s�
0.5
Re mf  � 33.7    0.0408  � 22,120  �
2
 33.7  11.45
� �
kg
11.45 �1.002*10 3
Vmf  m� s  0.00764 m  7.64 l
kg s m2 �s
0.0015 m �998.2 3
m
Use the Vmf for coal recognizing that this will cause additional expansion of the sand
l l
Recommended backwash rate = 1.3 �7.64 2
 9.9 2
m �
s m �
s
Use Equation 10.15 for the pressure drop.
kg m N
Δpsand  0.3 m � 2650  998.2  3 �9.807 2 � 1  0.40   2920 2
m s m
kg m N
Δpanthracite  0.5 m � 1670  998.2  3 �9.807 2 � 1  0.5   1650 2
m s m
N
Δp total  Δpsand  Δp anthracite  2920 N  1650 N  4570 2
m
10.39 Use Figure 10.29

d 90 (sand)  0.0006 m � 1.4   0.00105 m
1.67
Enter Figure 10.29 at 0.00105 m, read up to plot for sand SG=2.65, and read across to
Solutions Manual
Page 106
V=18.1 gpm/ft2. Also read across to intersection of SG=1.60 and read down to
d90 = 1.82 mm.
Then calculate the d10 for coal:
1.82 mm
d10   1.04 mm
 1.4 
1.67
10.40
ρ = 999.7 kg/m3
μ = 1.307*10-3 kg/(m s)
1. choose specific gravity for the media
2. choose a deq and use equations 10.17 through 10.19 to calculate Vmf
3. multiply Vmf by 1.3 to obtain the fluidization velocity (Vf)
4. repeat steps 2 and 3 for multiple values of deq and Vf
5. choose another specific gravity and repeat steps 2 through 4
Solutions Manual
Page 107
CHAPTER 11
CHEMICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
11.1 a.
g
MWAl2  SO4  �
4.3H2 O
 2 �27.0  3 �32.1  26.3 �16  28.6 �1  600
3 mol
600 g
EWAl2  SO4  �
4.3H 2O
  100
3 6 eq
g
MWFe2  SO4   2 �55.8  3 �32.1  12 �16.0  400
3 mol
400 g
EWFe2  SO4    66.7
3 6 eq
g
MWNa 2CO3  2 �23.0  12.0  3 �16.0  106
mol
106 g
EWNa 2CO3   53
2 eq
b.
g
MWNH   14.0  4 �1.0  18.0
4 mol
18.0 g
EWNH    18.0
4 1 eq
g
MWHCO   1.0  12.0  3 �16.0  61.0
3 mol
61.0 g
EWHCO    61.0
3 1 eq
g
MWCO   12.0  3 �16.0  60.0
3 mol
60.0 g
EWHCO    30.0
3 2 eq
Since CO 2 reacts with water to form H 2 CO3 the charge of CO 2 after dissolution is taken as 2.
g
MWCO2  12.0  2 �16.0  44.0
mol
44.0 g
EWCO2   22.0
2 eq
Solutions Manual
Page 108
11.2 a.
mg CaCO3 mg CaCO3
50 50
mg Ca eq mg Mg eq mg
Total hardness = 38 �  10 �  136 as CaCO3
l mg Ca l mg Mg l
20 12.2
eq eq
b.
mg CaCO3 mg CaCO3
 50 2 50
mg HCO3 eq mg CO3 eq mg
Total Alk. = 120 � 
 15 � 2
 123 as CaCO3
l mg HCO3 l mg CO3 l
61 30
eq eq
11.3
component mg/l EW meq/l
Ca2+ 36 20.0 1.80
Mg2+ 14 12.2 1.15
Na+ 43 23.0 1.87
K+ 7 39.1 0.18
HCO3- 208 61.0 3.41
SO42- 14 48.0 0.29
Cl- 44 35.5 1.24
11.4
Calcium = 94/20 = 4.7 meq/l
Magnesium = 24/12.2 = 2.0 meq/l
Sodium = 14/23.0 = 0.6 meq/l
Bicarbonate = 317/61 = 5.2 meq/l
Sulfate = 67/48.0 = 1.4 meq/l
Chloride = 24/35.5 = 0.7 meq/l
Solutions Manual
Page 109
11.5
calcium hardness = 185/50.0 = 3.7 meq/l

magnesium hardness = 50/50.0 = 1.0 meq/l
sodium = 23/23.0 = 1.0 meq/l
potassium = 20/39.1 = 0.51 meq/l
alkalinity = 200/50.0 = 4.0 meq/l
sulfate = 58/48.0 = 1.21 meq/l
chloride = 36/35.5 = 1.01 meq/l
All alkalinity is in the form of bicarbonate ion since the pH is between 4.5 and 8.3
11.6 Sulfuric acid is a strong acid, i.e., it completely dissociates.

mg H 2SO 4
1.0
l mol H  mol
�2  2.04*105
mg H 2SO 4 mol H 2SO 4 l
98,100
mol H 2SO 4
{ }
pH   log H  @  log �
H �
� � 4.69
11.7 See Figure 11.2

At a pH of 7.0 alkalinity is in the carbonate form
At a pH of 10.5 the predominant form of alkalinity is carbonate
Solutions Manual
Page 110
11.8
t  4 1 t
C �t �
(a)  e tR � � e
tR
C0 C t
(b) 4  �R �
C0  4  1 !
t/tR C/C0 t/tR C/C0
0.25 0.78 1.0 0.06
0.5 0.61 2.0 0.18
1.0 0.37 3.0 0.22
1.5 0.22 4.0 0.20
2.0 0.14 5.0 0.14
3.0 0.05 6.0 0.09
11.9
Solutions Manual
Page 111
Solutions Manual
Page 112
t C Δt  Ci  Ci 1 
t
 C t  i   C t  i 1
t
 Ct   Ct 
2
i
2
i 1
t
2 2 2
min mg/L min
0 0.00
2 0 0.00 0.00
2 0.00
2 0 0.00 0.00
4 0.00
2 0.1 0.60 3.60
6 0.10
2 0.45 3.40 26.00
8 0.35
2 1 9.30 87.40
10 0.65
2 1.05 11.30 122.60
12 0.40
2 0.62 7.88 100.72
14 0.22
2 0.33 4.84 71.28
16 0.11
2 0.16 2.66 44.36
18 0.05
2 0.05 0.90 16.20
20 0.00
Σ 3.76 40.88 472.16
 40.88
t  10.9 min
3.76
472.16
  10.9   7.37
2
σ2 
3.76
Solutions Manual
Page 113
11.10
� CΔt  11922
i i �C t Δt  1.81*10
i i i
6
�C t
i i
2
Δt i  3.192*10 8
1.81*106
t  152 min
11922
3.19*108
  152   3683
2
σ2 
11922
 152 
2
n  6.27 tanks in series

3683
Solutions Manual
Page 114
11.11
Solutions Manual
Page 115
� CΔt  18.39
i i �C t
i Δt
i i  323 �C t
i i
2
Δt i  6671
323
t  17.6 min
18.39
6671
  17.6   53.6
2
σ2 
18.39
 17.6 
2
n  5.8 tanks in series

53.6
137 m3 min
tR  3
�1440  19.5 min
m d
10,100
d
t 17.6 min
  0.90
t R 19.5 min
mg �min
Q �� CΔt  18.30
CΔ  i i

�C Δt
i i 
 l  0.94
mg
V tR 19.5 min l
Cpeak 1.17
  1.24
CΔ 0.94
Solutions Manual
Page 116
11.12
for 2 tanks in series:
2
� �
mg � 1 � mg
C  30 ��  4.8
l � 1 1.5 hr l
1  2.0 � �
� hr 2 �
for 4 tanks in series:
4
� �
mg � 1 � mg
C  30 ��  3.2
l � 1 1.5 hr l
1  2.0 � �
� hr 4 �
11.13
a. The rate of zero-order irreversible reaction depends only on time and the reaction
rate constant since it is independent of the concentration of the reactant and
product.
b. The rate of a first-order reaction proceeds at a rate that is directly proportional to

the remaining concentration of the reactant. It also depends on time and the
reaction rate constant.
11.14
Reaction is first order

k = 0.08 min-1
Solutions Manual
Page 117
11.15
400
ln 6
k   2*10  0.28 min 1
30
� �
� 1 � coliforms
C  2*106 ��  213, 000
0.28 100 ml
�1 �30 min �
� min �
11.16
for PFR:
d 100
tR  �ln  2.0 d
0.8 20
for CMR:
d � 100 �
tR  ��  1� 5.0 d
0.8 �20 �
for 2 CMR in series:
� 1
�
2 ��100 �
2
�
tR  � � 1� 3.1 d or each reactor t i  1.55 d
0.8 � 20
� �
d � �
11.17 Refer to sections 11.11 and 11.13. Coagulation is the reduction of electrical repulsive
forces of colloidal particles by adding coagulant chemicals. Flocculation is the
agglomeration of destabilized particles by chemical joining and bridging of destabilized
particles through slow mixing to produce a chemical floc that can be removed by
subsequent sedimentation and filtration. Flocculation is commonly used to refer to the
gentle mechanical mixing of chemically treated water to agglomerate small particles into
a well-defined floc.
11.18 Jar 4 with a dosage of 2 �8.0  16.0 mg / l

With distilled water, no floc formation occurs because of the lack of alkalinity for the
chemical reaction, i.e., the pH falls below the region where aluminum hydroxide would
form.
11.19 One mole of alum produces 6 moles of H+ (Equation 11.52), that is, it would consume 6
equivalents of alkalinity.
1.0 mg alum mole alum 6 eq alkalinity 50, 000 mg CaCO3 mg CaCO3
� � �  0.5
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum eq alkalinity l
One mole of alum reacts with 3 moles of hydrated lime (Equation 11.53)
Solutions Manual
Page 118
1.0 mg alum mole alum 3 moles Ca(OH) 2 74,000 mg Ca(OH) 2 mg Ca(OH) 2
� � �  0.37
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole Ca(OH) 2 l
or expressed as quicklime (CaO):
1.0 mg alum mole alum 3 moles CaO 56,000 mg CaO mg CaO
� � �  0.28
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole CaO l
One mole of alum reacts with 3 moles of soda ash (Equation 11.54)
1.0 mg alum mole alum 3 moles Na 2 CO3 106,000 mg Na 2CO3 mg Na 2CO3
� � �  0.53
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole Na 2CO 3 l
11.20
alkalinity reacted:
15 mg alum mole alum 6 eq alkalinity 50, 000 mg CaCO3
� � �  7.5 mg / l as CaCO3
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum eq alkalinity
carbon dioxide generated by addition of alum:
H +  HCO3 � H 2 CO3 � CO 2  H 2O
15 mg alum mole alum 6 moles H  1 mole CO 2 44, 000 mg CO 2 mg CO 2
� � � 
�  6.6
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole H mole CO 2 l
soda ash dosage:
15 mg alum mole alum 3 moles Na 2CO3 106, 000 mg Na 2CO3 mg Na 2CO3
� � �  7.95
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole Na 2CO3 l
carbon dioxide generated when alum and soda ash are added:
15 mg alum mole alum 3 mole CO 2 44, 000 mg CO 2 mg CO 2
� � �  3.3
l 600, 000 mg alum mole alum mole CO 2 l
Yes. Addition of lime slurry results in neither a reduction in alkalinity nor production of
CO2. Lime slurry is more difficult to prepare and feed than sodium carbonate solution;
therefore, for small treatment plants, soda ash is often the chemical of choice and the
carbon dioxide produced can be removed by air-stripping if necessary.
Solutions Manual
Page 119
11.21
lb
mg mil gal
 a 40 �8.34
mg
 333 lb
mil gal
l
l
 b from Equation 11.56
lb
mg FeCl3 mole FeCl3 3 moles CaO 56, 000 mg CaO mil gal 1
40 � � � �8.34 � 
l 162, 000 mg FeCl3 2 moles FeCl 3 mole CaO mg 0.7
l
 247 lb
mil gal
lb
mg FeCl3 mole FeCl3 2 moles Fe(OH)3 107, 000 mg Fe(OH)3 mil gal
 c 40 � � � �8.34
mg

l 162, 000 mg FeCl3 2 moles FeCl3 mole Fe(OH)3
l
lb Fe(OH)3
 220
mil gal
11.22
alkalinity consumed:
60 mg FeCl3 mole FeCl3 3 eq alkalinity 50, 000 mg CaCO3 mg CaCO3
� � �  55.6
l 162, 000 mg FeCl3 mole FeCl3 eq alkalinity l
alkalinity needed from CaO:
mg CaCO3
55.6  40  15.6
l
mg CaCO 3 eq 28, 000 mg CaO mg CaO
15.6 � �  8.7
l 50, 000 mg CaCO3 eq l
11.23 Percentages for Giardia cyst and coliform removals of selected test runs listed in
tabulated data are as follows:
Test Run Polymer Effluent Giardia Removal Coliform
Dosage Turbidity Removal
mg/l NTU % %
2 0 0.22 79.7
6 12 0.03 97.5
8 13 0.06 99.9 85.1
11 18 0.07 100 97.8
12 24 0.02 100 99.9
Based on the plotted data below, the least dosage of polymer for maximum turbidity
removal is 10 mg/l. The effluent turbidity to ensure virtually 100% Giardia cyst removal
is less than 0.1 NTU
Solutions Manual
Page 120
11.24
lb
mg mil gal
Dry solids   1500  200  �8.34  10,800 lb
l mg mil gal
l
lb solids
10,800
mil gal water gal
Volume   15,800
lb solids lbsludge lb water mil gal
0.08 �1.03 �8.34
lb sludge lb water gal
11.25 See process flow diagram below.
Flocculation tanks: Use four or five compartments separated by baffles to direct flow
through paddle flocculators. If desired, axial flow turbine flocculators can be used. For
design criteria refer to Section 10.7 for recommended criteria.
Sedimentation tanks: Use long rectangular tanks with “finger effluent channels. For
design criteria refer to Section 10.10 and Table 10.1.
Dual-media coal-sand filters: Use filter media as described in Section 10.14 and plastic
block underdrains as shown in Figure 10.20 for concurrent air-and-water scour. Flow
control, as discussed in Section 10.15 can be either the traditional system as illustrated in
Figure 10.22 with a deep filter box to provide a positive head of 8 ft above the filter
surface or influent flow splitting as illustrated in Figure 10.24 to prevent a negative
piezometric head in the media.
Solutions Manual
Page 121
Clear well: Construct baffle walls in the reservoir to form a longitudinal baffled
serpentine tank to create a long narrow plug-flow for a longer contact time for
disinfection.
Solutions Manual
Page 122
11.26
mg mg CaCO3
8.8 135
l  0.4 meq meq
CO 2 
mg l
Alk  l
mg CaCO3
 2.70
l
 all as HCO 
-
22.0 50.0
meq meq
mg mg
40 29
Ca 2  l  2.0 meq SO 4 2  l  0.6 meq
mg l mg l
20.0 48
meq meq
mg mg
14.7 17.8
Mg 2  l  1.21 meq Cl   l  0.51 meq
mg l mg l
12.2 35.5
meq meq
mg
13.7
Na   l  0.60 meq
mg l
23.0
meq
meq
�cations  2.0  1.21  0.6  3.81 l
meq
�anions  2.70  0.6  0.51  3.81 l
OK
Solutions Manual
Page 123
Treatment Chemicals
Component meq/l Lime (meq/l) Soda ash (meq/l)
CO2 0.40 0.40 0
Ca(HCO3)2 2.00 2.00 0
Mg(HCO3)2 0.70 1.40 0
MgSO4 0.51 0.51 0.51
Σ 4.31 0.51
meq mg CaO mg mg
Lime required = 4.31 �28  35  156 CaO
l meq l l
meq mg Na 2 CO3 mg
Soda ash required  0.51 �53  27 Na 2CO3
l meq l
11.27 Solution is the same as the last part of Example 11.6. First stage recarbonation converts
OH- to CO32-.
OH- from excess lime = 35/28 = 1.25 meq/l.
OH- from Mg(OH)2 = 10/50 = 0.20 meq/l
(1.25 + 0.20) x 22 = 31.9 mg/l of CO2
Second stage converts half of carbonate to bicarbonate.
(0.80 meq/l of carbonate remaining x 0.5 x 22 = 8.8 mg/l of CO2
Total CO2 required = 31.9 + 8.8 = 41 mg/l
Allowing for 20% of CO2 escape, the total requirement = 41 x 1.2 = 49 mg/l
11.28
Component Component Conc Lime Soda Ash
meq/l meq/l meq/l
Ca(HCO3)2 3.7 3.7 0
Mg(HCO3)2 0.3 0.6 0
MgSO4 0.7 0.7 0.7
Σ 5.0 0.7
Lime dosage = 5.0 x 28 + 35 (excess) = 175 mg/l CaO

Soda ash dosage = 0.7 x 53 = 37 mg/l Na2CO3
Solutions Manual
Page 124
Recarbonation is calculated as I the solution to Problem 11.27 except that the conversion
of carbonate to bicarbonate is 75 %.
meq CO32 mg CO 2 mg
0.8 �0.75 �22.0  13.2 CO 2
l eq l
Allowing for 20% of carbon dioxide escaping:
mg
Total CO 2 applied  1.2 �(31.9  13.2)  54 CO 2
l
11.29 Lime dosage to react with the calcium = 3.7 x 28 = 104 mg/l CaO
This softening is not recommended if the desired magnesium harness of 50 mg/l is too
great. The maximum concentration normally recommended is 40 mg/l. Since the
alkalinity is two-thirds carbonate, the pH is greater than 10. Recarbonation is necessary
to reduce the pH to the range of 8.5 to 9.5 to prevent calcium carbonate scaling of the
filter media and distribution piping.
11.30
calcium = 94.0/20.0 = 4.70 meq/l

magnesium = 24/12.2 = 1.97
sodium = 14/23.0 = 0.61
bicarbonate = 317/61.0 = 5.20
sulfate = 67/48.0 = 1.40
chloride = 24/35.5 = 0.68
Solutions Manual
Page 125
Component Component Conc Lime Soda Ash
meq/l meq/l meq/l
Ca(HCO3)2 4.70 4.70 0
Mg(HCO3)2 0.50 1.0 0
MgSO4 1.47 1.47 1.47
Σ 5.0 0.7
mg
 a Lime dose   5 �28   35  175 CaO
l
mg
Soda ash dose  1.47 �53  77.9 Na 2CO3
l
bar diagram after chemical addition and settling and recarbonation
Recarbonation:
for OH 
meq
1.25  0.2  1.45
l
for 75% conversion of carbonate
meq
0.8 �0.75  0.60
l
mg
CO 2 required  22.0 � 1.45  0.60   45.1
l
allowing for 20% escape of CO 2 :
mg mg
45.1 �1.20  54.1 CO 2
l l
Solutions Manual
Page 126
bar diagram of finished water for part (a)
(b) The lime dose for non-carbonate magnesium hardness is only 0.67 meq/l of the 1.47
meq/l since 0.8 meq/l of Mg (40 mg/l as CaCO3) is the allowable concentration in the
finished water.
Component Lime - 1st Stage Flow Lime - By-passed flow Soda Ash
meq/l meq/l meq/l meq/l
Ca(HCO3)2 4.70 0.66*4.70 = 3.10 0.34*4.70 = 1.60 0
Mg(HCO3)2 0.50 0.66*0.5*2 = 0.66 0.34*0.5*2 = 0.34 0
MgSO4 1.47 0.66*0.67 = 0.44 0.67
Σ 4.20 1.94 0.67
meq
Lime added first stage (based on total flow) = 4.20  1.94  6.14
l
meq mg CaO mg
 6.14 �28  172 CaO
l meq l
meq mg Na 2 CO3 mg
Soda ash added in second stage (based on total flow) = 0.67 �53  35.5 Na 2CO3
l l l
meq
6.14
Actual lime dose to the first stage = l  9.30 meq
0.66 l
meq
Excess lime remaining = 9.30  (4.70  0.5 �2  1.47)  2.13
l
The bar diagram for the settled effluent from the first stage is shown on the next page
Solutions Manual
Page 127
2.12
2.12
The bar diagram for the uncreated comgined first-stage effluent and the bypassed flow is
shown below.
After reactions in the combined flow:

meq
Ca 2 remaining  4.69   2 �1.86   0.97
l
meq
Na  from the raw water and the soda ash  0.61  1.47  2.08
l
HCO3  
 1.59  bypassed   1.47  soda ash   1.86 reacted with OH   0.2 (converted to CO32 )
 1.0
Finished water after reactions of excesslime and soda ash:

mg
Final hardness  1.57 �50  79
l
Solutions Manual
Page 128
(c) Flow passing through the first stage is processed as excess-lime treatment.
mg
lime required  0.66 �236  156 CaO
l
mg
soda ash required  0.66 �78  52 Na 2CO3
l
meq
the amount of excess OH  in the mixed flow stream  0.66 �(1.25  0.20)  0.96
l
meq
Ca(HCO3 ) 2  0.339 �4.70  1.59
l
meq
OH  reacts with calcium bicarbonate lowering it to  1.59  0.96  0.63
l
Final Hardness = 1.43 �50  72 mg/l as CaCO3
11.31
calcium = 63.0/20.0 = 3.15 meq/l

magnesium = 15/12.2 = 1.23
sodium = 20/23.0 = 0.87
potassium = 10/39.1 = 0.26
carbonate = 16/30 = 0.53
bicarbonate = 189/61.0 = 3.10
sulfate = 80/48.0 = 1.67
chloride = 10/35.5 = 0.28
Total cations = 5.51 meq/l

Total anions = 5.58 meq/l
Solutions Manual
Page 129
Component meq/l Lime (meq/l)
CaCO3 0.53 0
Ca(HCO3)2 2.62 2.62
Lime requirement = 2.62 x 28 = 73 mg/l

Final hardness = (0.60 as Ca + 1.23 as Mg) x 50 = 91 mg/l as CaCO3.
11.32
carbon dioxide = 15/22 = 0.7 meq/l

calcium = 60/20 = 3.0
magnesium = 24/12.2 = 2.0
sodium = 46/23.0 = 2.0
alkalinity = 200/50 = 4.0
sulfate = 96/48.0 = 2.0
chloride = 35/35.5 = 1.0
40  10
X  0.333 and 1  X  0.667
 2 �50   10
Component Lime - 1st Stage Flow Lime - By-passed flow Soda Ash
meq/l meq/l meq/l meq/l
CO2 0.7 0.67*0.70 = 0.47 0.33*0.70 = 0.23 0
Ca(HCO3)2 3.0 0.67*3.0 = 2.0 0.33*3.0 = 1.0 0
Mg(HCO3)2 1.0 0.67*2.0 = 1.33
MgSO4 1.0 0.67*0.2 = 0.13 0.20
Σ 3.93 1.23 0.20
Lime dosage= 3.93 +1.23 = 5.2 meq/l = 145 mg/l CaO

Soda ash dosage = 0.20 x 58 = 12 mg/l Na2CO3
5.2 meq
Excess lime in the first stage =   0.7  3.0  2.0  1.0   1.1
0.67 l
Solutions Manual
Page 130
Diagram for settled effluent from the first stage:
Diagram for unreacted first-stage effluent and by-passed flow:
Hypothetical diagram after reaction of excess lime:
Finished water after sedimentation and filtration:
Solutions Manual
Page 131
11.33
carbon dioxide = 15/22 = 0.7 meq/l
calcium = 60/20 = 3.0
magnesium = 24/12.2 = 2.0
sodium = 46/23.0 = 2.0
alkalinity = 200/50 = 4.0
sulfate = 96/48.0 = 2.0
chloride = 35/35.5 = 1.0
Diagram for the raw water:
40  10
X  0.333 and 1  X  0.667
 2 �50   10
Dosages for treatment of 66.7 % of the flow

Component Lime Soda Ash
meq/l meq/l meq/l
CO2 0.7 0.67*0.70 = 0.47 0
Ca(HCO3)2 3.0 0.67*3.0 = 2.0 0
Mg(HCO3)2 1.0 0.67*2.0 = 1.33
MgSO4 1.0 0.67*1.0 = 0.67 0.67
Σ 4.47 0.67
Chemical additions to first stage flow:

mg
Lime dosage   4.47 �28   35  160 CaO
l
mg
Soda ash dosage  0.67 �53  36 Na 2CO3
l
Diagram after excess lime softening:
Solutions Manual
Page 132
Blending of the first stage softened water and by-passed water in meq/l
CO 2  0.33 �0.7  0.23
HCO3  0.33 �4.0  1.33
Ca 2  0.33 �3.0  1.0
Mg 2  0.33 �2.0  0.67
Na   0.33 �2.0  0.67
Components in excess-lime treated water:

Ca 2  0.67 � 0.6  1.25   1.23
Mg 2  0.67 �0.2  0.13
Na   0.67 �2.67  1.78
CO32  0.67 �0.6  0.4
OH   0.67 � 1.25  0.20   0.97
Reactions when waters are blended:

CO2 is eliminated by OH-, 0.97-0.23 = 0.74, lowering both Ca2+ and OH- by 0.23 meq/l.
0.74 Ca(OH)2 reacts with Ca(HCO3)2 reducing HCO3- by 0.74 meq/l and precipitating
1.48 CaCO3 minus the practical limit of 0.6 meq/l.
Calculating concentrations in finished water after sedimentation and filtration:

Ca 2  1.0  1.23  1.48  0.6  1.35
Mg 2  0.67  0.13  0.80
Na   0.67  1.78  2.45
HCO3  1.33  0.74  0.59
CO32  ?
SO4 2  2.0  same as raw water 
Cl  1.0  same as raw water 
Final water diagram
Solutions Manual
Page 133
11.34
Solutions Manual
Page 134
11.35
calcium = 108/20 = 5.4
magnesium = 44/12.2 = 3.61
sodium = 138/23.0 = 6.0
bicarbonate = 146/61 = 2.39
sulfate = 110/48.0 = 2.29
chloride = 366/35.5 = 10.31
Component Lime Soda Ash

meq/l meq/l meq/l
Ca(HCO3)2 2.4 2.4 0
CaSO4 2.3 0 2.3
CaCl2 0.7 0 0.7
MgCl2 3.6 3.6 3.6
Σ 6.0 6.6
Solutions Manual
Page 135
Component mg/l
Ca(HCO3)2 0.6 x 81 = 49
Mg(HCO3)2 0.2 x 67.1 = 13
Na2(SO4) 2.3 x 71 = 163
NaCl 10.3 x 58.4 = 602
Summation = 827
TDS = 827 mg/l
The recommendation for lime-soda ash softening was not appropriate. The sodium
concentration of the water is increased from 138 mg/l to 290 mg/l For persons on sodium
restricted diets, the recommended maximum concentration of sodium in drinking water is
100 mg/l. Although hardness is reduced from 450 to 40 mg/l, the TDS concentration is
only reduced from 900 to 827 mg/l. To produce a potable water, a membrane process,
such as reverse osmosis is recommended to decrease the salinity.
11.36
11.37
grains
hardness removed meq mg gal
 4.3 �50 �0.0584 �106 gal  15.5*106 grains
million gal l meq mg
l
grains 0.3 lb NaCl lb NaCl
Salt required for regeneration = 15.5*106 �  4640
mil gal 1000 grains mil gal
In ion exchange softening the Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions are replaced by Na+ ions and carbon
dioxide is not removed. Compared to the finished water from lime-soda softening, it is
higher in sodium, total dissolved solids, and corrosivity.
11.38 Chlorine is oxidizing the iron and manganese forming precipitates that settle out in the
distribution system. Periodically these are flushed out of mains and storage tanks to
cause “rusty” water that results in staining. Apparently prior to chlorination most of the
iron and manganese remained in solution and colloidal suspension and passed through the
Solutions Manual
Page 136
system unnoticed.
11.39 The manganese zeolite process (Section 11.20) requires manganese-treated greensand to
prevent passage of manganese through the filter from either inadequate oxidation of the
manganese in the raw water or overdosing of potassium permanganate. In small water
systems, the concentrations of iron and manganese in the raw water can change rapidly if
different wells supply water of varying quality, which is often the case. Plain sand
filtration is not satisfactory since the permanganate dosing cannot be easily paced to the
varying demand. If overdosing of permanganate is the main problem, prechlorination is a
competitive oxidizing reaction that will make the overdosing worse. A complete study is
recommended including: iron and manganese testing of raw, chemically treated and
filtered water; checking the chemical feeders for accuracy in dosing; and experimentation
with a manganese-treated greensand filter medium.
11.40
1.2  mg / l  Fe 1 mmole  KMnO 4 158  mg  KMnO 4
� �  1.12 mg / l KMnO 4
56  mg / mmole  Fe 3  mmole  Fe  mmole  KMnO 4
0.8  mg / l  Mn 2  mmole  KMnO 4 158  mg  KMnO 4

� �  1.53 mg / l KMnO 4
55  mg / mmole  Mn 3  mmole  Mn  mmole  KMnO 4
1.12  1.53  2.65 mg / l KMnO 4
11.41
m3 d mg l
3000 �30 �2.5 �103 3
chlorine gas  d month l m  225 kg
mg month
106
kg
kg
225
70% calcium hypochlorite  month  321 kg
0.7 month
kg
225
12% sodium hypochlorite  month  1875 kg
0.12 month
lb
2.2
kg kg gal
 1875 �  495
month 8.34 lb month
gal
All these chemicals form the same free chlorine residual (HOCl and OCl-) in ammonia-
free water at the same pH.
Solutions Manual
Page 137
11.42
11.43 NH 3  Cl 2 � NH 2Cl  H   Cl

Thus 17 mass units of NH3 react with 71 mass units of Cl2 yielding a stoichiometric ratio
equal to 71/17 = 4.2
11.44 Ozone can be applied in water treatment for:

a. inactivating microorganisms
b. oxidizing iron, manganese, sulfde, nitrite, and selected trace organic compounds
c. taste and odor control
d. removal of color caused by natural organic matter
e. partial oxidation of natural organic precursors to disinfection byproduct formation
making them more degradable. Degradation is typically accomplished in
biologically active filters.
f. destabilization of selected colloids
Ozonation does not produce a disinfecting residual, therefore, chlorine or chloramines are
added to treated potable water before distribution to establish a disinfection residual.
11.45 The suspected health risk of trihalomethanes (THMs) in drinking water is cancer. This
risk has been demonstrated by carcinogenicity of individual THMs in laboratory animals.
THMs in treated water are byproducts of chlorination of natural organic matter in water.
Remedial actions to reduce THM formation in a treated river water are:
a. move the point of chlorine application to the finished water and reduce the applied
dosage.
b. optimize coagulation to reduce the turbidity and organic content of the finished water
prior to chlorination.
c. apply powdered activated carbon to adsorb natural organic matter precursors.
d. consider the application of alternative disinfectants.
11.46 The C � t product is the residual disinfectant concentration times the contact time
(duration time) that the disinfection concentration is maintained in the water prior to use.
Solutions Manual
Page 138
It is expressed in the units of  mg / l  �
min . The major factors that affect the C �
t value
used in design are the kind of disinfectant, temperature, pH, the kind and viability of the
microorganisms to be inactivated, the presence of interfering substances, such as
suspended solids. The bacterium, E. Coli is readily inactivated by free chlorine as
compared to more resistant organisms such as protozoa and viruses. Cryptosporidium is
the protozoan cyst that is most difficult to inactivate. The disinfectants in order of
effectiveness are: ozone (most effective) chlorine dioxide, and chloramine.
11.47 Giardia lamblia and Cryptosporidium species cause diarrhea that can be life-threatening
to persons with immunodeficiency syndrome. Giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis are
transmitted by ingestion of protozoan cysts in contaminated food and person-to-person
transmission. Waterborne sources are from feces of diseased humans and animals
(Giardia has been found to be transmitted by beavers and Cryptosporidium has been
found in the feces of infected cattle and sheep.)
Solutions Manual
Page 139
11.48
As pH increases the CT value for the inactivation of Giardia by chlorine increases in a

non-linear manner. This means that as the pH increases chlorine is less effective against
Giardia, and this is the result of a decrease in the HOCl/OCl- ratio. As temperature
increases the CT for the inactivation of viruses by chloramine decreases, indicating a that
chloramine is a more effective disinfectant as the temperature increases.
11.49 At a temperature of 10 oC and pH of 7.0 the C �for

t a 3-log inactivation of Giardia by
chlorine is 112 mg min/l. At a temperature of 20 C, the C �
o
t is 56 mg min/l. At a
temperature of 10 oC and pH of 8.0 the C �for
t a 3-log inactivation of Giardia by
chlorine is 162 mg min/l.
11.50 Turbidity is 0.1 NTU which is less than the 0.5 NTU allowable. After direct filtration,
the recommended inactivation by disinfection is 1.0-log for Giardia and 3-0 log for
viruses. Interpolating from Table 11.9 between ph of 7.0 and 8.0, the required C � t value
for 3-log removal of Giardia at a chlorine residual of 1.0 mg/l is 132 mg min/l. For 1-log
removal, the C � t is 132/3 or 44 mg min/l. For t10 of 90 min, the required chlorine
residual would be 44/90 = 0.49 mg/l. Re-evaluate the C � t value at a chorine residual of
0.4 mg/l. The interpolated C � t value for pH of 7.4 is 122 and for 1-log removal is 122/3
or 41 mg min/l. The chlorine concentration would be 0.41/90 = 0.45 mg/l. This is
sufficiently close.
Solutions Manual
Page 140
11.51
11.52 For conventional treatment with sedimentation and filtration, the reductions srequired by
chlorination following filtration are 0.5-log of Giardia cysts and 2-log removal of
viruses. From the EPA tables for a temperature of 10 oC and a pH of 8.0 and a 0.5-log
reduction of cyst, the C �t value is 170/6 = 28.3 mg min/l for a chlorine residual at the
end of the pipeline of 1.4mg/l. The t10 time for the baffled clear well from the solution to
problem 11.9 is 7.5 minutes.
4000 ft
The time of flow in the pipeline is  13.3 min
ft s
5 �60
s min
Total time is then 20.8 min.
mg �min
28.3
l mg
chlorine residual =  1.36
20.8 min l
Solutions Manual
Page 141
11.53 99% inactivation of Cryptosporidium requires a dose of 5.8 mw/cm2.
mw
RED  VF �required dose  1.8 �5.8  10.4 2
cm
  mw
0.5
RED  100.8 � 0.100  � 0.8  � 1
2.0 0.18
�B0.85  10.4 2
5 cm
B  1.64
Therefore a minimum of 2 banks are required.
11.54
As expected the reduction equivalent dose, the calculated dose for a particular level of
inactivation decreases as the UV absorbance of the water increases because the
Solutions Manual
Page 142
absorbance of the UV in the water by organics and other substances decreases the
effective dose of light to the microorganism. Similarly the RED decreases with
increasing Q because water is flowing faster through the unit and time of exposure is
correspondingly less as the flow rate increases.
11.55 From Table 11.10 the C � t value for a 4-log reduction of viruses by chlorine is
6.0 mg min/l at 10 oC.
2
�8 � 2 gal
4200 ftπ� ��
ft 7.48
�12 � ft 3
contact time in the pipeline   22 min
gal
2000
min
The required chlorine residual is 6/22 = 0.3 mg/l.
11.56
gal min
Quantity of water pumped per day = 400 �60 �18 hr  432, 000 gal
min hr
lb
mil gal mg mil gal lb
chlorine usage  0.432 �0.5 �8.34  1.8
day l mg day
l
100 lb
Duration of chlorine gas from 100-lb cylinder   56 days
lb
1.8
day
lb chlorine lb water
0.10 �200 gal �8.34
lb water gal
Duration of liquid sodium hypochlorite   93 days
lb
1.8
day
Calcium hypochlorite powder added to 50 gal of water for a 15% available chlorine
solution
lb chlorine lb
0.15 �50 gal �8.34
lb water gal
Duration of calcium hypochlorite =  35 days
lb chlorine
0.7 �1.8
d
For a cold climate, chlorine gas is recommended provided design and operation
minimizes hazards of handling, feeding and storing chlorine. The well house should be
designed with the safety features of a chlorination room. The risk of liquid chlorine in a
cold climate is freezing of the solution. For a warm climate, liquid sodium hypochlorite
is recommended provided it can be reliably delivered by a supplier. Chlorine gas can be
used in a warm climate if the design recognizes the risk of high temperature on chlorine
Solutions Manual
Page 143
cylinders. Use of calcium hypochlorite is not recommended since it is hazardous to
handle and difficult to prepare in solution.
Solutions Manual
Page 144
11.57 Table 11.10 does not give the C �t for 3-log inactivation of viruses by free chlorine at 10
o
C. The C � t value can be estimated as by the table value for 4-log removal of 6
mg/l·min divided by 4 (for 4-log removal) and multiplied by 3 (for 3-log removal)
resulting in a C �of
t 4.5 mg/l·min. But the EPA tables from reference 18 state the
required C � t is 4.0 mg/l·min. The actual value in the groundwater treatment plant is:
mg mg mg
0.8 �1.8 min  0.4 �8.0 min  4.6 �min which exceeds the required value.
l l l
The disinfection is adequate.
11.58 The kinds and numbers of pathogens in wastewater depend on the health of the
contributing population. Primary sedimentation removes 0-90% of various kinds of
pathogens and secondary biological processes remove 0-99%. Effluent chlorination
removes 99-99.99% of bacteria and 0% of helminths. Inactivation of viruses and
protozoa in wastewater effluent by chlorination has not been established.
11.59 1. Start with the statement, “The kinds and numbers of pathogens in untreated
wastewater depend on the health of the contributing population.” Elaborate on the
meaning of this for the city, and summarize waterborne diseases mentioning the function
of carriers in the spread of pathogens.
2. The number of pathogens in wastewater treatment are diminished by each processing
step in treatment. Outline the possible removals of various pathogens in conventional
wastewater treatment.
3. Discuss the advantages of tertiary treatment by chemical coagulation, filtration, and
long-term effluent chlorination for removal of pathogens.
4. Present the water quality requirements established by other states for wastewater reuse
in irrigation of public parks and playgrounds.
5. Evaluate the feasibility of funding and constructing a tertiary treatment system at the
plant, transporting the reclaimed water to the park and other potential reuse sites, method
of application, and monitoring to ensure control of the quality of the reclaimed water and
the application to reduce direct contact with people.
11.60
Assume a commercial purity of 30% fluosilicic acid.
mg
 1.0  0.3 mg
Dosage  l  3.0
mg F mg fluosilicic acid l
0.79 �0.30
mg fluosilicic acid mg solution
lb
mg mil gal lb
3.0 �8.34  24.6
l mg mil gal
l
Solutions Manual
Page 145
11.61 (a) A 4.0% NaF solution contains 40,000 mg/l NaF and 0.45 x 40,000 = 18,000 mg/l F.
mg
 1.0  0.4 
l water
solution dosage per million gal = �106 gal water  33.3 gal solution
mg
18, 000
l solution
(b) Assume a commercial purity of 95%
mg F lb
 1.0  0.4  mil gal
NaF per million gallons  l �8.34  11.7 lb
mg F mg NaF mg
0.45 �0.95
mg NaF mg compound l
11.62 Lead toxicity affects the red blood cells, nervous system, and kidneys. Young children,
infants, and fetuses are the most vulnerable. First-flush samples are used to assess lead
contamination since the primary sources are lead solder joining copper pipe, lead
goosenecks in old service lines, and old brass fixtures. The recommended methods of
controlling excessive lead are corrosion control and replacement of lead service lines.
11.63 Crown corrosion in large concrete sewer pipe can be retarded by ventilation, chlorination
to control hydrogen sulfide generation, and synthetic coatings and linings.
11.64
Distilled Seawater Distilled Seawater after

destabilization
mg mg
25 15
l  0.43 meq l  0.75 meq
mg l mg l
58.4 20
meq meq
For blending, X is the fraction of groundwater.

For chloride: 1030 X + 15 (1-X) = 250 X = 0.23
For sulfate: 420 X + 0 (1-X) = 250 X = 0.60
For sodium: 580 X + 10 (1-X) = 100 X = 0.16
Solutions Manual
Page 146
Therefore the blended water can be 16% groundwater based on the sodium limit of 100
mg/l.
11.65 If water recovery is 90%, the concentrations of ions in the reject brine are about 10 times
those in the acidified feed water.
mg mol
calcium concentration  2160  0.0539
l l
mg mol
sulfate concentration  5710  0.0595
l l
mg meq
alkalinity  550  11.0
l l
� � 1 � 1000 �
SI  5.8  �2.1  log � � log  0.5 which is scale forming for CaCO3
� �0.0539 � 11.0 �
�
Ca 2 �
�
� �
��SO 4 2 � 3
� 0.0539 �0.0595  3.2*10 which is saturated and scale forming for CaSO 4
If 90% recovery were to be performed, the brackish groundwater would have to be

softened to reduce the calcium concentration before acidification and RO processing or
an appropriate antiscalant could be added to the water.
1. The quality of this water is poor for a municipal supply. The fluoride concentration of 1.4
mg/l is too high for a hot climate and will result in mottling of children’s teeth. The nitrate
concentration exceeds the MCL. The sodium content is too high for drinking by persons on a
low sodium diet for hypertension. Aesthetics problems are related to excessive dissolved solids
and chloride that can affect the taste of the water (these may also cause gastrointestinal tract
problems sensitive persons). The iron and manganese concentrations are high enough to cause
red water and staining problems.
2. The high dissolved solids concentration must be reduced and the most suitable process is
reverse osmosis. Pretreatment is required to remove the iron, manganese, and any suspended
solids that result from silt drawn through the well screen or corrosion of piping. The processes
employed depend on the size of the treatment plant. In a small system, the iron and manganese
can be removed by chemical oxidation, sedimentation, and filtration. Coagulation may be
Solutions Manual
Page 147
included in the process to flocculate suspended solids if further investigation indicates that the
well water contains silt and metal oxides. Aeration may also be added to aid in oxidation and for
cooling if the water temperature is likely to exceed 35 to 45 oC.

Suitable pretreatment for a large plant is lime precipitation with the limited addition of soda ash
to provide adequate floc formation followed by granular-media filtration. This processing also
removes iron, manganese, and suspended solids. Recarbonation may be used before filtration to
lower the pH if carbon dioxide is readily available, otherwise, sulfuric acid can be applied to low
the pH. The following is a general flow scheme for RO treatment.
Sulfuric acid lowers the pH to 5.8 to inhibit the formation of calcium carbonate precipitate and
hexametaphosphate at about 10 mg/l inhibits the formation of calcium sulfate precipitate. The
cartridge filter remove particulates down to a size of 5 micrometers. With a feed pump pressure
of about 350 psi, a recovery of product water with satisfactory quality is about 75% of the feed
water. Higher recovery of product water may be possible by staging the RO modules so that the
waste brine from the first stage is desalted in a second stage. The forced-air stripping tower
removes the majority of the carbon dioxide to stabilize the water. The final adjustment to near
pH 8 is done by the addition of 10 mg/l of soda ash.
3. Ion removals are generally more than 99% for multi-valent ions and between 80 and 95% for
mono-valent ions. With lime precipitation as pretreatment, the concentration of calcium ion may
be too low for a stable water. One method of increasing the calcium content is to add a portion
of groundwater after air stripping. The groundwater may require coagulation and filtration
before blending. With an approximate blend of 10% raw groundwater and 90% RO product
water and estimated finished bar graph with about 225 mg/l TDS is shown below. Answers will
Solutions Manual
Page 148
differ based on the rejection that is assumed for each of the ions and the amount of calcium and
magnesium removed in lime precipitation.
11.66
Processing Sequence Chemical Additions Process Wastewaters

Split treatment or excess lime and soda ash precipitation sludge
lime softening
Neutralization or sulfuric acid or carbon
recarbonation dioxide
Filtration backwash water
Acidification sulfuric acid
Sequestration sodium hexametaphosphate
Cartridge filtration
Reverse osmosis reject concentrate
Countercurrent stripping
pH stabilization lime or soda ash
Fluoridation fluoride chemical
Disinfection chlorine
11.67 SOCs are manufactured chemicals used in industry, agriculture, and household
applications. Conventional water treatment by coagulation, sedimentation and filtration
provides limited removal of SOCs. Granular activated carbon is more effective than
powdered activated carbon in removing SOCs.
The limitations in using aeration to remove VOCs from contaminated well water are the
low allowable MCLs for drinking water, poor removal at low temperature, and ice
formation in stripping towers.
11.68 Air-to-water ratio is 20

S = 20 x H
�100 �
� � 6.0  1  1 �
� 6.0 �
NTU tetrachloroethylene � �ln � 2
� � 4.48
�6.0  1 � � 6 �
� �
other NTU values are shown in the table below
Chemical H S NTU
tetrachloroethylene 0.30 6.0 4.48
trichloroethylene 0.21 4.2 2.99
Solutions Manual
Page 149
cis-1,2 dichloroethylene 0.094 1.88 6.04
The mass transfer coefficient was assumed to be the same for all chemicals. This is a
simplification of the problem and is not likely to be true in a real system. But if the mass
transfer coefficients for all three chemicals are the same, then the HTU value for all
chemicals will be the same since there is only one loading rate in the tower. Accordingly,
the chemical with the largest NTU value (cis-1,2 dichloroethylene ) will control the
design.
L L
HTU  
kg 0.015 15
1000 3 �
m s
for L = 5, HTU = 0.33. Other values of L and HTU are shown in the table below.
The height of the packing (Z) for the controlling component (cis-1,2 dichloroethylene) is
then:
ZL 5  HTU �NTU  0.33 �6.04  2.01 m
ZL 10  0.67 �6.04  4.02 m
ZL 15  1.00 �6.04  6.04 m
L H HTU
5 0.33 2.01
10 0.67 4.02
15 1.0 6.04
For L  15 and Z  6.04 m
the cross-sectional area of the PTA is given by:
l kg
44 �1
A= s l  2.9 m 2
kg
15 2
m s
Solutions Manual
Page 150
11.69
mg
4500
πf  l  3.10 bar
mg psi
100 �14.5
l�psi bar
l l
Fw  2.5*10 4 2 ��
�  35  0    3.1  0  �
�bar  7.98*10 3 2
m �� s bar m �s
assume 95% removal of chloride.
mg
C p estimate  4500 �0.05  225
l
l mg mg
Fs  3.5*104 2 � 4500  225   1.50 2
m � s l m � s
mg
1.50 2
m � s mg
Cp   188
l l
7.98*103 2
m � s
Further iteration (substituting 188 mg/ as the Cp estimate does not significantly change Cp
11.70
Cc �1  0.85 � 1  0.9  �
� � 6.10
Cf 1  0.85
mg
 Cc  Ba  0.05 �6.1  0.31
l
mg
 Cc  SO4  20 �6.1  122
l
mg mg
0.31 122
Ba 2 � SO 4 2 � l l  2.8*109
�
� ��  mg
�
mg
137, 000 96, 000
mol mol
which exceeds the Ksp of 1*10-10; therefore, there is a potential for precipitation on the
feed-concentrate side of the membrane.
Solutions Manual
Page 151
11.71 For the first bottle-point:
mg
 250  2  SOC �0.2 l mg
qe  l  198 SOC
0.25 g PAC g PAC
The remaining bottle-points are shown in the table below and plotted in the figure with
the best-fit linear regression.
The model and the data are plotted below. The good fit indicates that the Freundlich
model provides a good fit to the data.
Solutions Manual
Page 152
for an equilibrium concentration of 50 mg/l, the dose can be calculated:
C  Ce 250  50 g mg
Dose  0  0.40
 0.28  280
q 148 �50 l l
11.72
1. Lime softening for the precipitation of carbonate hardness.
2. Sedimentation removes settleable solids.
3. Recarbonation stabilizes the water by lowering the pH.
4. Filtration to remove nonsettleable solids.
5. Postchlorination establishes a disinfection residual.
11.74
1. Prechlorination starts oxidation of reduced iron and manganese, suppresses growth of
iron bacteria in pipelines, and controls algal growth on open aerators. It likely will
increase the formation of disinfection byproducts.
2. Aeration adds dissolved oxygen, removes carbon dioxide, and oxidizes iron and a
portion of the manganese.
3. Rechlorination oxidizes the remainder of iron and manganese.
4. Detention allows chemical reaction time.
5. Filtration removes metal oxides.
6. Ammonia converts the free chlorine to chloramine residual.
11.75
1. Prechlorination suppresses iron bacteria and initiates oxidation of iron and
manganese. It likely will increase the formation of disinfection byproducts.
2. Flocculator-clarifiers provide chemical mixing, flocculation and sedimentation. Lime
provides partial precipitation softening, and alum coagulates the calcium carbonate
precipitate. Potassium permanganate oxidizes iron and manganese.
Solutions Manual
Page 153
3. Filtration removes suspended solids.
6. Postchlorination establishes a disinfection residual.
11.76
1. Presedimentation reduces turbidity, particularly silt, by sedimentation. Polymer is
added to enhance settling.
2. Activated carbon adsorbs taste and odor producing compounds.
3. Alum is a coagulant and polymer is a flocculation aid.
4. Sedimentation removes settleable floc.
5. Same as 2 above.
6. Filtration removes nonsettleable floc.
7. Postchlorination is for disinfection and to establish a disinfection residual.
11.77
1. Copper sulfate controls algal growth in reservoir water.
2. Chlorine dioxide is for oxidation of taste and odor producing compounds and for
disinfection.
3. Alum and polymer are to remove turbidity.
4. Sedimentation removes settleable floc.
5. Activated carbon adsorbs taste and odor producing compounds.
6. Filtration removes nonsettleable floc and the activated carbon
7. Postchlorination is for disinfection and to establish a disinfection residual.
11.78
1. Acidification converts bicarbonate ions to carbon dioxide and increases the
corrosivity of the water.
2. Hexametaphosphate helps to prevent calcium sulfate scale.
3. Cartridge filtration removes particulate matter in sizes down to a few micrometers to
protect the membrane surface.
4. High pressure pumps force the water through the RO membranes.
5. The RO modules are high pressure vessels containing the membranes.
6. Degasification strips out carbon dioxide increasing the pH
7. Sodium hydroxide is to stabilize the water by increasing the pH
8. Chlorine is to establish a disinfection residual.
Solutions Manual
Page 154
CHAPTER 12
BIOLOGICAL TREATMENT PROCESSES
12.1 (a) Autotrophic bacteria oxidize inorganic compounds for energy.
(b) Autotrophic nitrifying bacteria oxidize ammonia to nitrate in an aerobic environment to

gain energy (Eqs. 12.1 and 12.2). Heterotrophic bacteria, under anaerobic conditions, use
the oxygen in nitrate as a hydrogen acceptor yielding nitrogen gas in the process of
metabolizing organic matter (Eq. 12.12).
(c) Thiobacillus bacteria convert H2S to H2SO4 to gain energy (Eq. 12.3). The strong
H2SO4 formed in the moisture of condensation on the crown and walls of the pipe and
metal surfaces of equipment in pumping stations causes corrosion. (Refer to Section 11.37
Corrosion of Sewer Pipes.)
(d) The oxidation of reduced iron is the source of energy for growth of iron bacteria (Eq.
12.4). Bicarbonate (carbon dioxide) is the carbon source, and inorganic nitrogen and
phosphate are other major nutrients for synthesis. Decomposition of dead growths of iron
bacteria by heterotrophic bacteria under anaerobic conditions releases obnoxious gases and
organic compounds.
12.2 Nutrients require for algae growth are inorganic nitrogen, phosphate, carbon dioxide, and
trace elements. The required environmental conditions are light, warm temperature, basic
pH and mixing.
12.3 The sequence of use of hydrogen acceptors is dissolved oxygen, nitrate, and sulfate (Eqs.
12.11-12.13). Dissolved oxygen is the preferred hydrogen acceptor because it yields the
maximum energy. Obnoxious odors appear with the release of H2S from reduction of
sulfate.
12.4 (a) Refer to the last four paragraphs in Section 12.4.
(b) Aerobic metabolism yields the maximum energy per unit of organic matter oxidized and
therefore greater bacterial synthesis than anaerobic metabolism.
12.5 In exponential growth, biomass is increasing at the maximum rate determined by the
bacterial reproduction rate in the presence of excess substrate. In declining growth, the rate
of biomass increase is limited by the substrate available. The endogenous phase is
characterized by scarcity of substrate resulting in a decreasing rate of metabolism.
12.6 Bacterial growth in a pure culture is a function of both the concentration of microorganisms
and the concentration of the growth-limiting substrate. The mathematical relationship is a
hyperbolic equation (Eq. 12.25) where the limiting substrate concentration is equal to the
saturation constant at one half the maximum specific growth rate. The same mathematical
relationship exists for enzymatic reactions as defined by Michaelis and Menten. At one
Solutions Manual
Page 155
half the maximum rate of substrate decomposition, the substrate concentration is equal to
the dissociation constant.
12.7
Estimated μm = 1.2 per hour and K S = 0.25. Substituting into Eq. 12.25, the Monod
 S 
equation is   1.2  which is graphed in the above diagram.
 0.25  S 
12.8 To determine Y, a series of batch cultures are grown starting with different initial
substrate concentrations. The data are plotted as shown in Fig. 12.7 to determine the
values of Y. (Refer to Section 12.6 Growth of Pure Bacterial Cultures.)
12.9 (a) Increasing temperature increases biological processes up to the optimum temperature.
Beyond the optimum, further increase of temperature decreases the rate of activity.
(Refer to Fig. 12.10.) Generally, wastewater aeration processes operate in the range of
10° – 20°C depending on climate, temperature of the municipal water supply, and type of
treatment system. In this range, the rate of biological metabolism doubles for every 10°
to 15°C rise. Anaerobic digesters are heated up to 35°C to enhance sludge
decomposition. Mesophilic bacteria are adversely affected by temperatures above 40°C.
(b) K/K20   T  20 , 0.75  15 20 ,   1.059 , 0.5  1.059 X  20 , ( X  20)  8 °C
12.10 Activated-sludge systems are operated at a low F/M ratio to ensure nearly complete
metabolism of the organic matter and good settling characteristics of the biological floc.
12.11 Bacteria rather than protozoans are the primary feeders because they are the most
competitive microorganisms that metabolize organic matter under the environmental
conditions established by the aeration system.
Solutions Manual
Page 156
12.12 The majority of carbon dioxide in anaerobic digestion is produced during decomposition
of organic matter to acids, while most of the methane results from decomposition of
acids. Therefore, an increasing percentage of carbon dioxide in digester gas indicates the
accumulation of acids that can lead to process failure.
12.13 (a) Algae grow in stabilization ponds because the plant nutrients, sunlight, and other
conditions are favorable for growth. Algae produce oxygen that can be used by bacteria
in symbiotic relationship in Fig. 12.14.
(b) Algae doe not decompose organic matter, but thrive as a result of sunlight an abundant
inorganic nutrients. The primary decomposers are bacteria.
12.14 Q = 24 mgd
B  24  8.34  200  40,000 lb/day
S  24  8.34  220  44,000 lb/day
 1.26 
Qm  24 0.0101   29 mgd
 24 
 1.91 
Bm  40,000 0.0430
  48,400 lb/day
 40,000 
 2.18 
Sm  44,000 0.0517
  55,200 lb/day
 44,000 
 1.96 
Qd  24 0.0360   42 mgd
 24 
 4.08 
Bd  40,000 0.0732
  75,100 lb/day
 40,000 
 5.98 
Sd  44,000 0.0716
  122,000 lb/day
 44,000 
32,000
12.15 Q   8.45 mgd
3785
B  8.45  8.34  180  12,700 lb/day
S  8.45  8.34  200  14,100 lb/day
 1.26 
Qm  8.45 0.0101 
 10.4 mgd
 8.45 
 1.91 
Bm  12,700 0.0430
  16,200 lb/day
 12,7000 
 2.18 
Sm  14,100 0.0517
  18,800 lb/day
 14,100 
Qm  10.4  3785  39,400 m3/d
Solutions Manual
Page 157
16,200
Bm   187 mg/l
10.4  8.34
18,800
Sm   217 mg/l
10.4  8.34
12.16 The volume of textile wastewater is 1000 gal. The domestic wastewater is X. Therefore,
the blended volume is 1000 + X. Solving for X based on a P requirement of 1 mg P/100
mg BOD.
 1500  1000  200 X  1 0  7X

   , X = 3000 gal.
 1000  X  100 1000  X
Solving for X based on a N requirement of 5 mg N/100 mg BOD.
 1500  1000  200 X  5 30  1000  35 X
   , X = 1800 gal.
 1000  X  100 1000  X
Minimum quantity of domestic wastewater = 3000 gal / 1000 gal of textile wastewater.
12.17 Assume a BOD/N/P ration of 100/3/0.7 (Section 12.11).

100 / 3 / 0.7 = 4300 / 129 / 30
Chemical weights: NH4NO3 = 80, N = 14, H3PO4 = 98, P = 31
80
NH4NO3 dosage  129  70  170 mg/l = 130 kg/d
28
98
H3PO4  30  95 mg/l = 74 kg/d
31
To determine if the dosage is correct, test filtered effluent samples for ammonia, nitrate,
and soluble phosphorus. Discharge of organic nitrogen and phosphorus bound in the
suspended solids cannot be avoided, but soluble N and P indicate a surplus of chemical
additions. Monitor the activated-sludge process (particularly, sludge settleability and
effluent BOD and SS) when chemical additions are adjusted to ensure adequate process
performance is being maintained.
12.18 BOD/N/P = 740 / 24 / 12 = 100 / 3.2 / 1.6

This is greater than 100 / 3.0 / 0.7, therefore no nutrient additions are needed.
 1000 
12.19 Flow per 1000 lb of milk     65,100  260 gal
 250,000 
 0.0651  1400  8.34  3.0
BOD per 1000 lb of milk  lb
250,000
 0.0651  1400  8.34 
BOD EP   3800 persons
0.20
65,000
Hydraulic EP   540 persons
120
10,000
12.20 Q   2.64 mgd
3785
Solutions Manual
Page 158
2,640,000
Hydraulic EP   22,000 persons
120
2.64  1300  8.34
BOD EP   143,000 persons
0.20
12.21
Source Q (gal/day) BOD (lb/day)
Domestic 7500 x 120 = 900,000 7500 x 0.20 = 1500
Milk waste 65,000 0.065 x 1400 x 8.34 = 760
Potato Waste 90,000 450
1,055,000 2710
2710
BOD concentration   310 mg/l
1.055  8.34
2710
BOD EP   14,000 persons
0.20
12.22
Source Q (m3/d) BOD (kg/d)
Domestic 2000 x 0.45 = 900 200 x 0.091 = 182
Dairy waste 190 190 x 0.90 = 171
Poultry waste 125 136
1215 = 1220 489
489,000
BOD concentration   400 mg/l
1220
Solutions Manual
Page 159
12.23
Source Q (m3/d) BOD (kg/d)
Total wastewater 1600 280 X 1600 = 448
Slaughterhouse -60 1800 x 60 = -108
Soup-canning
plant -100 400 x 100 = -40
1,440 300
1,440,000
Flow per person   360 l/d
400
300,000
BOD per person   75 g/d
4000
0.65  1890  280

12.24 Filter area   341 m2, D = 21 m
480  2.1
1890
Hydraulic loading   5.5 m3/m2·d
341
9.4  5.5
For the minimum hydraulic loading of 9.4 m3/m2·d, R   0.71
5.5
480 g/m3·d = 30 lb/1000 ft3/day
1  0.71
Using Eq. 12.43, F   1.49
1  0.071 2
100
 0.5
 80
Using Eq. 12.42, E  30  % at 20°C
1  0.0561 
 1.49 
Effluent BOD  (0.65  280)0.20  36 mg/l
At 15°C, E  80  1.035 (15 20)  67 %
Effluent BOD  (0.65  280)0.33  60 mg/l
12.25 Assume 35% BOD removal in primary clarifier.

111  30
Efficiency required   100  73 %
111
E16  73  E 20  1.03516  20 E20 = 84%
1  0.05
Using Eq. 12.43, F   1.36
 1  0 .1  0 .5  2
100
Using Eq. 12.42, 84 
1  0.0561( w / V (1.36)) 2
Allowable w/V = 16 lb/1000ft3/day
12.26 No. Primary clarifiers are sized to accept peak hydraulic flows by selecting conservative
overflow rates for design applied to average weekday flow during the season of the year
of greatest flow. Increasing the low flows at night has negligible effect on suspended
solids removal and sludge thickening near the tank bottom.
Solutions Manual
Page 160
12.27 Assume same primary BOD removal of 35%
0.65  250  1.2  8.34
First-stage BOD loading   56 lb/1000ft3/day
29.3
At R = 1.25, NRC E = 73%
Second-stage BOD loading  0.27  56  15 lb/1000ft3/day
R = 1.0, F = 1.65, and E = 61%
Effluent BOD  (0.65  250)0.27  0.39  17 mg/l
11
12.28 F   1.65
1  0.1 2
E at 80 lb/1000 ft3/day = 72% at 20°C
E18  72  1.03518 20  67 %
BOD loading on second filter  0.33  80  26 lb/1000ft3/day
100
E2   60
0.0561  26  % E18 = 56%
1  
0.33  1.65 
E  100  1001  0.351  0.67 1  0.56  91 %
 55  30100  46
12.29 BOD reduction required  % at 15°C
55
E2 at 15°C = 46 = E  1.03515 20 E2 at 20°C = 55%
155  55
E1 at 15°C =  65 % E1 at 20°C = 77%
155
For R = 0.5, F = 1.36, and using Eq. 12.44,
100
55  0.5 w2
 0.0561   w2  ,  18 lb/1000ft3/day at 20°C
1    V
1  0.77   1.36V 
Solutions Manual
Page 161
12.30
As the recirculation ratio increases, the recirculation factor increases in a non-linear

manner, with decreasing incremental increase in F as R increases. This relationship is
illustrated in the plot of F/R vs R in the figure above. F is used rather than R because as
the recirculation ratio incrementally increases, the incremental benefits of recirculation in
wetting the media and increasing efficiency tends to decrease.
1740
12.31 BOD EP   8700 persons
0.20
Flow mgd gpm cfs m3/min m3/d
Average 0.84 583 1.3 2.21 3180
Peak 1.25 868 1.93 3.28 4730
Minimum 0.12 83 0.19 0.32 454
1740 1530
BOD   248 mg/l SS =  218 mg/l
0.84  8.34 0.84  8.34
0.65  1740
  32,200 3
12.32 Filter media required 35 ft
1000
For depth = 7.0 ft, area = 4620 ft2 = 0.106 acres
1.5  583
Hydraulic loading   0.190 gpm/ft2 (OK)
4620
Using Eq. 12.43,
Solutions Manual
Page 162
1  0. 5
F   1.36
(1  0.05) 2
100
 0 .5
 77.8
E  35  %
1  0.0561 
 1.36 
E15  77.8(1.035)15 20  66 %
Effluent BOD  (0.65  248)0.34  55 mg/l > 30 mg/l
A single-stage stone-media trickling filter at specified operating conditions cannot meet
the effluent requirement. Filter efficiency required would be 81% at 15°C or 96% at
20°C, which is impossible. A two-stage trickling-filter plant is required. (Refer to
solution to Problem 12.34.)
0.65  1740
  32,300 3
12.33 Filter media required 35 ft
1000
For each filter, the volume of media = 16,200 ft3
For depth = 7.0 ft, surface area = 2310 ft2
583
Hydraulic loading  1.5   0.379 gpm/ft2 (OK)
2310
Using Eq. 12.42 for primary filter,
F for R of 0.5 = 1.36 and w/V = 70
100
 0.5
 71.3
E  70  %
1  0.0561 
 1.36 
E15 = 71.3(1.035)15 20  60 %
Using Eq. 12.44 for secondary filter,
(0.65  1740)0.40
w2/V   27.9 lb/1000ft3/day
16.2
100
 0.5
 59.3
E2  0.0561  27.9  %
1   
 1  0. 63  1 . 36 
15  20
E2  59 .3 (1 .035 )  49.9 %
Effluent BOD  (0.65  248)0.40  0.50  32 mg/l (OK)
12.34 Refer to Eq. 12.53

583
QP  0.127 gpm/ft2
4600
 0.00301.035
15 20
 42  6.6
Exponent of e  1.60
 0.1271  0.5  0.5
e-1.60 = 0.202
Se 0.202
  0.144
Sp 1  0.5  0.5  0.202
Solutions Manual
Page 163
Unfiltered effluent BOD  14.4  2  29 mg/l
800,000
12.35 Q   0.148 gpm/ft2
1440    35
2
Settled BOD  0.65  200  130 mg/l

K15  0.0901.035 15 20  0.076 min-1
0.0767.0
(a) Se/Sp
 e 0.144  0.29
0.44
Effluent BOD  0.29  130  37 mg/l
 KD
 Q  1 R   n
e 0.0767.0
(b) Se/Sp  ,  0.144  11.5   0.44
 KD
e  0.434
1  R   R  e  Q 1 R  
n
0.434
  0.23
1  1.5  1.5  0.434
12.36 Settled BOD  0.65  220  143 mg/l

K16  0.1201.035 1620  0.105 min-1
 KD 0.1057
Qn  0.18  11.0   0.39 = 0.335
e e
0.335
Se/Sp   0.20
1  1.0   1.0  0.335
Solutions Manual
Page 164
0.092 D
12.37 Se = S0
 e 0.35  100  e 0.14 D
0.39
12.38
Solutions Manual
Page 165
n  slope  0.40
intercept  1.185  log  CD 
101.185
C  1.53
10
12.39 For Q = 1.03 l/m2·s, ln So/Se = 54 / 14 = 1.35

98  6.01.035
18  20
As D T  20
  541 (l/m2·s)-0.5
Qn 1.030.5
Other values are listed below and plotted on the next page.
Q ln So/Se AsDΘT-20/Qn
l/m2·m (l/m2·s)-0.5
1.03 1.35 541
0.64 1.65 815
0.47 1.80 888
1.06 1.39 455
0.97 1.46 685
0.70 1.41 703
Note: 1.0 (l/m2·s)0.5 = 1.213 (gpm/ft2)0.5 and 1.0 (l/m2·s)-0.5 = 0.8244 (gpm/ft2)-0.5
As D T  20
n [(l/m2·s)-0.5]
Q
Solutions Manual
Page 166
12.40 Filter area   16 2  804 ft2
Filter volume  804  16  12,900 ft3
80  0.60  8.34
Soluble BOD loading   31 lb/1000ft3/day
12.9
600,000
QP   0.518 gpm/ft2
804  1440
400
QR   0.498 gpm/ft2
804
Hydraulic load  0.518  0.498  1.02 gpm/ft2
0.498
R   0.96
0.518
From Eq. 12.53, the exponent for e equals
 0.0014  1.03514 20  36  16
 0.65
 0.5181  0.96  0.50
e 0.65
Se/Sp   0.36
1  0.96  0.96e 0.65
Sp  0.36  80  29 mg/l soluble BOD
12.41 V  480  12  5760 ft3

0.6  62  8.34
Soluble BOD loading   53.9 lb BOD/1000ft2
5.76
 0.0035  1.03518 20  42  12
Exponent   0.883 , e 0.883  0.4135
1.741  1.0  0.50
e 0.883 0.4135
Se/Sp    0.261
1  1.0   01.0e  0.883
1.586
Se  0.261  62  16 mg/l
126
Total BOD   16  33 mg/l
62
12.42 From Eq. 12.53, the exponent for e

 0.0035  1.03518 20  42  7.0
  1.15
 0.351  1.0  0.50
e 1.15
Se/Sp   0.19
1  1.0  01.0e 1.15
Se  0.19  68  13 mg/l
13
Effluent BOD   24 mg/l
0.54
12.43 Without R and using rearranged Eq. 12.51
Solutions Manual
Page 167
2
   
2
   
 0.0018  42  201.035
15  20
 k A D T  20    0.374
Q   20 s  
  gpm/ft2
  So    10 
 ln 
S   
 ln   
  e     80  
Use R = 1.0, Q(1+R)  0.374  2  0.75 gpm/ft2 (>0.7)
Using Eq. 12.52,
80  1.0  10
So   45 mg/l
1  1.0
Using Eq. 12.53,
0.0018  (1.035)15  20  42  20
K20 ΘT-20 As D / (QP (1 + R))n  1.47
 0.374  2 0.5
e 1.47
Se/Sp   0.1930
1  1.0  1.0e 1.47
Se  0.140  80  10.4 mg/l
500,000
Surface area   463 ft2
1440  0.75
162  8.34  0.5
  73
BOD loading 463 lb/1000ft3/day
20
1000
0.65  1740
12.44 RBC area   377,000 ft2
3.0
Correction of area for temperature, 1.55  377,000  433,000 ft2
Use 12 RBC shafts each with a nominal surface area of 36,000 ft 2 oriented in 3 rows of 4
stages.
Solutions Manual
Page 168
12.45
For numerical design guidelines for sizing processes, refer to appropriate sections in
textbook.
2.24
12.46 t  24  7.0 hr
7.7
7.7  173  8.34
BOD loading   37.1 lb BOD/day/1000ft2
300
7.7  173  8.34
F/M   0.24 lb BOD/lb MLSS/day
2.24  2500  8.34
Solutions Manual
Page 169
600  500
TS efficiency   100  17 %
600
120  22
SS efficiency   100  82 %
120
173  20
BOD efficiency   100  88 %
173
2.24  2500  8.34
Sludge age   8.1 days
 7.7  22  0.054  98008.34
2.7
Return sludge rate   100  35 %
7.7
12.47 (a) K25/K15  1.047  2515  1.58

Volumetric BOD loading
 40  1.58  63.2 lb BOD/1000ft3/day (1010 kg BOD/m3·d)
6.0
Aeration period   3.8 h
1.58
F/M loading
 0.26  1.58  0.41 lb BOD/lb MLSS/day = 0.41 kg BOD/kg MLSS·day
(b) βCs – Ct at 15°C  0.9  10.8  2.0  7.7 mg/l

βCs – Ct at 25°C  0.9  8.4  2.0  5.6 mg/l
100 7.7  5.6 
Decrease in rate of oxygen transfer   27 %
7.7
(c) Oxygen demand for BOD  200  1.0  200 mg/l

Oxygen demand for NOD  35  4.6  160 mg/l
Oxygen supply must take into account both organic oxidation (BOD) and nitrification
(NOD).
Total oxygen demand  200  160  360 mg/l of wastewater
13,900  128
12.48 BOD load   1780 kg/d
1000
2800  2350
MLSS in aeration tank   6580 kg
1000
1700  1000
BOD loading   636 g/m3·d
2800
1780
F/M   0.27 g BOD/d·g MLSS
6580
2350  2800
Sludge age  26  13,900  11,000  72  5.7 d
2800
Aeration period  13,900 24  4.8 h
4800
Return sludge rate  13,900 100  35 %
Solutions Manual
Page 170
128  22
BOD efficiency  100  83 %
128
Sludge production
72  11,000
  0.44 kg suspended solids wasted / kg BOD applied.
1000  1780
3400
12.49 t  11,000 24  7.4 h
180  11,000
BOD loading   580 g/m3·d
3400
180  11,000
F/M   0.23 g BOD/d·g MLSS
2500  3400
2500  3400
Sludge age  20  11,000  160  8000  5.7 d
2.64  120  8.34

  66,000 3
12.50 V based on BOD 40 ft
1000
2,640,000  5
V based on Q   73,500 ft3
7.48  24
Therefore, required V = 73,500 ft3 = 0.550 mil gal.
2640
F / M  0.20  MLSS = 2880 mg/l
0.550  8.34  MLSS
From Fig. 13.1 for an F / M = 0.20, K = 0.42
2880  0.550  8.34
Sludge age   7.5 days
0.42  2640  2.64  30  8.34
From Section 10.11, the criteria for sizing final clarifiers are: average daily overflow rate
= 800 gpd/ft2 and minimum side-water depth of 10 ft with greater depths for larger
diameter tanks (e.g., 11 ft at 50-ft diameter and 12 ft at 100-ft diameter).
2,640,000
Surface area   1650 ft2
2  800
Diameter of each of two clarifiers = 46 ft.
Side-water depth = 11 ft.
12,000  180
12.51 V of each tank   3860 m3
560
3860
t  12,000 24  7.7 h
12,000  180
F / M  0.35  MLSS = 1600 mg/l
3860  MLSS
Use Eq. 13.6 converted to metric units.
0.44  180  12,000
Wss   950 kg/d
1000
Solutions Manual
Page 171
1600  3680
Sludge age  030  12,000  950,000  4.7 d
950,000
V of waste sludge  10,000  95 m3/d
From Section 10.11 for Q = 36,000 m3/d, the criteria for sizing final clarifiers are:
average daily overflow rate = 33 m3/m2·d and minimum side-water depth 3.1 m.
12000
Area = 2W2   364 m2 W = 13.5 m and L = 27.0 m
33
Minimum side-water depth = 3.1 m
740
12.52 (a) BOD   164 mg/l
0.54  8.34
35,000  7.48
(b) t  270,000
24  23 hr (From Table 12.3, 20 – 30 hr is OK.)
370
BOD loading   10.6 lb/1000ft3/day (10 – 30 OK)
35
370
F/M   0.068 lb BOD/day·lb MLSS (0.05 – 0.2)
0.035  62.4  2500
2  1150
(c) Oxygen transfer / lb of BOD applied   6.2 lb oxygen/lb BOD
370
(> 1.0 OK)
The rotors are sized to move the mixed liquor around in the oxidation ditch in addition to
providing aeration.
400  1440
(d) V0   815 gpd/ft2 (<1200 OK)
 15 2
400  1440
Weir loading   6100 gpd/ft (<10,000 OK)
  30
7.48
(d) t in chlorination tank at peak hourly flow  2200   20 min ( < 30 NG)
800
t at twice design flow = 22 min (<30 NG)
0.30  200  8.34

  3800 3
12.53 V based on BOD 130 ft
1000
300,000  1.8
V based on Q   3000 ft3
7.48  24
Use 3800 ft3
0.30  200  8.34
F/M   0.51 lb BOD/day·lb MLSS
0.0038  5500  0.75  62.4
12.54 Aeration tanks Assume an aeration period of 24 hr and check BOD loading and F/M at
2000 and 3000 mg/l MLSS. Compare these values to t and F/M data in Table 12.3.
Volume of each aeration tank = 0.42 mil gal = 56,100 ft3.
Solutions Manual
Page 172
248  0.42  8.34
BOD loading   15.5 lb BOD/day/1000ft3 (10 – 30 OK)
56.1
248  0.42  8.34 248
F/M  
MLSS  0.42  8.34 MLSS
At MLSS = 2000, F/M = 0.12 lb BOD/day/lb MLSS
At MLSS = 3000, F/M = 0.08 lb BOD/day/lb MLSS
Use 2 extended aeration tanks each with a volume of 56,100 ft 3 with influent piping
arranged so that the system can be operated as a step-aeration process. Provide aeration
appropriate for the kind of diffusers and rectangular aeration tanks. The recommended
minimum air requirement for the diffused-air process of extended aeration is 2000 ft 3/lb
of BOD load.
Final clarifiers Design criteria from Section 10.11 are: maximum average daily overflow
rate = 600 gpd/ft2, peak hourly overflow rate = 1200 gpd/ft 2, and minimum side-water
depth = 10 ft. For each of the two clarifiers,
420,000
Area based on average flow   700 ft2
600
625,000
Area based on peak flow   521 ft2
1200
Check loading for a single peripheral weir.
420,000
Weir loading   4500 gpd/ft (<10,000 OK)
  30
Use 2 circular clarifiers with single peripheral weirs with a diameter of 30 ft and side-
water depth of 10 ft.
Aerobic digesters General design criteria for sizing from Section 13.17 area volatile
solids loading of 0.04 lb/ft3/day and aeration period of 200 – 300 degree-days based on
digesting temperature and sludge age.
For an extended aeration system without primary sedimentation, the waste solids
production is estimated (based on the discussion under Eqs. 13.4 - 13.6 in Section 13.2)
to be: Ws  2.0k  BOD  8.34
From Fig. 13.1, k equals approximately 0.34, therefore, Ws
 2.0 0.34   248  0.84  8.34  1200 lb/day
Assuming 75% of the sludge solids are volatile, the required digester capacity
1200
 0.75   22,000 ft3.
0.04
If the digesters are to be operated as a semi-batch process, as discussed in the last
paragraph of Section 13.17, the sludge age of solids in the digesters can be assumed to be
at least 15 days. Therefore, at 15°C the aeration period is 225 degree-days.
Use 2 aerobic digesters each with a capacity of 11,000 ft 3, liquid depth of 10 ft to allow
quiescent settlement for decanting supernatant, and diffused aeration for mixing, which is
normally in the range of 15 – 30 cfm/1000 ft 3 of digester volume. The digested sludge
should thicken to at least 1.5% solids content.
Solutions Manual
Page 173
Drying beds Refer to Section 13.18. Since rational design is difficult, experience at other
plants in the region should be reviewed for design and sizing of open-air sand drying
beds. For a rough estimate, assume a drying capacity of 25 lb/ft 2/yr. For 50% volatile
solids reduction in digestion, solids production
  0.25  0.5  0.751200 365  270,000 lb/yr
270,000
Drying area required   10,000 ft2
25
Solutions Manual
Page 174
12.55
Solutions Manual
Page 175
12.56 From Section 12.21. The major assumptions in developing of the model are: steady-state
conditions (flows, substrate concentration, etc.), soluble substrate, no microorganisms in
the influent wastewater, and aeration take is complete mixing.
From Section 12.23. Kinetics equations are applicable only in design of the completely
mixed activated-sludge process. Selection of design parameters, such as mean cell
residence time, must account for deviations between the assumed and actual conditions,
for example, nonsteady-state flows and characteristics of actual wastewater.
10  2460
12.57 ΘC   24.8 d
0.31  2460   30.0  0.31 7.7
 S  30.0150  2.5
    442 mg/l
 t U 10
442
U   0.18 d-1
2460
1 1 1
U
C U Se
0.040 0.18 5.56 0.40
0.065 0.26 3.85 0.30
0.110 0.33 3.00 0.23
0.140 0.40 2.50 0.17
Solutions Manual
Page 176
12.58 The operating parameters assumed in design of an activated-sludge process using the
kinetics equation are the mean cell residence time and operating MLVSS. The kinetic
constants must be determined by treatability study that takes into account the suspended
solids and insoluble BOD in the wastewater.
180  10
12.59 E  100  94 %
180
 1 
  0.06 100
F / M  8.0  lb of soluble BOD/day/lb of MLVSS
  0.33
0.60  94
8.0  0.60  3.0180  10
V  0.66 mil gal = 88,000 ft3
25001  0.06  8.0 
24
Θ  0.66   5.3 hr
3.0
3.0  180  8.34
BOD loading   51 lb/1000 ft3/day
88
Solutions Manual
Page 177
10  0.60  7500 90  7 
12.60 Using Eq. 12.75: V   1670 m3
14001  0.06  10
24
Θ  1670   5.3 hr
7500
90
  0.29
F / M 5.3 g soluble BOD/day/g MLVSS
 1400
24
0.60  7500 90  7 
Using Eq. 12.86, the excess biomass is Px   230 kg VSS/d
1  10  0.061000
12.61 40  1200  0.0174  835 lb of oxygen applied/1000 ft3 of tank/day
36  28.3  1000
 54 lb of oxygen utilized/1000 ft3 of tank/day
453,600
54
Oxygen transfer efficiency   100  6.5 %
835
12.62 Oxygen supplied in 1000 ft3 of air  1000  0.0174  17.4 lb

1 .0
Oxygen transfer efficiency   0.057  5.7 %
17.4
12.63
t ln(Cs-Ct)
0.0 ln (8.8 - 0.0) = 2.2
2.0 ln (8.8 - 3.0) = 1.8
4.0 ln (8.8 - 4.3) = 1.5
6.0 ln (8.8 - 5.0) = 1.3
8.0 ln (8.8 - 5.5) = 1.2
11.0 ln (8.8 - 6.3) = 0.9
14.0 ln (8.8 - 7.1) = 0.5
17.0 ln (8.8 - 7.6) = 0.2
Solutions Manual
Page 178
 2.0  0 60  6.3
KLa  hr -1
19.0  0
KLa at 20°C  6.31.024  20 22  6.0 hr -1
N  10 6  6.0  8.8  9200  62.4  30.3 lb/hr
30.3
RO   3.0 lbs/hp·hr
10
12.64
t Cs Ct Cs-Ct ln (Cs-Ct)
(min) (mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l)
0 8.7 0.0 8.7 2.16
2 8.7 1.0 7.7 2.04
4 8.7 1.9 6.8 1.92
6 8.7 2.7 6.0 1.79
8 8.7 3.1 5.6 1.72
13 8.7 4.9 3.8 1.34
18 8.7 5.9 2.8 1.03
23 8.7 6.5 2.2 0.79
28 8.7 7.1 1.6 0.47
33 8.7 7.5 1.2 0.18
38 8.7 7.7 1.0 0.00
43 8.7 7.9 0.8 -0.22
48 8.7 8.0 0.7 -0.36
58 8.7 8.3 0.4 -0.92
Solutions Manual
Page 179
 2.1  0 60  3.32
Using 12.91, the slope of ln(Cs – Ct) vs time plot is KLa  hr-1
38  0
(KLa)20  3.321.024 20 21.9  3.2 hr -1
Using Eqs. 12.93 and 12.95,
W    60  2  8.0  62.4  5,650,000 lb
N  10 6  3.2  9.2  5,650,000  166 lb/hr
166
RO   4.2 lb/hp·hr
40
1000  80  210  8.34

12.65 Pond area  1,000,000  20
 7.0 acres
4.0  7.0  43,560  7.48

Retention time   110 days
1000  80
7
Irrigation area  1000  80  54,300  10.3 acres
280
12.66 BOD loading  530  60,000  2.5 g/m2·d
Evaporation and seepage  0.003  60,000  180 m3/d
1.5  0.6 60,000  150
Storage available  d
530  180
1740
12.67 (a) Area required   43.5 acres
40
Solutions Manual
Page 180
60  43.5  43,560  7.48
(b) Water loss   194,000 gal
12  365
 0.840  0.194100  77
Effluent Q / Influent Q  %
0.840
 0.840  250  0.646  25100  92
(c) BOD removal  %
0.840  250
646,000  7
(d) Irrigation area  54,300
 83 acres
8.34
12.68 Area of primary ponds  0.84  248   69.5 acres
25
Use two primary ponds each 35 acres
Minimum total water volume required  120  0.84  101 mil gal
Volume in primary ponds  70  5  0.326  114 mil gal
Wastewater inflow during 4 months  0.84  3.07  4  30  309 acre-ft
Pond area required for storage = (inflow - water loss) / difference in water levels
Pond area = (309 – pond area   4 / 12  ) /  5  1.5  80.6 acres
Area of secondary pond = 80.6 – 70 = 10.6 acres
Solutions Manual
Page 181
180
12.69 Primary pond area  240   10,800 m2
4
120
Water loss for 120 d  2.0   0.24 m
1000
Area of secondary cell depends on required total storage volume. Storage depth in
primary cells is 1.0 m and in secondary cell is 2.0 m.
10,8001.0  2.4   AS(2.0 + 0.24) = 240  120
AS = 6900 m2 Consider the following layout.
1
12.70 Le / LO   0.26 E = 74%
1  0.70  4
K10°C  0.701.035 10 20  0.50 day-1
1
Le / LO  0.26  t = 5.7 days
1  0.50  t
3.0 0.8  92  2.0 1.02   0.9 

0
12.71 R   1.6 lb of oxygen/hp·hr
9.2
12.72 From Table A.10, the saturation DO in clean water at 25°C is 8.4 mf/l and at 15°C is 10.2
mg/l at one atmosphere.
Using Eq. 12.102,
0.8  8.4  2.0
R at 25°C  4.2 1.02 25 20  0.9   2.1 lb/hp·hr
9.2
Transfer for 40-hp aerator  2.1  40  84 lb/hr
0.8  10.2  2.0
R at 15°C  4.2 1.0215 20  0.9   2.3
9.2
Transfer for 40-hp aerator  2.3  40  92 lb/hr
 40  0.746  33
Power usage  kW
0.90
Solutions Manual
Page 182
175,000  7.48
12.73 t  200,000
 6.5 days
Critical temperature for required detention time is 10°C.

k at 10°C  0.681.047  10 20  0.43 per day
Using Eq. 12.99,
1
Le / LO   0.26 (nearly 0.25, OK)
1  0.43  6.55
0.75  920
Oxygen transfer required   36 lb/hr
0.8  24
Critical temperature for oxygen transfer is 30°C.
CS = 7.6 mg/l at 30°C
Using Eq. 12.102 with Ct = 2.0 mg/l
0.8  7.6  2.0
R  2.5 1.02 30 20  0.9   1.2 lb/hp·hr
9.2
Oxygen transfer provided  1.2  30  36 lb/hr (OK)
12.74 BOD removal efficiency is lowest in winter.

k4°C  0.801.035 4  20  0.46
1
Le / LO   0.35
1  0.46  4
BOD removal  0.65 0.25  400  8.34  540 lb (> 400 OK)
Dissolved oxygen is lowest in summer.
k30°C  0.801.035 30 20  1.13
834
BOD removal  834   683 lb
1  1.13  4
683
Oxygen required   28.4 lb/hr
24
28.4 2.0 0.9  7.6  C t 1.02  0 .9 
10
 Ct = 0.9 mg/l (< 2.0, not adequate)

45 9 .2
12.75 Winter operation is critical for detention time.

k2°C  0.901.035 2  20  0.48
1
Le / LO  0.20  t = 8.3 days
1  0.46  t
Lagoon volume  0.20  8.3  1.66 mil gal = 222,000 ft3
Summer operation is critical for oxygen utilization.
k25°C  0.801.035 25 20  1.07
1
Le / LO   0.10
1  1.07 8.3
BOD removal  0.90  1100  990 lb of BOD/day
1.0
Oxygen required  990   41 lb of oxygen/hr
24
Using Eq. 12.102 at a minimum dissolved oxygen or 2 mg/l,
Solutions Manual
Page 183
0.8  8.4  2.0
R25°C  2.33 1.0225 30 20  0.9  1.19 lb of oxygen/hp·hr
9.2
41
Power required   34 hp
1.19
d
The volume of a prismoidal basin  .
6 A1  4 A2  A3 
For two equal-sized basins with a water depth of 10 ft, side slopes of 1/1, and length
twice the width, the width of each basin is W as determined by the relationship:
10
111,000 
6 2W  W  4 2W  10W  10   2W  20W  20 
W = 82 ft. and L= 2W = 164 ft.
Use 2 aerated lagoons each with 164 ft by 82 ft water surface and water volume of
111,000 ft3. The side slopes are to be concrete on a slope of 1 to 1 and the bottom sealed
or paved so that the lagoons can be drained and cleaned with mechanical equipment if
necessary. Install 2 x 10 hp aerators in each pond along the centerline at approximately
one-third points.
The size of the two facultative ponds depends on either BOD loading or water storage
volume.
1100
Minimum area based on BOD loading  0.20   11 ac
20
Minimum area based on wastewater storage
200,000
4  30  2
 7.48  917,000 ft = 21 acres
5 .0  1 .5
Solutions Manual
Page 184
Use 2 secondary ponds each with a surface area of 10.5 acres and water depth of 5 ft.
12.76 Contain the odorous emissions by covering the grit chamber and primary clarifiers and
pump the foul air out for processing to prevent a corrosive atmosphere under the covers.
Depending on the size of the plant, the foul air can be exhausted through a counter-
current packed-tower scrubber (excellent for removing hydrogen sulfide) or cleansed
through the activated-sludge aeration tanks by blowing the foul air through the air
diffusers. (The corrosivity of the foul air on blowers and piping should be evaluated.)
Since foul odors are coming from the raw wastewater, installation of an exhaust pipe into
the wet well to collect foul air should also be considered.
12.77 The suspended solids limit in Table 12.9, potential limit on BOD, need for chlorine
disinfection, and toxicity standards indicate the need for secondary treatment. A toxicity
evaluation is most likely to reveal inadequate pretreatment of industrial wastewaters
discharged to sewers.
Solutions Manual
Page 185
CHAPTER 13
PROCESSING OF SLUDGES
1.00 0.70 0.30

13.1  
SS 2.50 1.00
98.5  1.5
S  1.006  1.01
S S  1.72 98.5 1.5

1.00 1.72
1000
V   66 3
1.5 m
 1000  1.01
100
1.00 0.35 0.65
13.2   S S  1.27
SS 2 .5 1.0
94.0 6.0
  1.01
S of sludge 94.0  6.0
1.00 1.27
78.0 22.0
  1.05
S of cake 78.0  22.0
1.00 1.27
13.3 Assume a specific gravity of sludge = 1.0

1000
  3000
V at 4% solids 4 gal
 8.34  1.0
100
V at 8% solids is 1500 gal, one half the V at 4%.
13.4 (a) WsP = 0.60 x 200 x 10 x 8.34 = 10,000 lb

10,000
Vp   20,000 gal
0.06  8.34
From Fig. 13.1 at F/M = 0.33, k = 0.48
Wss = 0.48 x 0.65 x 240 x 10 x 8.34 = 6240 lb
6240
Vs   50,000 gal
0.015  8.34
(10,000  6200)100
(b) s   2.8%
(20,000  50,000)8.34
6240
  16,600
(c) Thickened Vs 0 . 045  8.34 gal
(10,000  6200)100
s  5.3%
(20,000  16,600)8.34
Solutions Manual
Page 186
13.5 Ws = 2.0 x 0.35 x 200 = 140 mg/l
13.6 (a) Wsp = 0.50 x 260 x 1000 = 130,000 g/d = 130 kg/d
Wss = 0.40 x 0.65 x 220 x 1000 = 57,200 g/d = 57.2 kg/d
Ws = 130 + 57.2 = 187 kg/d
187
(b) V   3.7 m3/d
0.05  1000
13.7 From Fig. 13.1 for F/M = 0.24, k = 0.44

s / 100 = 9800 / 1,000,000 = 0.0098
0.44  173  29,000
V  230,000 m3/d
0.0098  1000
13.8 (a) Total sludge solids = 8.34 (0.44 x 40 + 0.74 x 12) = 221 lb/mil gal
0.70  221
(b) V of settled sludge   1550 gal/mil gal
0.012  8.34
0.30  221
V of wash water   13,200 gal/mil gal
0.0006  8.34
221
(c) V of thickened sludge   757 gal/mil gal
0.035  8.34
13.9 Sedimentation solids = 1,400,000 x 0.014 = 19,600 kg/Mm3

Wash water solids = 1,000,000 x 0.032 x 160 / 1000 = 5100 kg/Mm3
Total sludge solids = 19,600 + 5100 = 24,700 kg/Mm3
Using Eq. 13.9,
Total sludge solids = 0.44 x 19.8 + 0.74 x 18 = 22.0 g/m3
= 22,000 kg/Mm3 < 24,700 kg/Mm3
Solutions Manual
Page 187
13.10
Components in Precipitate Produced

Example 11.6 CaCO3 Mg(OH)2
Formula meq/l meq/l meq/l
CO2 0.40 0.40 0.00
Ca(HCO3)2 2.30 4.60 0.00
CaSO4 1.20 1.20 0.00
MgSO4 0.80 0.80 0.80
Excess lime 1.25 1.25 0.00
8.25 0.80
Minus practical limits -0.60 -0.20
7.65 0.60
Dry solids = 7.65 x 50 + 0.60 x 29.2 = 400 mg/l = 3300 lb/mil gal
13.11
Precipitate Produced
Components in Example 11.6 CaCO3 Mg(OH)2
Formula meq/l meq/l meq/l
CO2 0.50 0.50 0.00
Ca(HCO3)2 3.20 6.40 0.00
CaSO4 0.30 0.30 0.00
MgSO4 1.80 0.635 1.00
7.825 1.00
Minus practical limits -0.60
7.225
Minus Ca(HCO3)2 remaining -0.373
6.852 meq/l
This procedure for calculating sludge form split treatment involves knowing the calcium
bicarbonate in the finished water. Therefore, since complete softening calculations are
required, the calcium precipitate can be calculated from the lime added plus calcium
removed and the magnesium precipitated from magnesium removes. The following
values are taken from the solution to Example 11.6
Lime added = 2.938 + 1.388 = 4.326 meq/l

Calcium removed = 3.5 – 0.973 = 2.527 meq/l
CaCO3 precipitate = 4.326 + 2.537 = 6.852 meq/l
Magnesium removed = 1.8 – 0.8 = 1.0 meq/l
Solids = 6.85 x 50 + 1.0 x 29.2 = 370 mg/l = 3100 lb/mil gal
Solutions Manual
Page 188
13.12 (a) Well water
Components mg/l Eq. Weight meq/l

Ca 94 20.0 4.7
Mg 24 12.2 2.0
Na 27 23.0 1.2
Total cations = 7.9
HCO3 390 61.0 6.4
SO4 73 48.0 1.5
Cl 2 35.5 0.1
Total anions = 8.0
Treated Water
Components mg/l Eq. Weight meq/l

Ca 21 20.0 1.1
Mg 14 12.2 1.1
Na 23 23.0 1.0
Total cations = 3.2
HCO3 107 61.0 1.8
SO4 64 48.0 1.3
Cl 6 35.5 0.2
Total anions = 3.3
Solutions Manual
Page 189
Theoretically, the concentration of Na, SO4, and Cl in the raw and treated water should be
the same since these ions are not effected by lime softening. The difference in
concentrations in the data are most likely the result of inaccuracies in laboratory testing.
(b) Calculations of dissolved minerals removed.

Ca 94 – 21 = 73 mg/l
Mg 24 – 14 = 10
Fe 0.7 – 0 = 1
Mn 0.4 – 0 = 0
HCO3 390 – 107 = 283
367 mg/l
Dissolved minerals removed in treating 0.45 mil gal of well water:

0.45 x 367 x 8.34 = 1400 lb of dry solids.
(c) Dry sludge solids produced per day.

Lime dosage = 300 mg/l x 0.74 = 222 mg/l CaO
The 222 mg/l of CaO and 73 mg/l of Ca removed from the well water precipitate for
CaCO3:
222 (100 / 56.1) + 73 (100 / 40.1) = 580 mg/l CaCO3
The 10 mg/l of Mg removed for the well water precipitates as iron hydroxide and the Mn
as manganese dioxide:
0.7 (107 / 55.8) + 0.4 (86.9 + 54.9) = 2 mg/l
Total dry sludge solids = 580 + 24 + 2 = 610 mg/l

The yield from treating 0.45 mil gal of water:
0.45 x 610 x 8.34 = 2290 = 2300 lb.
Yield of wet sludge = 2290 / 0.05 = 46,000 lb.
13.13 Assume 50% SS removal and 35% BOD removal in primary sedimentation and a k of
0.47 from Fig. 13.1.
Wsp = 0.50 x 120 x 240 x 10-6 x 8.34 = 0.12 lb
Wss = 0.65 x 0.47 x 120 x 200 x 10-6 x 8.34 = 0.06 lb
Ws = 0.12 + 0.06 = 0.18 lb
After 35% reduction in anaerobic digestion and dewatering to 20% solids in filter cake,
(0.65  0.18)8
Volume of Filter Cake   0.6 pint
0.20  8.34
13.14 Refer to Section 13.4. Returning waste-activated sludge to the head of the plant will thin
the primary sludge. Solids captured in gravity thickening of combined sludge is often
poor, resulting in excessive solids being returned to the plant inlet in the thickener
Solutions Manual
Page 190
overflow. The preferred sludge scheme is separated handling of the waste-activated
sludge by either flotation or gravity-belt thickening (Fig. 13.3a) prior to blending with the
primary sludge or some other scheme, such as, separate aerobic digestion and spreading
on farmland.
13.15 Assuming similar operating conditions as design load, the volume of waste activated
sludge production would be:
Volume with normal operation = (57,000 / 41,000) x 270 = 380 m3/d
Volume with poor operation = (57,000 / 41,000) x 380 = 530 m3/d
Design operation of the belt gravity thickeners is to be 7 d/wk for a maximum of 7 h/d.
The plan is to pump primary sludge during the same 7 h period to blend with the
thickened wasted activated sludge. During normal operation assume a conservative
hydraulic loading of 34 m3/m·h (150 gpm/m) from Table 13.5 to calculate the required
belt width and solids loading.
Belt width required at 34 m3/m·h = 380 / (34 x 7) = 1.6 m
Solids loading at 34 m3/m·h = 34 x 1000 x 0.0112 = 380 kg/m·h
During poor operation, calculate the required belt widths and solids loadings for both the
lower hydraulic loading limit of 34 m 3/m·h and the upper limit of 56 m 3/m·h (250
gpm/m) from Table 13.5.
Installation of two 1.5-m gravity belt thickeners satisfies both the hydraulic and solids
loading ranges given in Table 13.5 during the maximum month with one unit in
operation.
During normal activated-sludge process operation,

Hydraulic loading = 380 / (1.5 x 7) = 36 m3/m·h (only slightly over 34 m3/m·h)
Solids loading = 36 x 1000 x 0.0112 = 400 kg/m·h (only slightly over 380 kg/m·h)
During poor activated-sludge process operation,

Hydraulic loading = 530 / (1.5 x 7) = 50 m3/m·h (less than 56 m3/m·h)
Solids loading = 56 x 1000 x 0.0081 = 410 kg/m·h (less than 910 kg/m·h)
For the few weeks of poor operation, both thickeners could be operated for 7 h or less
using the combined belt width of 3.0 m to lower the hydraulic loading to 34 m 3/m·h.
Alternately, if one thickener were out of service, the other one could be operated for 10.4
h at 34 m3/m·h.
13.16 Thickening of settled sludge and filter wash water with polymer flocculation and recycle
overflow from the clarifier-thickeners (Fig. 13.5). Dewatering by plate-and-frame
Solutions Manual
Page 191
pressure filtration after conditioning with lime. Concentration of solids by centrifugation
after polymer flocculation. Lagooning and air drying after thickening in storage ponds.
(Section 13.5)
The two lagoons should be used alternately to allow between 6 months and 1 year for
decanting, evaporation, and drainage. Alum sludge does not consolidated under water. If
the sludge in the lagoon is a viscous liquid at the time when a lagoon must be emptied,
the thickened sludge can be removed by dragline or clamshell and dumped in thin layers
on the lagoon banks to air-dry. The thickened sludge after air-drying can be transported
to landfill.
0.90  33,000  0.03  8.34

13.17 V   13,000 gal
0.07  8.34
40  1000  0.045
13.18 Solids loading   50 kg/m2·d
 (3.4) 2
0.85  40  1000  0.045
V of sludge   20 m3/d
0.075  1000
25,000  0.05  8.34

13.19 Area   1040 ft2, Dia = 36.4 ft
10
25,000
Sludge water overflow rate   24 gpd/ft2
1040
Dilution water flow  ( 400  24)1040  390,000 gpd
0.90(25,000  0.05  8.34)
V  1880 ft3
0.08  62.4
4.0  1040  24
Solids retention time   53 hr
1880
6730
13.20 (a) Aeration period = 13,000  24  12.4 h
260  13,000
BOD loading   502 g/m3·d = 31 lb/1000 ft3/day
6730
This BOD loading is at the upper limit of 30 lb/1000 ft 3/day for extended aeration (Table
12.3), the aeration period is less than the minimum of 20 h for extended aeration but more
than 7.0 h for step aeration (Table 12.3), the aeration basins are completely mixed, and no
primary sedimentation is provided. Therefore, the most consistent classification is
extended aeration.
2300  6730
(b) Sludge age  13  13,000  8000  340  5.36 d
Estimated stabilization  5.36  20  107 degree-days < 200-300 degree-days
This indicates poor stability of the organic matter in the waste-activated sludge.
Solutions Manual
Page 192
(c) Yes. Had the designer specified a scraper mechanism with a rapid-sludge-removal
apparatus (Fig. 10.4).
Yes. Since sludge is commonly wasted from the return sludge pipe, excessive
recirculation can draw in wastewater from above the sludge blanket diluting the waste
sludge.
(d) Unstabilized waste-activated sludge is biologically active releasing gases of

decomposition that hinder settling and float solids, particularly in this situation where the
sludge is warm.
(e) The sludge is not biologically stable and does not readily release bound water. A
stabilized sludge reduces to a dry cake that shrinks with moisture loss and cracks into
pieces for easy removal from underlying sand bed.
(f) The recommended sludge processing is aerobic digestion for stabilization followed by
gravity thickening in the digesters prior to withdrawal for land application of biosolids.
Depending on economics and environmental considerations, the digested sludge can be
applied as a liquid, as a dewatered cake after filter press dewatering, or as dried cake
from open-air drying beds.
(1150  0.01  9800  0.0005)8.34

13.21 V of sludge   550 gpd
0.03  8.34
 1.4 160 
13.22 Total dry sludge solids yield  15,000  400,000 30
 100 1,000,000 
 ( 214  64)30  8220 kg/mon
(The contribution of polymer solids would be insignificant.)
Volume of blended sludge after thickening the wash water

 64 
 15  30  642 m3/mon with 1.28% solids.
 0.01  1000 
Volume of monthly sludge accumulation after supernatant withdrawal and 1 year of

8220
drying   82 m3/mon
0.10  1000
Assume 2 of the 4 cells are in service while the other 2 are consolidating the drying
sludge and being cleaned. The depth of sludge applied
642
  0.40 m/mon.
2  800
82
The depth of accumulated sludge after drying to 10%   0.05 m/mon.
2  800
If consolidation of the sludge from supernatant withdrawal and drying is uniform
throughout the year. The average increase in depth of sludge
Solutions Manual
Page 193
0.40  0.05
  0.175 m/mon.
2
At the end of one year of filling the 2 cells, the depth of sludge should be
 12  0.175  2.1 m.
With another 12 months of consolidation without sludge application dried sludge depth
should be  12  0.05  0.60 m. The proposed plan is likely to be successful.
13.23 Sludge solids  500  1000  0.0080  4000 kg/d

500
Gravity belt width required   2.1 m
34  7
Use 2 gravity belt thickeners with 2.0 m wide belts.
500
Hydraulic loading   35.7 m3/m·h = 160 gpm/m
2.0  7
4000
Solids loading   286 kg/m·h = 630 lb/m/hr
2 .0  7
(2  286)  3.0k
Polymer solution feed for one 2.0-m press   0.86 m3/h
1000  0.002  1000
13.24 WAS sludge solids  293,000  8.34  0.01  24,400 lb

Thickened sludge solids to digester  0.98  24,400  23,900 lb
23,900
Thickened sludge volume   71,600 gpd
8.34  0.04
From digester: 23,900 (0.70)0.50  0.3  15,500 lb
 15,500 
At    100  2.6%
 71,600  8.34 
Dewatered cake  0.95  15,500  14,700 lb/day
14,700
At  9800 gpd
0.18  8.34
Recycled fromdewatering is 0.05  15,500  780 lb/day in an estimated
71,600  9800  61,800 gpd, 1500 mg/l or 0.15%.
Summary: WAS 1.0%, Thickened sludge 4.0%, Digested sludge 2.6%, Dewatered sludge
18%, Recycled filtrate 0.15%.
250  0.92  10,000

13.25 V of float  40,000
 58 m3/16 hours
250  10
Area   13 m2
16  12
250
Hydraulic loading   19 m3/m2 per 16 hour period
13
50,000  0.0098  8.34 4090

13.26 Solids loading    2.3 lb/ft2/hr
75  24 1800
4090  0.95 3880
V of float    9900 gal
0.047  8.34 0.392
Solutions Manual
Page 194
0.050  32  8.34
Dosage of polymer   6.9 lb/ton
3880  2000
0.70  580
13.27 (a) VS loading  10,600
 0.038 lb/ft3/day
580 0.55  580

(b) V1   232 ft3 V2   85 ft3
0.04  62.4 0.06  62.4
232  85
V 30  85  90  12,400 ft3
2
630 0.30  630  0.70  0.50  630

13.28 V1   12.6 m3/d V2   5.9 m3/d
0.05  1000 0.07  1000
12.6  5.9
V 30  5.9  90  810 m3
2
13.29 (a) Wsp  0.50  310  1200  186,000 g = 186 kg

Wss  0.65  0.40  260  1200  81,000 g = 81 kg
186  61 267 0.60  267
V1    5.9 m3/d V2   2.0 m3/d
0.045  1000 45 0.080  1000
2.0  5.9
V 30  2.0  90  300 m3
2
1200  260
(b) EP   3400 persons
91
300
Capacity per PE   0.088 m3 (3.1ft3/PE)
3400
10,000
15,000 
13.30 (a)  100  p p = 92.0%
 100 8.34
0.70  10,000
  70,000 3
(b) V based on VS loading 100 ft (Use)
1000
15  15,000
V based on detention time   30,000 ft3
7.48
(c) Undigested solids  (0.30  0.4  0.7)  10,000  5800 lb
5800
15,000 
 100  p p = 95.4%
 100 8.34
620,000 2  480
13.31 (a) EP   6200 persons, V per person   0.15 m3
100 6200
0.70  620
(b) VS loading   0.70 kg/m3·d
2  310
Solutions Manual
Page 195
(0.30  0.7  0.6)620 2( 480  310)
(c) V2   6.4 m3/d, Storage time   53 d
0.07  1000 6.4
2400  8.34  0.044  0.67 590

13.32 (a) VS loading  15,500

15,500
 0.038 lb/ft3/day < 0.1 – 0.2
(15,500  7.48)
t  48 days > 10 – 15
2400
(b) Gas production
4200
Per lb VS added   7.1 ft3 < 8 – 12
590
4200
Per lb VS destroyed   12 ft3 < 16 – 18
(590  1500  8.34  0.043  0.45)
(c) Primary solids  0.5  128  0.63  8.34  336 lb/day
Biological solids  0.33(0.65  166)0.63  8.34  187 lb/day
Plus extra clarification  (30  16)0.63  8.34  74 lb/day
AlPO4 precipitation = (P precipitated) (MW of AlPO4) / (MW of P)
(7.1  1.3)(122)
  23 lb/day
(31)
Total dry sludge solids  336  187  74  23  620 lb/day
Actual sludge solids yield = 590 lb/day
13.33 (a) Solids in sludge  2800  62.4  0.050  8740 lb/day

(0.30  0.40  0.70)8740 5070
s   0.029  2.9 %
2800  62.4 175,000
(b) Estimated methane production using average values from Table 13.7.
Based on VS added  0.70  8740  10  61,000 ft3/day
Based on VS destroyed  0.60  0.70  8740  17  62,000 ft3/day
70,000
  60
(c) Storage  5070  days
 
 0.07  62.4 
(d) Gas production would decrease.
(e) By increasing temperature from 35°C to 37°C, gas production might increase slightly,
but with further increase, gas production would decrease sharply as the temperature
exceeds the mesophilic range.
13.34 (a) S  218  0.84  8.34  1527 lb SS/day

B  248  0.84  8.34  1737 lb BOD/day
 2.18 
Sm  1527 0.0517 
 2280 lb SS/day
 1527 
Solutions Manual
Page 196
 1.91 
Bm  1737 0.043 
 2410 lb BOD/day
 1737 
WS  0.50(2280)  0.40  0.65(2410)  1770 lb/day
1770
(b) V1   709 ft3/day
0.04  62.4
1770  0.65
V2   307 ft3/day
0.06  62.4
  709  307  
V   25  307  120  49,500 ft
3
 2
Use 2 floating-cover heated digesters each with a volume of 25,000 cubic feet.
1740
Equivalent design population of plant   8700 persons
0.20
V at 5 ft3/PE  8700  5  43,500 ft3
This is 6000 less than the calculated 49,500 ft3.
(c) Drying bed area based 1 to 2 ft2/BOD design PE = 8700 to 17,400 ft2
Average annual yield of digested sludge solids
 (0.50  1527  0.40  0.65  1737)0.65  365  288,000 lb
Drying bed area based on 20 to 40 lb/ft2/yr = 14,400 to 7200 ft2
100,000 0.60  5500

13.35 V1   12,000 gal, V2   4000 gal
8.34 0.10  8.34
V1 – V2 = 8000 gal, which is a 2/3 volumetric reduction.
13.36
(0.65  0.23)100
(a) VS converted to gas   65 %
0.65
(b) V of supernatant  1000  446  554 gal
Solutions Manual
Page 197
13.37
textbook.
13.38 The flow diagram for the solution to Problem 12.55a shows the sludge processes of
gravity-belt or flotation thickening of the waste activated sludge (WAS), a blending tank
for mixing the WAS with primary sludge, anaerobic digesters with floating covers, and
open-air drying beds. Filtrate from thickening of WAS and supernatant from digestion
are returned to the wet well at the inlet of the plant. Belt filter presses (to replace the
drying beds) for sludge dewatering require a supply of wash water to clean the belts.
Normally, chlorinated effluent is reused as a non-potable water supply for landscape
irrigation, cleaning, gas chlorinators, and wash water to belt presses. The wash water
should be filtered to prevent plugging of spray nozzles. The wastewater from the belt
presses is returned to the wet well at the inlet of the plant.
textbook.
13.39 Volume of first-stage digester  20  128  4360 m3

Install two heated and mixed digesters each 2200 m3.
Solutions Manual
Page 198
Install one unheated second-stage tank for thickening and storage with a volume of 4400
m3.
10,900  0.70  1000
Volatile solids loading   1730 g/m3·d
4400
Digested solids  (0.30  0.50  0.70)(10,900)  7090 kg/d
7090
Based on Eq. 13.3, solids in concentration s = 100 (M/V)  100 218,000  3.2 %
Volume of digested sludge after supernatant withdrawal
 218,000  50,000  168,000 l/d
7090
Solids concentration in thickened digested sludge  100 168,000  4.2 %
50,000  7.48
13.40 Detention time  32,000
 12 days
32,000  0.015  0.65  8.34

VS loading  50,000
 0.052 lb/ft3/day
2600 50,000
EP   15,000 persons, V   3.3 ft3/capita
0.17 15,000
13.41 VS loading with both aerobic digesters in operation

2000  62.4  7600  0.65
  0.039 lb/ft3/day
1,000,000  2  8000
Recommended maximum VS loading = 0.04 lb/ft3/day
Volume of air supplied with both digesters in operation
2  200
  25 cfm/1000 ft3
16
Recommended aeration is 15 – 30 cfm/1000 ft3
16,000  11,000
Sludge age  700  14,000  18 days
Aeration period at 8°C  18  8  144 degree-days
At 10°C  18  10  180 degree-days
Recommended aeration period is 200 – 300 degree-days
8800
13.42 VS loading   0.35 kg/m3·d
0.25  1000
Digested solids  12,500  0.50  8800  8100 mg/l
(Total volume, V1)8100 = (Settled volume, V2)15,000
Assuming no solids in supernatant, the portion decanted
V2  V1 15,000  8100 
  100  46 %
V2  15,000 
13.43 Waste-activated sludge solids  510  0.008  1000  4080 kg/d

Digested waste solids  (1.00  0.35)4080  2650 kg/d
Solutions Manual
Page 199
2650
Volume of settled digested sludge   106 m3/d
0.025  1000
Supernatant withdrawn  510  106  404 m3/d
250
Required sludge age   13 d
19
13(106  2.5)
Volume   2650 m3
1.3
2650
Liquid sludge detention time   5.2 d
510
0.65  4080
Volatile solids loading   1.0 kg/m3·d
2650
Consider 3 rectangular tanks each 8.0 m by 24.5 m with common walls along the 24.5-m
side. Side-water depth of 4.0 m, 1.0 m freeboard, and hopper bottom.
Volume  3 8.0  24.5  4.0  0.5(8.0  24.5)  2650 m3
13.44 (a) (1) Using Fig. 13.1, select k = 0.35

WS  2.0  0.35  0.84  248  8.34  1220 lb/day
1220
VS   1960 ft3/day
0.01  62.4
(a) (2) Based on VS loading,
1220  0.70
Digester V   21,400 ft3
0.04
Determining the required digester V based on aeration period is difficult because the
actual aeration depends on digester operation. From item (3) in the question the
thickened sludge concentration is assumed to be 1.5%, from item (4) the VS reduction is
assumed to be 50%, and from item (5) the average operating suspended solids
concentration is 1.0%.
Solids concentration in thickened digested sludge

 0.30  10,000  0.70  0.50  10,000  6500 mg/l
With thickening to 15,000 mg/l, the volume of digested sludge
1960  6500
  850 ft3/day
15,000
Sludge age = __(V of digesters) (SS conc. in aerating sludge) _
(V of withdrawal/day)(SS conc. in digested sludge)
( 21,400)(10,000)
  16.8 days
(850)(15,000)
Aeration period  16.8  8  134 degree-days
200
Digester V required for 200 degree-days   21,400  32,000 ft3
134
1220  0.70
VS loading  32,000
 0.027 lb/ft3/day
1220
(b) Digested sludge solids   793 lb/day
(0.30  0.70  0.50)
Solutions Manual
Page 200
Because the digested sludge has only 1.5% solids and the climate is cold, assume an
allowable drying-bed loading of only 10 lb/ft2/yr.
793  365
Area required   29000 ft2, which is a very large are costly to construct and
10
to clean off dried cake.
850  7.48  7
(c) Required width for belt presses   0.71 m
35  60  30
Install two 1-m belt presses, one for service during normal operation and one standby.
Two presses also provide extra capacity when the sludge yield exceeds the calculated
average daily amount and if the sludge does not thicken to 1.5%.
13.45 (a) From Fig. 13.1 for F/M = 0.15, k = 0.38.

WS  2.0  0.38  200  400  60,800 g/d = 60.8 kg/d
60.8
V  4050 l/d = 4.0 m3/d
0.015
V of digesters based on t  15  4.0  60 m3
60.8  0.70
V of digesters based on VS   71 m3 (Use)
0.60
60.8  0.75
(b) Daily volume of thickened digested sludge   2 .3 m 3
0.02  1000
Storage volume for 90 days  2.3  90  210 m3
13.46 An organic amendment or a recoverable bulking agent is added to dewatered sludge cake
before composting to reduce the unit weight and increase air voids.
13.47 (a) Primary sludge solids  75,000  8.34  0.06  37,500 lb/day
Waste-activated sludge solids  230,000  8.34  0.01  19,200 lb/day
19,200
V of thickened WAS   58,000 gal
0.04  8.34
V of combined sludge  75,000  58,000  133,000 gal
37,500  19,200
S of combined sludge  133,000  8.34  0.051  5.1 %
19,200  37,500
(b) Weight of cake   247,000 lb/day
0.23
247,000
Number of 8-ton truck loads  16,000  16 per day
100  7
13.48 EP   3500 persons
0.20
70
13.49 Hydraulic loading   47 gpm/m (Table 13.9 lists 40 – 60 gpm/m)
1.5
Solids loading  47  60  0.040  8.34  940 lb/m/hr (The range of loadings in Table
13.9 is 500 – 1000 lb/m/hr)
Solutions Manual
Page 201
6.0  60  0.0020  8.34
  8.5
Polymer dosage 940 lb/ton
1.5 
2000
Although his polymer dosage is within the 6 – 12 lb/ton range given in Table 13.9, one
should remember that flocculation efficiencies of polymers vary considerably among
different brands. Selection of the best polymer is based on cost per ton of cake solids, not
the weight per ton.
The quantity of filtrate can be estimated by subtracting the calculated cake volume from
the sludge feed. Assuming a specific gravity of 1.05, the volumetric flow of sludge cake
using Eq. 13.3 with the factor for specific gravity in the denominator is :
70  0.040  8.34
V  7.6 gpm = 8 gpm
0.35  8.34  1.05
Flow of filtrate  70  8  62 gpm
Wastewater flow = filtrate + polymer feed + wash water
 62  6  50  118 gpm
118  60  0.0018  8.34
Solids in wastewater   71 lb/m/hr
1.5
940  71
Solids recovery   0.92  92 %
940
100
13.50 Hydraulic loading   50 gpm/m
2
Solids loading  50  60  8.34  0.065  1600 lb/m/hr
6.4
 60  8.34  0.0020
 2  4.0 lb/ton
Polymer dosage 1600
2000
1600
Theoretical flow of sludge cake   10 gpm/m
60  8.34  0.30  1.05
Wastewater flow  50  3.2  30  10  73 gpm/m
Solids in wastewater  73  60  8.34  0.0018  66 lb/m/hr
1600  66
Solids recovery  100  96 %
1600
4.5
13.51 Hydraulic loading   9.0 m3/m·h
0.5
0.035
Solids loading  4.5  1000   315 kg/m·h
0.5
0.45  0.0020  1000
  5.7
Polymer dosage 0.50  315 kg/tonne
1000
Wastewater SS = wash-water SS + filtrate SS
(1.07  2600  1.20  500)3600
  24 kg/m·h
0.5  1000  1000
Solutions Manual
Page 202
(315  24)100
Solids recovery   92 %
315
13.52 From the solution to problem 13.40, the aerobically digested waste sludge is 106 m 3/d
containing 2650 kg at 2.5% solids concentration.
Dewatering should be completed in a 7-h period (one 8-h work shift) or less to reduce the
time that the digestion tank is unaerated. For a sludge with only 2.5% solids, the
recommended maximum hydraulic loading is 11.4 m/h·m.
106
The size machine for daily dewatering   1.33 m
11 .4
Provide two 1.5-m belt filter presses. Sludge feed, polymer dosing, and belt wash water
should be provided as in Fig. 13.9.
The dewatered cake should be conveyed directly to trucks for hauling to agricultural
areas where it can be stockpiles for later application as fertilizer and soil condition to
grow fodder, fiber, or seed crops.
13.53 Solids loading  45  8.34  60  0.05  1130 lb/m·hr

4.0  60  8.34  0.0020
  7.1
Polymer dosage 1130 lb/ton
2000
1000
Wash-water usage   32  7.10 gal per 1000 gal of sludge
45
1000
Wastewater production   64  14.20 gal per 1000 gal of sludge
45
(1130  64  8.34  0.0022  60)100
Solids recovery   94 %
1130
90,000  8.34  0.05  0.94
Cake production   73 tons/day
0.24  2000
90,000
Required belt width   2 .8 m
45  12  60
The recommended size for two presses is either 1.5 m each or 2.0 m each depending on
size built by manufacturer selected.
1.10(40  1000  0.02)

13.54 W of cake   2200 kg/d
0.04
40  1000  2200  0.60
V of filtrate   39 m3/d
1000
(8.34  0.036)1.10
13.55 (a) Cake production   0.86 lb/gal of sludge
0.385
Solutions Manual
Page 203
 60 
300  8.34  0.036  3
(b) Filter yield  20   7.5 lb/ft /hr

36
13.56 The surface-water treatment plant diagrammed in Problem 11.20 applies alum as the
coagulant an polymer as the coagulant aid. The water softening plant diagrammed in
Problem 11.30 applies lime and soda ash for precipitation of calcium and magnesium.
Both flow diagrams show gravity settling of the filter wash water in clarifier-surge tank
after chemical conditioning. The overflow is reclaimed water returned to the plant inlet.
In both cases, sludge from wash-water reclamation and settled sludge withdrawn from the
sedimentation tanks are blended for gravity thickening followed by mechanical
dewatering.
The following diagram is applicable to both treatment plants. The equipment selected
maybe either plant-and-frame filter presses or solid-bowl scroll centrifuges depending on
characteristics of the sludge and quantity of sludge being dewatered. Pressure filtration is
often preferred for dewatering alum sludge and softening precipitate high in magnesium
hydroxide. Chemical recovery by recalcination of softening precipitate and alum
recovery are rarely feasible.
Solutions Manual
Page 204
13.57 Centrifugation is an economic choice in large plants where costs of machines and a
facility building, operating costs, and disposal of drier cake are less than for an equivalent
belt filter pres system. (Refer to paragraph under heading “Centrifugation.”) The
wastewater flow is 150 mgd (Table 13.10), which is significantly greater than 40 mgd.
Feed sludge with uniform characteristics is very important for centrifuge dewatering
since a minor change in concentration can reduce consistency of the dewatered cake.
From Fig. 13.25, the selected methods of cake conveyance are horizontal auger, inclined
auger, and cake pump.
Mc 190,000( 24,000  3200)

13.58   0.88  88 %
Ms 24,000(190,000  3200)
190,000  24,000
QR  190,000  3200 8.0  7.1 l/s
Mc 60(10  S R )
13.59  0.90  SR = 1.18%
Ms 10(60  S R )
QR 60  10
  0.85 85 % volume reduction
QS 60  1.18
13.60 (a) Read the first paragraph under Section 13.28 Land Application. Processing of
biosolids for agricultural land (referred to as Class B) must stabilize the organic matter,
reduce pathogenic organisms, and meet specified maximum allowable concentrations of
Solutions Manual
Page 205
10 toxic metals. Biosolids sold in bags or other containers for application on private
lawns and gardens (referred to as Class A) have stricter limits on toxic metals and
pathogens. Reduction of pathogens requires thermal treatment for a specific time-
temperature regime.
(b) For agricultural land application, the usual processing is either anaerobic digestion
(Section 13.13) or aerobic digestion (Section 13.17) and the biosolids quality must meet
the specified limit of 10 toxic metals. For codisposal, the dewatered sludge can be either
raw or digested and must not contain hazardous wastes prohibited in municipal solids
waste landfills (Section 13.29). Normally, a minimum solids content is required by the
management of the landfill to reduce problems of confinement of wet sludge during
burial so bulldozers and landfill compactors do not sink into the fill.
13.61
Numerical value Logarithm
140,000 5.15
320,000 5.51
130,000 5.11
330,000 5.52
300,000 5.48 Biosolids meet fecal
220,000 5.34 coliform density of
305,000 5.48 Class B biosolids
Average = 5.37 = 230,000 CFU/g <2,000,000
Solutions Manual
Page 206
CHAPTER 14
ADVANCED WASTEWATER TREATMENT PROCESSES AND WATER REUSE
14.1 Characteristics of biologically treated wastewater are: major constituents listed in Table
12.1; trace refractories including organics and heavy metals, mostly from industrial
wastewaters discharged to municipal sewers; microorganisms; and odor-producing
compounds. Contaminants most likely to cause pollution of surface water and
groundwater are: refractory compounds that interfere with reused of water as a drinking
water source, BOD and suspended solids reducing dissolved oxygen in the receiving
watercourse if reaeration is inadequate, ammonia nitrogen and chlorine residual as they
related to toxicity of aquatic organisms, and unaesthetic conditions of increased turbidity
and odors. Lake eutrophication (fertilization) is caused by excess phosphorus and
nitrogen. Microbiological quality is of concern in natural waters in the reuse of
reclaimed wastewater. Waterborne diseases and pathogens (viruses, bacteria, protozoa,
and helminthes) excreted in human feces are listed in Table 8.1. Toxic water pollutants
are discussed in Section 8.9.
14.2 Flow equalization allows smaller treatment units and higher quality of processing by
eliminating peak flows. Although equalization is not usually economical for
conventional treatment, it can result in savings for advanced wastewater treatment. Flow
equalization also reduces peak pollutant loadings increasing treatment efficiencies. For
water reclamation plants, flow equalization is essential for the operation of the unit
processes and to produce an effluent of consistently high quality.
14.3 The following wastewater flows are from Fig. 12.16a.

Time Flow Rate Cumulative Volume
Midnight - -
2 a. m. 150 gpm 18,000
4 120 32,400
6 130 48,000
8 280 81,600
10 430 133,000
Noon 430 185,000
2 p. m. 410 234,000
4 400 282,000
6 350 324,000
8 300 360,000
10 250 390,000
Midnight 190 413,000
Plotting these data as shown in Fig. 14.1 yields an equalizing volume of 70,000 gal,
which is 17% of the average daily flow. Additional volume will be required to install
mechanical or diffused aeration equipment for mixing the wastewater in the basin.
Solutions Manual
Page 207
14.4 (a) Volume of equalization chamber = 0.15 x 10
= 1.5 mil gal
Volume of primary clarifiers + aeration tanks + final clarifiers
10  8  7.48 5  10 2.2  10
    1.0  2.1  0.9
600 24 24
= 4.0 mil gal
Equalization chamber volume is a significant portion of the total capacity of all treatment
units
1.5
  0.27
1.5  4.0
(b) Assuming a flow pattern with a peak hourly rate equal to 1.5 times the average flow,
the average overflows of the clarifiers can be increase by 50%. Therefore, primary
overflow rate can be 200 gpd/ft2 and the final overflow rate can be 1200 gpd/ft2. Since
the BOD loading is not completely equalized, assume that the aeration tank can reduce in
volume by only 20% for an aeration period of 4.0 hr and BOD loading of 48 lb/100
ft3/day.
The volume of the clarifiers and aeration tanks is now
2.2
 10
10  8  7.48 4  10 1.5
    0.7  1.7  0.6
900 24 24
= 3.0 mil gal
The reduction of volume of conventional units is 4.0 – 3.0 = 1.0 mil gal, which is less
than the equalization chamber volume of 1.5 mil gal. Unless other benefits can be
derived, equalization of the diurnal flow variation for conventional treatment is difficult
to justify.
14.5 The method of sludge disposal depends on availability of agricultural land for application
of biosolids, municipal solid-waste landfill for codisposal, or land for a dedicated landfill.
Contaminants in the sludge and/or facilities for sludge digestion can dictate the choice
between land application or land burial. (Tables 13.2 and 13.3). In a metropolitan area,
incineration may be an option in the absence of available and accessible land. After the
method of disposal is selected, the alternative sludge handling processes are evaluated.
The unit processes for treating the wastewater must be able to produce a sludge
compatible with the selected methods of handling and disposal of the sludge. Spreading
on agricultural land as biosolids requires a toxic-free, digested sludge, while raw sludge
must be buried in either a dedicated site or by codisposal in a municipal solid-waste
landfill. Sludges from advanced wastewater treatment processes, such as, lime
precipitation and activated carbon adsorption containing heavy metals or organic
chemicals my require land burial in a toxic waste site.
14.6 Waterworks operate at constant inflow; wastewater flow without flow equalization has a
diurnal pattern. Solids concentrations in wastewater also vary with flow so that peak
hydraulic and solids loadings usually occur simultaneously. Microbial suspended solids
are more “sticky” than chemical floc making backwashing more difficult.
Solutions Manual
Page 208
14.7 The flow diagram for expanding treatment by primary sedimentation and secondary step
aeration to include direct tertiary granular-media filtration and effluent chlorination is
shown in Fig. 14.2. The treated water in the chlorine contact tank is the source of water
for backwashing the filters. The backwash water is discharged to a storage tank from
which it is returned at a controlled rate to the plant inlet to prevent hydraulic surge. The
preferred filter in American practice is a dual-media anthracite-sand filter with an
underdrain system for air scour prior to water backwash (Section 10.14). The preferred
flow control is influent flow splitting (Section 10.15).
18.2  694
14.8 Filter area   2500 ft2
5.0
Use 4 filters, each 625 ft2.

From Fig. 14.3, length of filter run is 13 hr for 5.0 gpm/ft2 and 30 mg/l SS.
Filter cycle time = 13 + 0.5 = 13.5 hr.
150  100
Backwash as a percentage of filtrate   3.8%
13  5  60
Filtration rate with 3 of 4 cells operating and an assumed concurrent return of backwash
water equal to 10% of wastewater flow
18.2  1.1  694
  7.4 gpm/ft2
3  625
1500
14.9 Filter area based on average Q   8.3 m2
180
3300  4
Filter area based on peak Q   12.6 m2
350  3
If 10% backwash flow is included, the area required  1.1  12.6  13.8 m2
Use a small factory-built (package) filtration unit with 4 beds, each a minimum of 3.5 m2.
14.10 Figure 14.4b in Section 14.5.
14.11 The following are the anticipated effluent quality after primary sedimentation, activated
sludge aeration, dual-media filtration, chlorination, and dechlorination for (a) “plain
filtration” without chemical addition and (b) with chemical coagulation ”with alum and
polymer” prior to filtration.
(a) plain filtration (b) with alum and polymer

BOD = 5 – 10 mg/l = < 5 mg/l
Suspended Solids = 5 – 10 mg/l = < 5 mg/l
Turbidity = unknown = 2 NTU
Chlorine residual =0 =0
Dissolved solids = DS in water supply = DS in water supply + 300 mg/l
Nitrogen = 20-26 mg/l for domestic wastewater for both a & b
Coliforms = unknown = 2.2/100 ml
Solutions Manual
Page 209
14.12 Dissolved organic compounds (COD), chlorine residual, and to a lesser extent selected
heavy metal ions, and viruses (Section 14.6).
14.13 The treatment processes corresponding to each are:

SS = 3 and MPN = 2.2: Activated sludge aeration, chemical addition, optimal
flocculation, granular-media filtration, and disinfection at a C·t of 450 (mg/l)·min.
(Section 14.15, Water Recycling Criteria, State of California).
SS = 10 and MPN = 23: Activated-sludge aeration, chemical addition, direct filtration,
disinfection for C·t > 100 (mg/l)·min.
SS = 21 and MPN = 100: Secondary biological treatment, plain filtration, disinfection for
C·t > 100 (mg/l)·min.
SS = 30 and MPN = 200: Secondary biological treatment, no filtration, disinfection for
C·t > 100 (mg/l)·min.
14.14 The biological activated carbon (BAC) process was selected since the Fred Hervey Plant
is required to reclaim the wastewater to drinking-water quality standards. The
contaminants removed are: BOD and SS by biological activated sludge; (toxic) organic
chemicals by activated-carbon adsorption; and ammonia nitrogen by conversion to nitrate
nitrogen. The PAC in the waste sludge is reactivated by wet-air regeneration, which
includes thickening, heating and pressurizing in a heat exchanger, and regeneration in the
low-oxygen environment of the reactor. Although carbon loss during regeneration is only
about 5%, the ash and PAC in the regenerated slurry cannot be separated. Therefore, a
portion of the regenerated slurry is wasted to prevent build-up of ash in the mixed liquor,
and replacement virgin PAC must be added to the BAC process.
14.15 The molar ration is 1 to 1 since one mole of alum containing 2 Al reacts with two
phosphate radicals containing 2 P. One mole of alum, 600 g, reacts with two phosphates
Solutions Manual
Page 210
containing 2 x 31.0 = 32.0 phosphorus. Thus, the alum/phosphorus ratio = 600/62.0 =
9.7/1.
14.16 (a)
Alum Influent Al/P Phosphorus BOD SS

Applied Phosphorus Weight Removal Removal Removal
(mg/l) (mg/l) Ratio (%) (%) (%)
0 10.3 0.00 23 96 93
70 10.9 0.66 50 96 92
140 10.6 1.36 77 97 90
210 10.4 2.08 90 94 93
390 9.3 4.32 95 95 86
Although in general the addition of alum increases the settleability of biological floc, this
argument is not valid in this case since the BOD and SS removal efficiencies are
independent of alum dosage from 0 to 210 mg/l. The factors that contributed to the high
removal efficiencies in this laboratory study are: (1) the excellent hydraulic efficiency of
the clarifier of the laboratory apparatus to separate the floc from the supernatant, (2) the
gentle aeration of the mixed liquor and rapid return of settled sludge thus keeping it
continuously aerobic, (3) constant loading rates, (4) high wastewater temperature of 22 to
24°C, (5) the long aeration period of 7.2 h at an approximate BOD loading of 530 grams
per cubic meter per day and F/M of 0.3, and (6) a sludge age of about 14 d.
(c) The concentration of alkalinity decreases with increasing alum dosage since the
excess alum destroys bicarbonate ion producing carbon dioxide.
14.17 The weight ration of Al to P from Fig. 14.6 for 80% removal is 1.1. Therefore:
Solutions Manual
Page 211
1.1  10  600
Alum dosage   122 mg/l
54
8  124
AlPO4 precipitate   32 mg/l = 267 lb/mil gal
31
8  600
Unused alum  122   45 mg/l
2  31
45(2  78)
Al(OH)3 precipitate   12 mg/l = 98 lb/mil gal
600
Chemical precipitate = 267 + 98 = 370 lb/mil gal
Ws  2.0  0.35  200  140 mg/l = 1170 lb/mil gal
370 1170
Total volume of sludge per million gallons of wastewater   12,300 gal
0.015  8.34
Al 100(2  27 / 600) 1.5

14.18  
P 5.9 1.0
From Fig. 13.1, k = 0.47 for F/M of 0.3, and therefore SS removal = 0.47 x 120 = 56 mg
Since the k assumes an effluent SS of 30 mg/l and the actual effluent is 10 mg/l, Total SS
removal  56  (30  10)  76 mg.
Phosphorus in 76 mg of SS removed, oP = 0.02 x 76 = 1.5 mg.
With 1.5 mg in oP and 0.5 tp in effluent,
(5.9  1.5  0.5)(122) (3.9)(122)
AlPO4 precipitate    15 mg.
31 31
4.0  600
2  31
(61)(2  78)
Al(OH)3 precipitate   16 mg
600
Total solids = 76 + 15 + 16 = 107 mg per liter of wastewater
14.19 (a) Estimated average effluent quality parameters are BOD = 20 mg/l, SS = 30 mg/l and P
= 7.0-0.02 x 65 = 5.7 mg/l
Average waste solids  130  0.48  62 mg/l
(b) Al applied = 2 x 7 = 14 mg/l.

14  600
Alum dosage   156 mg/l
2  27
Alum + 2P = 2AlPO4 + 3SO4
600 2  31  62 244 3  96  288
50 5.7  0.5  5.2 20 24
Alum + 3Alk = 2Al(OH)3 + 3SO4 + 6CO2

600 3  100  300 2  78  156 3  96  288
156  50  106 53 28 51
Solutions Manual
Page 212
Chemical precipitates = 20 + 28 = 48 mg/l
Organic waste solids = 62 + (30 – 15) = 77 mg/l
Sulfate ion is increased by 24 + 51 = 75 mg/l
Bicarbonate alkalinity decreases by 53 mg/l
CO2 in solution increases, thus decreasing pH.
(c) Estimated effluent quality parameters are BOD = 2 – 5 mg/l, SS 1 – 5 mg/l, and P =
0.3 mg/l. Additional waste solids = 10 – 14 mg/l.
14.20 From Problem 13.32, raw wastewater BOD = 166 mg/l, SS = 128 mg/l.
Treated ww BOD = 7 mg/l, SS = 16 mg/l, and iP = 1.3 mg/l.
Alum addition = 405 lb/day in 0.63 mg/l (77 mg/l).
(a) Influent P: 7.1 mg/l iP + 3.0 mg/l oP
Removal in primary is estimated to be 0.9% of the 50% SS removal = 0.009 x 0.050 x
128 = 0.6 mg/l
Settled P: 7 mg/l iP + 2.4 mg/l oP = 9.5 mg/l tP
Removal in RBC is assumed to be 2.0% of biological SS yield.
With k = 0.40 and BOD = 0.65 x 166 = 108 mg/l,
oP = 0.02 x 0.40 x 108 = 0.9 mg/l
Effluent P: 1.3 mg/l iP + (0.02 x 16 = 0.3 mg/l oP) = 1.6 mg/l tP
Chemically precipitated P in settled ww by Eq. 14.5
= 9.5 - 0.9 - 1.6 = 7.0 mg/l
(b) Al2(SO)4◦14.3H2O + 2 PO43- = 2 AlPO4 + ◦◦◦

X 7.0
 X = 68 mg/l of alum
600 2  31  62
Alum precipitated as Al(OH)3 = 77 – 68 = 9 mg/l
Al applied in 77 mg/l of alum
77(2  27)
  77  0.09  6.9 mg/l
600
Al applied = 6.9 @ 1.0
P in settled ww = 7.0
In section 14.8, the Al/P ratio for a municipal ww is given as 1.5/1 for 90% P removal.
From Fig. 14.6, the P removal is 76% at Al/P of 1.0.
The P removal from the settled ww by the RBC and alum precipitation
(9.5  1.6)100
  83%
9.5
14.21 Wp= 1.0 (220 – 110) = 110 g/m3

Vp = 110/(1000 x 0.05) = 2.2 l/m3
Using k = 0.43 from Fig. 13.1,
Ws = 0.43 x 120 = 52 mg/l
Ws from improved settleability = 30 – 10 = 20 mg/l
P removed in biological solids at 2.0% = 0.02 (52 + 20) = 1.4 mg/l
P removed by alum = 6.4 – 1.4 – 0.5 = 4.5 mg/l
Solutions Manual
Page 213
AlPO4 precipitate = (4.5 x 122)/31 = 18 mg/l
(4.5  600)
2  31
72( 2  78)
Al(OH)3 precipitate   19 mg/l
600
Chemical-biological solids = 52 + 18 + 20 + 19 = 109 g/m3
Vs = 109/(1000 x 0.015) = 7.3 l/m3, V = 2.2 + 7.3 = 9.5 l/m3
14.22 Wp = 0.80 x 220 = 176 mg/l

Chemical precipitate = 2.0 x 170 = 340 mg/l
Ws = 0.43 x 0.60 x 180 + (30 – 20) = 56 mg/l
Total solids = 176 + 340 + 56 = 572 mg/l
This is approximately 5 times the weight of dry solids calculated for alum treatment in
Problem 14.21
14.23 (a) Figure 1.
(b) Ws= 2.0 x 0.38 x 2000 / 1000 x 200 = 304 kg/d

WF = (30 – 3) x 2000 / 1000 = 54 kg/d
Organic solids in the digested sludge
= 0.75 (304 + 54)= 270 kg/d
oP in organic solids = 0.02 x 270 = 5.4 kg/d
oP in effluent solids = 0.02 x 3 x 2000 / 1000 = 0.1 kg/d
Solutions Manual
Page 214
(10  0.5)  2000
iP precipitated   5.5  13.5 kg/d
1000
244
AlPO4   13.5  53 kg/d
62
2000 600
Alum remaining  190   (13.5)  249 kg/d
1000 62
Al(OH)3 = 249 (156/600) = 65 kg/d
270  53  65
Weight of cake   2200 kg/d
0.18
(c) Combined residual (NH2Cl and NHCl2)
Sulfur dioxide (or sodium metasulfite)
14.24 (a) Iron Applied = 2300 x 8.34 x 0.088

Influent phosphorus = 17.7 x 8.34 x 7.1
1690
  1.61
1050
Iron precipitated = 1690 – 17.7 x 8.34 x 1.4
Phosphorus removed = 1050 – 17.7 x 8.34 x 1.0
1480
  1.64
900
1480  100
(b) Iron in sludge solids  28,000
 5.3%
14.25 Iron applied = 60 x 55.8

Phosphorus removed = 8 x 162
= 2.6
Using Eq. 14.6 for 8 mg/l of P,
FePO4 reacted = 8 x 150 / 31 = 39 mg/l
FeCl3 reacted = 8 x 162 / 31 = 42 mg/l
FeCl3 remaining = 60 – 42 = 18 mg/l
Remaining FeCl3 reacts with lime to precipitate Fe(OH)3.
18( 2  107)
Fe(OH)3 precipitate   24 mg/l
162
18(3  56)
CaO reacted   9 mg/l
( 2  162)
CaO remaining = 50 – 9 = 41 mg/l
Remaining CaO reacts to precipitate calcium hardness.
41( 2  100)
CaCO3 precipitate   145 mg/l
56
SS removal = 230 mg/l
Total solids = 39 + 24 + 145 + 230 = 430 mg/l = 3600 lb/mil gal
Sludge volume = 3500 / (0.08 x 8.34) = 5400 gal/mil gal
Solutions Manual
Page 215
14.26 Section 14.12. Under normal operating conditions, nitrification is limited in activated-
sludge processes because of loss of bacterial nitrifier populations in waste sludge.
Nevertheless, with warm wastewater in warm climates, partial nitrification can occur
since the increased rate of growth of nitrifying bacteria exceeds the loss in sludge
wasting. A long aeration period and sludge age enhance nitrification.
14.27 For phosphorus values in Fig. 14.7, the percentages based on 7 mg/l tP are given below.
(Corresponding BOD percentages are given in brackets.)
Influent: 7 mg/l tP = 100% (BOD = 100%)
Primary sludge: 1.1 mg tP = 16%
Settled ww: 5.9 mg/l tP = 84% (BOD = 65%)
WAS: 1.3 mg tP = 18%
Effluent: 0.6 mg/l oP = 9%
4.0 mg/l iP = 57%
4.6 mg/l tP = 66% (BOD = 15%)
For nitrogen values in Fig. 14.9, the percentages based on 35 mg/l tN are given below.
(Corresponding BOD percentages are given in brackets.)
Influent : 35 mg/l = 100% (BOD = 100%)
Primary sludge: 5 mg/l = 14%
Settled ww: 30 mg/l = 86% (Bod = 65%)
WAS: 4 mg/l = 11%
Without nitrification
Effluent: 2 mg/l org-N = 6%
24 mg/l ammonia-N = 68%
0 mg/l nitrate-N = 0%
25 mg/l tN = 74% (BOD = 15%)
With substantial nitrification

Effluent: 2 mg/l org-N = 6%
5 mg/l ammonia-N = 14%
15 mg/l nitrate-N = 43%
22 mg/l tN = 63% (BOD <15%)
14.28 In anaerobic digestion, 40-50% of the organic-N in the sludge is released in biological
decomposition of solids as ammonia-N and returned to the influent wastewater in the
digester supernatant. This amounts to approximately 4 mg/l of the 9 mg/l removed in the
primary and waste-activated sludges. Since the wastewater already contains excess
nitrogen, this 4 mg/l passes through the plant and out in the effluent.
14.29 (a) Nitrification rate decreases 50% for every 10-12°C temperature drop.
(b) From Fig. 14.10, the rate decreases about 25%. Reduced temperature and pH can be
compensated for by increasing sludge age (mean cell residence time).
Solutions Manual
Page 216
14.30 Aeration period = (14,300 / 13,000) 24 = 26 h
315  13,000
BOD loading  14,300
 286 g/m3·d = 17.9 lb/1000 ft3/d
1200  14,300
Sludge age  8  13,000  1,400,000  11 .4 d
ˆ N  0.47e 0.098(1815)  0.631 d-1
2.0
 N  0.631  0.421 d-1
1.0 2.0
Correcting for pH,  N = 0.80 x 0.421 = 0.337 d-1
1
C   3.0 d, with steady-state flow
0.337
Assuming a peaking factor of 1.4 to compensate for diurnal flow,
 C  1.4  3.0  4.2 d, with diurnal flow pattern.
Complete nitrification is expected to occur.
14.31 BOD demand = 130 mg/l

Nitrogen oxygen demand = (24 + 4) 4.6 = 129 mg/l
Remaining alkalinity = 320 – (28 x 7.2) = 118 mg/l
14.32 (a) Aeration period = (6730 / 10,000)24 = 16.2 h

Design aeration period = (6730 / 10,000) 24 = 16.2 h
260  13,000
BOD loading   502 g/m3·d = 31 lb / 1000 ft3/d
6730
200  10,000
Design BOD loading   297 g/m3·d = 19 lb / 1000 ft3/d
6730
(b) Sludge age based on volatile suspended solids values
1600  6730
  5.33d
9  13,000  8000  340  0.70
Theoretical mean cell residence time calculations are below:
ˆ N  0.47e 0.098(1915)  0.700 d-1
5.0
 N  0.700  0.583 d-1
1.0 5.0
Correcting for pH,  N = 0.80 x 0.583 = 0.466 d-1
1
0.466
Assuming a peaking factor of 1.5 to compensate for diurnal flow,
 C  1.5  2.14  3.20 d < 5.33 d
Recalculating mean cell residence time with a peaking factor for the existing effluent of
20 mg/l of ammonia nitrogen
 C  2.80 d < 5.33 d
Solutions Manual
Page 217
The actual sludge age exceeds both theoretical mean cell residence times. Nevertheless,
the calculated values may be adversely affected by: inaccurate measurements of plant
performance particularly in the volume and concentration of solids in waste-activated
sludge, use of hypothetical equations that may not accurately represent reality for this
system, and/or inappropriate selection of the assumed peak factors.
(c)Yes. The DO levels should be above 1.0 mg/l for no inhibition of nitrification.
BOD demand = 1.4 x 260 x 13,000 / 1000 = 4730 kg/d of DO
Total N in influent = 56 x 13,000 / 1000 = 728 kg/d
Org N in effluent = 1 x 13,000 / 1000 = 13 kg/d
Org N in waste sludge = 0.06 x 340 x 8000 / 1000 = 163 kg/d
Ammonia N in effluent = 20 x 13,000 / 1000 = 260 kg/d
Influent N converted to nitrate = 728 – (13 + 163 + 260) = 292 kg/d
NOD demand = 4.6 x 292 = 1340 kg/d
Total oxygen demand = 4730 + 1340 = 6070 kg/d
(d) From Table A.10, Cs = 9.4 mg/l at 19°C

730  17
C'  9.4  9.0 mg/l
760  17
Using E. 12.102
(0.8  9.0  1.0)
R  84 1.0219 20  0.9  50 kg/h
9.2
Total oxygen transfer for 4 aerators operating at
C t  1.0 mg/l for 24 h  4  50  24  4800 kg/d
The actual oxygen transfer may be more or less depending on the DO concentrations in
the mixed liquor over the 24-h period. The rate is probably less than 50 kg/h during the
night when CS > 1.0 mg/l and more during the period of maximum loading when C S < 0.4
mg/l. In either case, the aeration capacity appears to be inadequate and limiting
nitrification at the current loading.
(e) Calculating total oxygen demand with ammonia N in the effluent of 5.0 mg/l:
NOD for ammonia N in effluent = 5 x 13,000 / 1000 = 65 kg/d
Other values have been calculated in part (c).
Influent N to nitrate = 728 – (13 + 163 + 65) = 487 kg/d
NOD demand = 4.6 x 487 = 2240 kg/d
Total oxygen demand = 4730 + 2240 = 6970 kg/d
Calculating R for an R0 of 150 kg/h and Ct = 1.0 mg/l,
(0.8  9.0  1.0)
R  150 1.0219 20  0.9  74.8 kg/h
9.2
Total oxygen transfer for 4 aerators operating at
C t  2.0 mg/l for 24 h  4  74.8  24  7180 kg/d
Solutions Manual
Page 218
This oxygen transfer is essentially equivalent to the oxygen demand. If by calculating R
at 2.0 mg/l, the dissolved oxygen during the period of maximum loading does not drop
below 1.0 mg/l, than larger aerators should be considered to allow a design loading of
6500 m3/d per aeration tank.
(e) For the first field study, ensure that the plant is operating in a reasonably steady-state
condition. Record wastewater flow rate and collect influent and effluent samples every 2
h over a 24-h period. Test each grab sample and the 24-h composite for BOD, SS, and
ammonia-N concentrations. Every 2 h measure the DO at a minimum of 4 representative
locations in the aeration tnk at various locations and depths. Measure temperature of the
mixed liquor, MLVSS concentrations, and quantity of waste sludge and VS
concentration. Plot the influent and effluent BOD, SS, and ammonia-N values as both
kg/h and mg/l versus time for evidence of short-circuiting. Calculate the sludge age.
Consider a second field study if more data are deemed necessary and the following
procedure is feasible. Split the wastewater flow between the two aeration basins so that
the influent to one is about 5000 m3/d with the other receiving about 8000 m3/d. After
steady-state conditions are established, repeat the above field-study procedures. The
potential problem is degradation in quality of the plant effluent.
14.33 ˆ N  0.47e
0.098 (1515 )
 0.470 d-1
Correcting for pH:  N = 0.71 x 0.470 = 0.334 d-1
2 .0
 N  0.334  0.223 d-1
1.0 2.0
1
0.223
Correcting for peak factors,
 C  1.5  1.2  4.50  8.1 d
14.34 Average ammonia load = 1500 x 25 = 37,500 g/d = 83 lb/d

Maximum ammonia load = 1.5 x 37.5 = 56.3 kg/d = 120 lb/d
From Fig. 14.12 at 16°C and 1500 mg/l MLVS and correction for pH = 7.4 using Fig.
14.10, the permissible load = 13 x 0.91 x 16 = 189 g/m3·d
Maximum V = 56,300 / 189 = 300 m3
Minimum V = 37,500 / 189 = 200 m3
Flow equalization will probably reduce the peak ammonia loading to 1.0 – 1.2 times the
average. Therefore, the aeration basin volume can be reduced from 300 to 200 – 240 m3.
14.35 (a) The new effluent standards need clarification by the regulatory agency. Do the 2.0
mg/l tP and 5.0 mg/l ammonia-N apply to 30-consecutive-day average concentrations of
composite samples? What about maximum daily or weekly average? Is the ammonia
standard applicable all year-round? P is usually limited to reduce eutrophication. Is
Solutions Manual
Page 219
fertilization of the receiving watercourse a problem? Ammonia-N is most likely to be
limited because of toxicity, although nitrogen oxygen demand may also be a
consideration. Is ammonia-N really causing pollution of the receiving water? The costs
of P removal and nitrification are going to be significant for the town of Nancy with a
population of only 8700 people. The question is: “ Are environmental benefits going to
be realized by advanced wastewater treatment?”
A treatment system using extended aeration by diffused aeration in basins and sludge
stabilization by aerobic digestion is designed neither to remove P nor for nitrification.
The effluent tP will not be significantly less than influent tP. The degree of nitrification
depends on wastewater temperature, hydraulic and N loading, and operational parameters
such as sludge age and F/M. During most months of the year, only partial nitrification
will occur and in winter most influent N is likely to appear as ammonia nitrogen in
effluent.
(a) Evaluating of performance involves tracing P and N through the treatment plant
periodically throughout the year. Influent and effluent samples should be collected on
one day each week (alternating the day of the week) at a frequency of every 2 hours. If
automatic samplers are used hourly samples can be collected. The flow meter should be
read at the times of sampling or the reading can be taken from a recorded flow pattern.
At the time of collection, some of the grab samples should be tested for temperature and
pH. After compositing over the 24-h sampling period, the samples should be tested for at
least the following: BOD, SS, ammonia-N, tN (Kjeldahl N), iP and tP. If nitrification is
occurring, grab samples of the effluent must be collected and immediately fixed with acid
for testing later. (Composite samples cannot be reliably tested for nitrate since the
bacteria will denitrify the wastewater under anaerobiosis.) On the testing day, the
aerating sludge in the digester, the belt filter cake, and return flows of wash water and
supernatant should be tested of tN, ammonia-N, and iP. All operational parameters
should be recorded including: wastewater flow, activated-sludge recirculation, quantity of
sludge wasted, MLSS and DO in aeration, SS in the WAS, return of supernatant and wash
water, and any other operation or maintenance considerations of importance.
The original procedures prepared for a field study often require revision. After one or
two trial runs, the methods of sampling and testing may need to be revised and new
procedures developed for evaluation of the plant.
If the treatment plant is significantly under the design load, the results of sampling and
testing may be misleading. For example, if nitrification is occurring at underloading, it
may not occur at design load. Consider the feasibility of isolating one half of the plant
including one aeration basin, one clarifier, and one or two digesters. Operate them at full
design load by splitting the influent unevenly between the two halves. Test results would
be more realistic if this can be done.
(b) The only reliable method for removal of P is chemical coagulation with biological
aeration (Section 14.8). The least expensive coagulant is waste pickle liquor from steel
Solutions Manual
Page 220
processing. If a source is available for the town of Nancy, discuss this waste reuse with
the industry. The easiest and safest coagulant to handle and feed is alum.
The only reliable method of nitrification to ensure meeting an effluent standard of 5 mg/l
ammonia-N is a second-stage suspended-growth plug-flow aeration process (Section
14.12).
Chemical precipitation with biological aeration will require a chemical building for
feeders and storage. Modification of the aeration system will probably not be required.
Figure 14.5a, without primary clarification, is a general flow scheme for the process.
Alum dosage and increase in dry solids in the sludge can be estimated by calculations
(Section 14.9). Other than increased solids, alum precipitates are not expected to
adversely influence aerobic digestion or pressure dewatering of waste sludge.
Design of nitrification by suspended-growth aeration is discussed in Section 14.11.

Figure 14.11 is a general flow diagram. Experience in the disposal of nitrifying waste
sludge is limited and should be evaluated at existing plants with similar treatment
systems. Nitrifying sludge has a lower solids concentration and, therefore, it may
influence digestion and dewatering. The textbook does not discuss the handling and
disposal of nitrifying sludge.
(c) For P removal, a full-scale test is recommended by setting up a feeder to temporarily

apply alum ahead of the aeration basins. Composite sampling and testing of the influent,
effluent, and WAS should be performed to determine their characteristics at the optimum
coagulant dosage. The period of operation should be long enough to evaluate the effects
on aerobic digestion and dewatering by the belt presses.
A pilot plant for nitrification of the effluent is recommended during full-scale testing,
however, acceptance by the town board is an unrealistic expectation. Remember Nancy
has a population of less than 9000. Conducting a full-scale test for alum application may
be accepted since the only expense is the chemical and use of a mixing tank and feeder.
Successful operation of a pilot plant requires special construction and supervision by
skilled personnel over an extended period of time. Perhaps, the town can convince some
other agency to provide the majority of the funding. Based on my experience, town
administrators are reluctant to spend tax dollars on experimental data; they want to be
able to show the taxpayers “bricks and mortar.”
14.36 (a) A carbon source like methanol is needed in denitrification to act as an oxygen
acceptor and to asupply carbon for biological synthesis.
(b) CH3OH = 0.9 x 8 x 2.5 x 25 = 70 g/m3
70
Methanol volume   90 ml/m3
0.82  0.95
14.37 Maximum ammonia-N load = 1.5 x 30 x 30 x 8.34 = 11,300 lb/d
Permissible tank loadings (Figs. 14.12 and 14.10)
= 15 x 0.71 = 10.7 lb NH3-N / 1000 ft3·d
Solutions Manual
Page 221
11,300
Aeration basin V  10.7  1,070,000 ft3
1000
Based on overflow rates of 500 to 400 gpd/ft2, required clarifier area = 60,000 to 75,000
ft2.
Maximum nitrate load = 1.5 x 27 x 30 x 8.34 = 10,100 lb/d
Permissible loading (Fig. 14.15) = 50 lb NO3-N / 1000 ft3/d
10,000
Denitrification basin V  50  200,000 ft3
1000
Clarifier area = 60,000 to 75,000 ft2
Methanol dosage = 0.9 x 5 + 2.5 x 27 = 72 mg/l
14.38 The DO in the aeration tank effluent is likely to be 2 mg/l, nitrite can be assumed to be
negligible, and nitrate 24 mg/l: [26 – (1 + 2) = 23 mg/l and 30 – (1 + 4) = 25 mg/l].
Using Eq. 14.27, Methanol dosage = 0.9 x 2 + 2.5 x 25 = 64 mg/l. Yes.
14.39 In the flow scheme illustrated in Fig. 14.19, more nitrogen is removed by splitting the
influent between two anoxic zones. This allows a portion of the nitrate produced from
the wastewater fed to the firs anoxic zone to be removed in the second.
14.40 1.0 mg of NO3-N = 62 / 14 mg NO3

48 62
Oxygen in 62 / 14 mg NO3    3.4 mg
62 14
Therefore, 2.0 mg of NO3-N contains 3.4 mg of oxygen.
In Fig. 14.17(b), 21% of the influent nitrogen is denitrified in the anoxic zone. If the
nitrate concentration in the return sludge (QR = Q) is estimated to be 14 mg/l with the
potential to satisfy 48 mg/l (3.4 x 14) of BOD, the influent BOD is reduced from 240
mg/l to 192 mg/l.
The advantage of recirculation of nitrified wastewater to the anoxic zone are to reduce
BOD and the reduced nitrate in the effluent reduces the potential of denitrification in the
sludge blanket in the final clarifier that results in floating sludge solids caused by
degasification.
14.41 Concentrations of influent nitrogen converted from ammonia to nitrate

= 27 - 1 = 26
NOD = 26 x 4.6 = 120 mg/l of dissolved oxygen
Concentration of nitrate reduced to nitrogen gas
= 27 – 4 = 23 mg/l
BOD satisfied by denitrification = 23 x 3.4 = 78 mg/l
14.42 1. Briefly describe the health risk of nitrate as being infant methemoglobinemia and the
lack of health risk on healthy adults (Section 8.5).
Solutions Manual
Page 222
2. Trace nitrogen through a conventional treatment plant (Section 14.11, Figure 14.9).
Compare removal of nitrogen to removal of organic matter.
3. Discuss removal of nitrogen by the following advanced wastewater treatment

processes. (1) Biological nitrification (Section 14.12) and biological denitrification using
methanol (Section 14.13). Explain how extensive these processes are by comparing them
to conventional treatment and the high cost of methanol. (2) Biological nitrification-
denitrification (Section 14.13). Discuss the limited feasibility of this process caused by
low wastewater temperature and inability to achieve an effluent concentration as low as
10 mg/l even with optimum operating conditions (Figure 14.19). (3) Agricultural
irrigation (Section 14.16). Discuss limitations of land availability and climate.
4. Summary: Although treatment for nitrogen removal is possible, all of the processes
have significant technical and economic limitations. Therefore, advanced wastewater
treatment for nitrogen removal is rarely applied. Only with demonstrable environmental
risk and/or risk to human health can nitrogen removal be considered.
14.43 Refer to Section 14.15. In the State of California, recycled water for irrigation of food
crops requires disinfected tertiary treatment. After high-quality biological treatment, the
influent to the tertiary granular-media filtration is not exceed 5 NTU and never to exceed
10 NTU. After coagulation with alum and polymer and filtration not to exceed 5 gpm/ft 2,
turbidity is limited to a maximum average of 2 NTU not to exceed 5 NTU for more than
15 min and never to exceed 10 NTU. Disinfection by chlorination in a plug-flow contact
tank is to provide a C·t of not less than 450 (mg/l)·min and not exceed an average MPN
of 2.2 coliforms/100 ml nor exceed a maximum of 23/100 ml. The State of Arizona for
food consumed raw specifies allowable limits of 2.2 fecal coliforms/100 ml not to exceed
25/100 ml, 1 enteric virus/40 liters, and no detectable Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia
lamblia, and Ascaris lumbricoides.
14.44 Reliability (dependability) is the confidence that the treatment plant performance will
achieve the required performance specified by the design engineer. Ways to increase
reliability are: provision for emergency disposal or storage of effluent, multiple filter
units, standby chemical feeders and chlorinators, alarm devices installed to warn of
process malfunction, alternate power supply, and adequate funds for operation and
maintenance.
14.45 Refer to section 14.15. A biologically stabilized wastewater is required to prevent

offensive odors and a coliform standard is usually established for the health protection of
agricultural workers. Acceptable processing is often conventional biological treatment
and extended storage in ponds (Section 14.16). Public access must be controlled by
fencing warning signs. Public access must be made to ensure the irrigation water is not
used for drinking water or for irrigation of foods for human consumption.
14.46 Wastewater loading = 40 + 10 x 12 + 0 – 20 = 140 in./yr = 0.38 in./d
Solutions Manual
Page 223
1.0  3.07  12
Land area required   100 ac
0.38
14.47 Using equation 14.23, precipitation + wastewater loading = evapotranspiration +

percolation + runoff
Precipitation = 4.2 in./mon.
Wastewater applied = 1.6 mgd x 36.8 ac-in./mil gal
= 59 ac-in/d x 30 days/mon.
= 1770 ac-in./mon.
Evapotranspiration = 5.7 in./mon.
Percolation = 12 in./mon.
Runoff = 0
1770 1770
Acres required for water balance =   131 acres
5.7  12  4.2 13.5
Nitrogen applied = 27 mg/l x 0.8 (fraction not denitrified) x 1.6 mgd x 8.34 x 30d
= 8,650 lb/mon.
Crop uptake = 400 lb/acre/yr x 131 acres / 12 = 4379 lb/mon.
Pounds in percolation = applied – crop uptake
= 8650 – 4380 = 4270 lb/mon /131 acres =32.6 lb/ac/mon.
Pounds in percolate = 32.6 x 30 = 978 lb/ac
12
Percolation =  30  9.78 mil gal/ac
36.8
978
Concentration in percolate  9.78  12 mg/l, which exceeds the 10 mg/l maximum.
8.34
Irrigated area must be increased based on nitrogen loading.
14.48 All tabulated values below are in acre-inches. For each monthly line, the values represent
the last day of the month: Effluent available at end of month, evaporation loss during
month, net increase in volume at end of month, water used during the month, and water
remaining in storage.
Net
Effluent Evaporation Monthly Water Water in
Mon Available Loss Increase Used Storage
Oct 20,100 - (4.6 - 0.3) 300 = 18,810 0 18,810
Nov 19,400 - (2.3 - 0.5) 300 = 18,860 0 37,670
Dec 19,800 - (1.0 - 1.0) 300 = 19,800 0 57,470
Jan 19,000 - (1.1 - 1.2) 300 = 19,030 0 76,500
Feb 16,600 - (1.6 - 1.1) 300 = 16,450 0 92,950
Mar 17,800 - (4.0 - 1.1) 300 = 16,930 22,000 87,880
Apr 17,900 - (5.0 - 0.7) 300 = 16,610 22,000 82,490
May 19,400 - (7.4 - 0.2) 300 = 17,240 36,500 63,230
Jun 20,400 - (8.9 - 0.1) 300 = 17,760 36,500 44,490
Jul 22,300 - (9.5 - 0.0) 300 = 19,450 25,500 38,440
Aug 22,300 - (8.6 - 0.0) 300 = 19,720 44,000 14,160
Solutions Manual
Page 224
Sep 20,700 - (6.2 - 0.1) 300 = 18,870 33,000 30
219,530 219,500
14.49 The State of California considers golf course irrigation as landscape irrigation with
restricted access and application using low quality water with standards of conventional
biological treatment with disinfection and 23 coliforms/100 ml (Figure 14.22). The State
of Arizona is “landscaped area, restricted access” with a standard of 200 fecal
coliforms/100ml (Table 14.4). Restricted irrigation involves fencing and warning signs
around the perimeter, buffer zones to prevent aerosols from drifting to public access
areas, isolation and identification of reclaimed water piping and, in the case of a golf
course, written warning on the score cards that irrigation water is reclaimed wastewater.
14.50 The following are the sequential processes in agricultural in Tallahassee, FL.
1. The raw wastewaters are low-strength domestic wastewater with commercial
wastewater but no industrial wastewaters.
2. The wastewaters are biologically treated in two plants followed by chlorination
resulting in high-quality effluents (Table 14.8).
3. Holding ponds provide storage for flow equalization for pumping to center-pivot
irrigators at the farm site. The ponds also provide emergency storage if irrigation is
interrupted.
4. The pond water is screened through a strainer with clear openings of 1.0 mm 2 to
prevent plugging of the irrigation nozzles.
5. Sixteen center-pivot irrigators spread the water on Bermuda grass, ryegrass, corn
and soybean.
6. As a portion of the applied water percolates to groundwater, the crops remove
nitrogen and other plant nutrients, the slow seepage through the vadose zone
adsorbs many trace organic and inorganic chemicals, and adsorbs viruses and
bacteria. The long residence time in the vadose zone also allows for die-off of
pathogens.
14.51 For a description of a center-pivot irrigator, view Fig. 14.23(b) and Fig. 14.24 and the text
describing these figures. Also, the third paragraph of Section 14.16 briefly describes
methods of irrigation. Center-pivot irrigation is the only suitable method of water
application on highly permeable soils like the fine sandy soil at the farm site and for this
large a project it is the only economical method of sprinkling. Groundwater monitoring
wells at varying depths are located as shown in Fig. 14.25. Comprehensive testing of
groundwater samples ensure that water quality meets drinking water standards.
14.52 The sequential processes in agricultural irrigation in Orange County, FL, are illustrated in
Fig. 14.26.
1. The raw wastewater is approximately one-half domestic, one-quarter commercial,
and one-quarter industrial. To prohibit discharge of toxic substances in the industrial
wastewaters, regulations are established for pretreatment at industrial sites.
2. The wastewater is biologically treated by activated-sludge aeration without primary
sedimentation. The majority of the flow is processed for partial removal of nitrogen
Solutions Manual
Page 225
by biological nitrification-denitrification to reduce the nitrogen level to less than 10
mg/l (Fig. 14.27).
3. After secondary clarification, tertiary treatment is by chemical coagulation, direct
granular-media filtration, and plug-flow chlorination with an extended contact time.
4. After storage at the plant, some of the reclaimed water is used for irrigation of urban
areas near the site of the treatment plant. But, the majority of the reclaimed water is
pumped to the Water Conserv II Distribution Center (Fig. 14.28) for irrigation of
citrus groves and rapid infiltration. Seventy four customer turnouts provide
irrigation for citrus and nurseries.
5. For citrus irrigation, micro-sprinklers are located under trees [14.28(b)].
6. All surplus reclaimed water is distributed to 58 RIBS (rapid infiltration basins) for
groundwater recharge [(14.28(c)].
14.53 The quality of the effluent after tertiary treatment for urban irrigation reuse meets the
chemical and microbiological limits established by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection, which requires a water free of all potential human pathogens
including enteric viruses. The effluent standard of less than 10 mg/l of total nitrogen is
for groundwater recharge. The quality limits for citrus irrigation include 27 chemical
limits (arsenic through zinc) plus BOC, COD, conductivity, and pH. Some of the
chemical limits are established to ensure healthy tree growth and quality of the citrus for
human consumption. In addition to the limit of 10 mg/l, recharge water for rapid
infiltration must be free of toxic substances. Samples of recharged groundwater
withdrawn from monitoring wells located in the infiltration sites must meet drinking
water standards.
14.54 Restricted urban landscape irrigation: areas for beautification only, highway medians,
golf courses.
Unrestricted: public parks, school playgrounds, private lawns and gardens.
1. Economic benefits: reduced cost of tertiary treatment compared to water reclamation
required for discharge to Boca Ciega Bay and Tampa Bay and reduction in potable
water consumption.
2. The primary purpose in reuse is irrigation of landscape areas both public and private.
3. During the dry season of greatest reuse, the typical residential lawn requires water
reclaimed from wastewater discharged by five residential sewer connections.
14.55 Restricted urban landscape irrigation: cemeteries, highway medians, landscaping in

industrial areas. Unrestricted irrigation sites: public parks and playgrounds, single and
multiple family residences, public and commercial facility landscaping.
14.56 The primary problem of the biological-activated carbon process is the inability to
separate the powdered activated carbon from the ash after wet-air regeneration. Thus, a
portion of the regenerated slurry must be wasted to prevent buildup of ash in the mixed
liquor and be replaced continuously by dosing virgin PAC.
Solutions Manual
Page 226
14.57 1. The reservoir water is pumped into a pipeline to the 10 injection wells in Hueco
Bolson, showing in Fig. 14.35. (The term “bolson” pertains to a sediment-filled basin
surrounded by mountains.)
2. The injection wells are 600 to 800 ft deep with multiple gravel-packed screens to
discharge reclaimed water into the granular strata. The design injection rate of each well
is 700 gpm by gravity flow under a pressure head of 16 to 20 ft in the water tank at the
end of the pipeline.
3. Based on linear groundwater velocities near the zone of highest hydraulic flow, the
calculated time of flow to production wells closest to injection wells is 3.5 years. Based
on results of the hydrogeology by U.S. Geological Survey, the residence time of injected
water indicated a significantly longer residence time of 6 years.
4. Filtration through the aquifer involves a number of water quality changes including:
dilution, adsorption of contaminants, chemical interactions, decay of unstable substances,
physical filtration, and die-off of microorganisms.
5. Drinking water withdrawn from the aquifer is chlorinated prior to distribution.
14.58 Read the last paragraph on Section 14.23.
14.59 Refer to text in Section 14.24 under Initial Water Factory 21 and Coastal Barrier and
Fig. 14.36.
Lime precipitation: precipitation of heavy metals, phosphate, and suspended
organic matter, and disinfection.
Recarbonation: stabilization by pH reduction with carbon dioxide.
Granular-media filtration: removal of particulate matter to protect carbon
columns.
Activated-carbon adsorption: removal of nonpolar organic compounds and some
heavy metals.
The following membrane system in the Groundwater Replenishment System replaced the
above processes.
Refer to text in Section 14.24 under Groundwater Replenishment System and Fig. 14.39
Filter screens: remove fine suspended solids.
Microfiltration: membranes in the pore size range of 0.7 – 7 μm (Refer to Section
11.39.)
Break tank: flow control of filtrate
14.60 El Paso, TX: Groundwater injection to augment drinking water supply.

Orange County and City of Orlando, FL: Inland disposal of wastewater by following
reuse applications: Restricted agricultural irrigation, unrestricted urban irrigation,
groundwater recharge.
Organ County Water District, CA: Basin recharge of groundwater to augment drinking
water supply, injection to groundwater as a barrier to saltwater intrusion
St. Petersburg, FL: High cost of reclamation of wastewater for discharge to Tampa Bay,
reduce the consumption of municipal water by using reclaimed water for urban landscape
irrigation.
Solutions Manual
Page 227
Tallahassee, FL: High cost of reclamation for discharge to surface water, restricted
agricultural irrigation, groundwater recharge
Water Factory 21 (original facility): Injection to groundwater as a barrier to saltwater
intrusion
Solutions Manual
Page 228

Solutions Manual 412

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solutions Manual 412

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Solutions Manual

Water Supply and Pollution Control

Warren Viessman, Jr., P.E.

Mark J. Hammer, Emeritus Engineer

Elizabeth M. Perez, P.E.

Paul A. Chadik, P.E.

WATER RESOURCES PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT

3.1 The answer to this question will vary by location.

3.2 reservoir area = 3900/640 = 6.1 sq. mi.

3.3 reservoir area = 1700 hec = 17 X 106 sq. meters

 state regulatory agencies

Event (n) Precip (inches) Tr = n/m Freq. (% years)

Month Inflow I Draft O Cumulative Deficiency Cumulative

Feb 31 37.3 31 6.3 6.3

3.9 S = 128,000/10*100*640 = 0.20

0.0002 = V/(400 X 100)

3.16 Reservoir capacity = 750 acre-feet

3.17 Constant annual yield = 1500 gpm

(a) gain or loss in storage = ?

3.19 Use equation 3.29

3.20 q= 000084*8*22/15 = 0.000986

528 *850 * log(10) gpd

3.23 Equation 3.20 is applicable

3.24 Using Equation 3.35, u can be computed

1.87 * 2002 * 3 *104

114 .6 * 9.1 * 300

3.25 (a) Using Equation 3.35, u can be computed as follows:

(c) Follow the procedure used in (a)

3.26 (a) Using Equation 3.31, u can be computed as follows:

100 * 100 * 0.001

100 * 100 * 0.001

3.27 (a) Using Equation 3.31, u can be computed as follows:

150 * 150 * 0.001

(b) Follow the procedure used in (a)

500 * 500 * 0.001

K f * 2 *  * ( h2  h1 ) 600 * 2 * 3.1416 * 100 * 8

528 * Q * log10 ( r2 / r1 ) 528 * 1200 * log10 (500 / 75)

3.34 Use Equation 3.23

3.35 Use Equation 3.37 and refer to figure which follows

3.39 Use Equation 3.23

 shutting off the water while brushing your teeth

5.1 2.75 x 106 ac-ft = 0.90 x 1012 gallons

5.2 Q = 200 x 0.1 = 20 cfs = 12.93 mgd

5.3 Answers will vary.

5.4 Answers will vary.

5.5 Answers will vary.

5.6 Irrigation water use = 3 ac-ft/acre

5.7 Answers will vary.

5.8 Answers will vary.

5.9 (a) Assume lot sizes = 10,000 sq ft

5.10 Answers will vary.

5.11 number of dwelling units = 1000 x 4 = 4000

5.13 7/2.5 = 9/X

5.14 1995 = 200,000 = 43 mgd

5.15 Treatment capacity in 1995 = 35 mgd

5.17 Answers will vary.

5.18 450 x 4 = 1800 dwellings

6.1 This is one potential solution:

6.6 Use Equation 6.15 in the second form

Since V2 = Q2/A2, the Darcy-Weisbach equation can be restated as

(2) For trial 2, choose P = 50.

Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 8.61 – (3.69 + 8.14) = - 3.22 cfs

(3) For trial 3, try P = 56

Q3 – (Q1 + Q2) = 10.9 – (3.57 + 7.50) = - 0.17 cfs

3.9 S = 128,000/10100640 = 0.20

3.20 q= 000084822/15 = 0.000986

528 850 log(10) gpd

7.26 Domestic: 100201000 = 2.0 mgd