DISINFECTION

Lecture 12 & 13
DISINFECTION

3/8/2018
 Primary disinfection
 Inactivation of microorganisms in the
water

 Secondary disinfection
 Maintaining a disinfectant residual in
the treated water distribution system

2
DISINFECTION

3/8/2018
 Commonly used disnfection agents

1. Free chlorine
2. Combined chlorine (chlorine combined with
ammonia)
3. Ozon
4. Chlorine dioxide
5. UV light

3
 3/8/2018
a THMs = trihalomethanes.
b HAAs = haloacetic acids.
c NDMA = N: nitrosodimethylamine. 4
3/8/2018
5
CONTRACTORS USED FOR CHEMICAL
OXIDANT

3/8/2018
 Separate unit process

 3 forms of Chlorine
 Ideal plug flow reactors
 Baffled, serpentine contact chamber

 Long pipeline

 Ozone
 Bubble chamber
 Multiple chambers in series (due to short circuiting)

 UV
 Proprietary reactors
6
3/8/2018
7
DISINFECTION WITH FREE AND COMBINED
CHLORINE

3/8/2018
 Likely reactions when chlorine is added to water

 Reaction with water

Cl2 + H2O  HCl+HOCl
HCl  H+ + Cl- [ H  ][OCl  ]
Ka 
HOCl H+ + ClO- [ HOCl ]

HOCl (hypochlorous acid) effective disinfectant

available chlorine
effective disinfection at acidic pH

8
 3/8/2018
 Free Chlorine
 Chlorine may be used as an element (Cl 2 ),
 as sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), also known as bleach,
 as calcium hypochlorite [Ca(OCl)2
 as chlorinated lime (CaOCl 2 )

pH dependent, fast
b/w pH 6.0 and 8.5, sharp change from HOCl to
almost complete dissociation:
 Chlorine exists predominantly as HOCl at pH levels
between 4.0 and 6.0
 HOCl and/or OCl is defined as free available
chlorine or free chlorine. 9
 3/8/2018
Example 13-1. If 15 mg/L of
HOCl is added to a potable water
for disinfection and the final
measured pH is 7.0, what percent
of the HOCl is not dissociated?
Assume the temperature is 25oC.

10
pKa = 7.54 , Ka = 10-7.54 = 2.8x10-8

3/8/2018
[HOCl]=3.47[OCl-]

[HOCl] =3.47(22.37%)=77.6% 11
FORM OF CHLORINE

3/8/2018
 Calcium hypochlorite
 Ca(OCl)2- powder
 Less storage space than liquid bleach

 NaOCl (liquid) – bleach

 Easier chemical to handle and feed
 Manufacturing – (generate heat)

2NaOH  Cl2  NaOCl  NaCl  H 2O

12
 3/8/2018
 Elemental chlorine tends to decrease pH;
 each mg/L of chlorine added reduces the alkalinity by
up to 1.4 mg/L as CaCO 3 .

 Hypochlorites, contain excess alkali to enhance

their stability and tend to raise the pH
somewhat.
 To optimize disinfecting action, the design pH is
in the a range 6.5 to 7.5
13
CHEMISTRY OF COMBINED CHLORINE

3/8/2018
 Reaction with ammonia
 
NH  HOCl  NH 2 Cl  H 2O  H (monochlora min e)
4

NH 2 Cl  HOCl  NHCl2  H 2 O(dichlora min e)

NHCl2  HOCl  NCl3  H 2 O( trichlora min e)
Free chlorine = HOCl+OCl-
Combined Chlorine =NH2Cl+NHCl2+NCl3
Total Chlorine= free chlorine+combined chlorine

14
3/8/2018
15
CHEMISTRY OF COMBINED CHLORINE

3/8/2018
16
CHEMISTRY OF COMBINED CHLORINE

3/8/2018
 At low pH
 Zone A
NH 2Cl  H   NH 3Cl 
NH 3Cl   NH 2Cl  NHCl2  NH 4
 Principal reaction in Zone B
2 NH 3  3HOCl  N 2 ( g )  3HCl  3H 2O

NH 3  4 HOCl  HNO3  4 HCl  H 2O

Recent evidence (2000, 2001) use of combined chlorine can result in the formation of low
17
levels of 1-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) , a suspected human carcinogen
DISINFECTION WITH CHLORINE DIOXIDE

3/8/2018
 Generation of Chlorine dioxide
Sodium chlorite
2 NaClO 2  Cl2  2ClO 2 (g)  2 NaCl
2 NaClO 2  HOCl  2ClO 2 (g)  NaCl  NaOH
5NaClO 2  4HCl  4ClO 2 (g)  5NaCl  2H 2 O

18
DISINFECTION WITH CHLORINE DIOXIDE

3/8/2018
 Chlorine dioxide is a stable free radical
 at high concentrations, reacts violently with reducing
agents
 explosive with a lower explosive limit * (LEL)
 between 10 and 39 percent
 Under alkaline conditions chlorate chlorite

19
DISINFECTION WITH CHLORINE DIOXIDE

3/8/2018
 Sodium Chlorite
 Solution (25% NaOCl or less)
 Commercially available 38 or 25% solution

 Explosive mix
 If sodium chlorite is exposed to acid

 Crystallization
 Prone to crystallization at low temperature and/or high
concentration
 Obstruct flow in pipeline, valves etc.

 Dreid NaOCl – fire hazard (expose to too much water,

20
explosion is possible)
DISINFECTION WITH OZONE

3/8/2018
 An allotrope of oxygen with three oxygen atom

 Unstable at high concentration (>23%)

(explosive)
 Under ambient condition undergoes rapid decay

 Can not be stored and transported

 Once dissolved in water forms OH radical

 React with contaminants and microbes

 Direct oxidation (primary in disinfection)
 Through the action of OH
.
21
 DISINFECTION WITH OZONE

3/8/2018
 Ozone Decay and Ozone Demand
 Decay in water consistent with first order kinetics

initiators
peroxide ion
initiator

superoxide radicals

Slow process, decay is accelerated at higher pH

22
Understanding ozone reaction pathways and decay of residual ozone in natural waters: (a) influence of
initiators, promotors, and inhibitors (adapted from Hoign´e and Bader, 1976); (b) the ozone decay
wheel—reaction pathways in pure water (adapted from Hoign´e and Bader, 1976);
 HO· traps or inhibitors

3/8/2018
Understanding ozone reaction pathways and decay of residual ozone in natural waters: (c)
effect of fulvic acid and carbonate on ozone decay—all tests conducted at 20 C with GAC 23
◦

filtered, deionized tap water adjusted to pH 7, and C ∼ 8 mg/L. (Adapted from Reckhow et
0

al., 1986).
FACTORS THAT INFLUENCE STABILITY OF
AQUEOUS OZONE RESIDUALS

3/8/2018
Increases Stability Reduces Stability

Low pH High pH

High alkalinity Low alkalinity

Low TOC High TOC

Low temperature High Temperature

24
 OZONE GENERATION

3/8/2018
 Either pure oxygen, purchased as liquid oxygen
(LOX), or the oxygen in the air, is dissociated by
the impact of electrons from the discharge
electrode.
 The atomic oxygen then combines with
atmospheric oxygen to form ozone

If ambient air is used

corrodes the ozone generator

25
REDOX REACTIONS

3/8/2018
 Chemical disinfectants are oxidants

 comparison of the disinfectants based on their

oxidizing power

 chlorine compounds

26
The equivalent weight of a compound in an oxidation-
reduction reaction is calculated using its oxidation-
reduction half reaction

3/8/2018
27
 3/8/2018
Example 13-2. Estimate
the percent available
chlorine in Ca(OCl)2 .

28
3/8/2018
29
EXAMPLE 13-6 ESTIMATING BREAK-POINT
CHLORINE REQUIREMENTS (MHW)

3/8/2018
Ammonia is added to pure water in the
laboratory to reach a concentration of 1 mg
N/L. Estimate the chlorine dose needed to
reach break point for the following
conditions: (1) all the ammonia is converted
to nitrogen gas and (2) all the ammonia is
converted to nitrate ion. When using
breakpoint chlorination to remove
ammonia, which reaction requires less
chlorine?
30
SOLUTION

3/8/2018
1. Determine the chlorine dose needed to convert
ammonia to nitrogen gas.
2 NH 3  3HOCl  N 2 ( g )  3HCl  3H 2O

3 mol of HOCl is needed for every 2 mol of NH :3

31
 3/8/2018
2. Determine the chlorine dose to convert
ammonia to nitrate.
NH 3  4 HOCl  HNO3  4 HCl  H 2O
4 moles of HOCl is needed for each mole of
NH 3

Required dose = 20.2 mg Cl /mg N ×1 mg N/L = 20.2

2

mg Cl /L2

3. The reaction to nitrogen gas uses less chlorine.

32
DISINFECTION WITH UV LIGHT

3/8/2018
Medium-pressure UV low-pressure UV 33
ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Electromagnetic radiation (100-400 nm)

Produce melanin (“ a tan”)

Absorbed by the DNA 34

ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Electromagnetic radiation (100-400 nm)
 Photons
 Energy associated with each photon E=hc/λ

 More energy is associated with photon- more

dangerous it is for living organisms

 Germicidal range
 Limited by the adsorption of UV radiation by water
 Radiation having 200 nm or less can not penetrate in water

 Wavelength of UV – DNA can absorb

 Not occur above wavelength 300 nm

35
 200-300 nm
SOURCE OF ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Low-pressure, low-intensity lamps
 common
 Low-pressure, high-intensity lamps (new)
 Very small amount of the light energy emanating at
wavelength of 188 nm
 Vast majority of it emanating at 254 nm (same as
low-intensity lamps)

 Medium-pressure, high intensity lamps (new)

 Greatest output
 Emanating at number of wavelength
36
 3/8/2018
37
Ultraviolet sources and germicidal range: (a) ultraviolet portion of
electromagnetic spectrum, (b) output from low-pressure UV lamp, and (c)
output from medium-pressure UV lamp.
3/8/2018
38
3/8/2018
39
MECHANISM OF INACTIVATION

3/8/2018
 The photons in UV light react directly with the
nucleic acid in the target organism
 Damaging them
 Nucleic acid
 Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
 Ribonucleic acid (RNA)

40
3/8/2018
41
REACTIVATION

3/8/2018
 Mechanisms for repairing the damage
 Photoreactivation
 Take place in presence of light
 Cleaving of the nucleic acid dimmers with the enzyme DNA
photolyase
 Dark repair
 Light is not required
 Organisms have dark repair mechanisms show much

greater UV resistance

 In water treatment
 Net inactivation after photoreactivation is important
42
 CONCEPT OF ACTION SPECTRUM

3/8/2018
 The possible significance of UV irradiation at
different wavelength in disinfection

 Action spectrum
Number of organisms exposed to light,
organisms/100 mL

 dN 
Rate of change in number of organisms
Intensity of light at wavelength λ. W/m2

   N  I
exposed to light of wavelength λ

 dt  Coefficient of specific lethality for light of
wavelength λ, m2/J

 Action spectrum is a representation of Λλ over a range of

wavelengths
 Displayed as a plot of the ratio Λλ/ Λ245 vs λ

43
 3/8/2018
Λλ/ Λ245

Comparing action spectra for C. parvum and MS-2

coliphage with absorption spectrum for DNA.
44
ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT DOSE

3/8/2018
 UV dose to which the microorganisms are
exposed.

45
DISINFECTION WITH UV LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Particulate matter

46
3/8/2018
47
DISINFECTION WITH UV LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Influence of Dispersion
 UV systems (particularly medium
pressure)
 Characterize by overall contact time
 Much shorter

 Short circuiting and dispersion are difficult

design issue

48
 3/8/2018
Figure 13-39 Performance of UV reactor: (a) flow pattern and (b) UV dose based on two 49
alternative microorganism travel tracks. The microorganism on the left was exposed to a UV
dose of 14 J/m whereas the microorganism on the right was exposed to a UV dose of 138 J/m .
2 2

(Adapted from Chiu et al., 1999.)

DISINFECTION WITH UV LIGHT

3/8/2018
 Equipment configuration
 A UV disinfection system
 UV lamps
 Transparent quartz sleeves that surround the UV lamps

 Structure that supports the lamps and sleevs and hold

them in place
 Power supply for the system

 Cleaning system to maintain transparency of the quartz

sleeves

50
 3/8/2018
Typical examples of UV lamps: (a) low-pressure low intensity with
quartz sleeve removed from socket to expose UV lamp,
(b) medium-pressure high-intensity lamps with cleaning device

51
3/8/2018
52
3/8/2018
53
 KINETICS OF DISINFECTION

3/8/2018
 Classical Disinfection Kinetics
 Disinfection could be modeled as a pseudo-first order
reaction w.r. to the concentration of the organisms
(Dr. Chick, 1908)

Log (N/No) vs t

54
effect of the
concentration of
the disinfectant
is not
considered in

3/8/2018
Chick’s law

55
 CLASSICAL DISINFECTION KINETICS

3/8/2018
 Chick-Watson Model
Concentration of disinfectant,mg/L Value of given %age of inactivation, unitless

Cnt = const (Watson 1908)

Empirical constant
t= time required to achieve a constant %age of inactivation

n log( C )  log( t )  log( const )

slope=n=coefficient of dilution
n>1: efficiency of disinfection decrease with dilution
n<1: time is more important than concentration
56
n=1: concentration and time are equally important
3/8/2018
57
 CLASSICAL DISINFECTION KINETICS

3/8/2018
 Chick-Watson Model
rate of change in number of organisms with time
Disinfection coefficient of dilution, unitless
dN
  CW C n N   K CW N
dt
Coefficient of specific lethality, units vary with n K =Λ C CW CW
n

Concentration of organisms

N=1, most cases

 N 
ln     CW Ct
 No 

58
 EXAMPLE 13-1 APPLICATION OF THE
CHICK–WATSON MODEL

3/8/2018
Plot the data as given below, according to Eq. 13-4.
Determine the coefficient of specific lethality and the
coefficient of determination (r ). The data for the inactivation of
2

poliovirus type I with bromine (Floyd et al., 1978) are provided

in the following table:

59
SOLUTION

3/8/2018
60
 3/8/2018
 N 
ln     CW Ct
 No 

61
3/8/2018
62
3/8/2018
63
 Example 13-2 MHW

CONTEMPORARY KINETIC MODELS

3/8/2018
 Rennecker-Marinas Model (ACCELERATING RATE)
 Some microorganisms do not exhibit significant
inactivation until certain Ct values has been
exceeded
 Lag coefficient b

ln   
N
No
0
  CW ( Ct b )
for Ct  b
for Ct  b
Lag coefficient b is the maximum value of Ct at which
ln(N/No)=0
no inactivation has occurred.

64
CONTEMPORARY KINETIC MODELS

3/8/2018
 Collins-Selleck Model (DECELERATING RATE)
 Inactivation of coliform organisms in domestic
wastewater using free and combined chlorine

 Also good for modeling the behavior of a number of

other disinfection alternatives

ln   
N
No
0
  C S ln(Ct ) ln(b ) 
for Ct  b
for Ct  b
Collins-Selleck coefficient of specific lethality, unitless

65
 CONTEMPORARY KINETIC MODELS

3/8/2018
 HOM-HAAS models
 Empirical model of survival versus disinfectant
concentration

   C t
N/N0= survival of organisms Empirical constants, unitless

N n m
ln No
Die-off coefficient, variable

 More robust than Chick-Watson model

66
INFLUENCE OF TEMPERATURE

3/8/2018
appropriate reaction rate constant, ΛCW, ΛCS ,K or κ Collision frequency parameter
 Ea  1 
ln( k r )       ln( A)
 R  T 
Once rate is known at one temperature, the rate at
another temperature can be determined

kr ,T1
  T1 T2
kr ,T2

 e Ea / RT1T2
67
APPROACHES TO RELATING DISINFECTION
KINETICS TO DISINFECTION EFFECTIVENESS

3/8/2018
 increasing complexity of detailed kinetics
 alternatives

 Ct tables
 Numerical Ct (Concentration x time) values
 Established to achieve given degree of inactivation of a
specific organism using specific disinfectant

 Approach is consistent with most model

 Adopted by US EPA

68
APPROACHES TO RELATING DISINFECTION
KINETICS TO DISINFECTION EFFECTIVENESS

3/8/2018
 Semi log plots of survival vs Ct
 Consistent with Chick–Watson model and the
Rennecker–Mari˜nas model

 It is assumed that the log survival values will plot as

a linear function of time or Ct
 Only one or two constants (ΛCW and b) are required for
application of the models

 Successful when modest degree of disinfectant is

required (3 log)

69
APPROACHES TO RELATING DISINFECTION
KINETICS TO DISINFECTION EFFECTIVENESS

3/8/2018
 Log-log plots of survival and Ct values
 Consistent with Collins-Selleck model
 Situation where lag time is present
 Disinfection requirements are substantial (4 log)

 two constants,  and b, are required for

CS

application of the Collins–Selleck model

70
APPROACHES TO RELATING DISINFECTION
KINETICS TO DISINFECTION EFFECTIVENESS

3/8/2018
 Correlating principal factors of influence
 Hom-Haas model
 A regression of disinfection performance against the two
important factors of influence
 Time and disinfectant concentration

ln    C t
N
No
n m

71
Ct tables

3/8/2018
72
DISINFECTION PRACTICE
 disinfectants must possess the following properties
1. destroy the kinds and numbers of pathogens that may be

3/8/2018
introduced into water within a practicable period of time over
an expected range in water temperature

2. They must meet possible fluctuations in composition,

concentration, and condition of the water to be treated

3. They must be neither toxic to humans and domestic animals

nor unpalatable or otherwise objectionable in the
concentrations required for disinfection

4. Their strength or concentration in the treated water must be

determined easily, quickly, and, preferably, automatically

5. Their cost must be reasonable

73
DISINFECTION PRACTICE

3/8/2018
 disinfectants should also possess the following
characteristics

 They should be safe and easy to store, transport,

handle, and apply.

 provide reasonable residual protection against

possible recontamination

74
REGULATORY CONTEXT

3/8/2018
Selection of an appropriate disinfection strategy
1. Providing water free of pathogens
 coliform bacteria, heterotrophic plate counts, Cryptosporidium
oocysts, Giardia cysts, Legionella,and viruses

2. Avoiding production of disinfection byproducts

 Trihalomethanes (THMs), haloacetic acids (HAAs), other
halogenated organic compounds, ozone DBPs, oxidation
byproducts, and disinfectant residuals present a health risk

3. Maintaining a disinfectant residual in the distribution

system.
 Residual disinfectant is provided to maintain the
bacteriological quality 75
DISINFECTION PRACTICE

3/8/2018
 selection of the primary disinfectant
1. Preceding treatment
 Upstream – filtration , US EPA discourage Ozone
 potential production of ozone byproducts and biodegradable
organic matter (BOM) that promotes regrowth in the
distribution system
2. Total organic carbon (TOC) concentration
 TOC > 2 mg/L favors selection of a primary disinfectant that
will not produce DBPs
3. Bromide ion concentration
 O3/peroxide + Br- ion produces hypobromous acid and
bromate ion - if [Br-]>0.1 mg/L, O3 is not recommended
4. ability to meet microbial inactivation
requirements 76
DISINFECTION PRACTICE

3/8/2018
77
DISINFECTION PRACTICE

3/8/2018
 selection of a secondary disinfectant
 selected primary disinfectant

 Concerns
 assimilable organic carbon (AOC) concentration
 High AOC is defined as a concentration exceeding 0.10

mg/L after filtration

 DBP formation potential(DBPFP)

 organic byproducts can be expected- distribution – Cl2

 distribution system retention time

 allows for the reactions that form THMs to proceed

toward completion
 High if more than 48 hrs
78
3/8/2018
79
3/8/2018
80
 3/8/2018
FIGURE 13-8
Flow diagram to narrow selection of a new primary
disinfectant for systems that filter.
( Source: Adapted from U.S. EPA, 1999.)

81
FIGURE 13-9
Flow diagram to narrow
selection of a new secondary
disinfectant.
( Source: Adapted from U.S.
EPA, 1999.)

3/8/2018
82
Example 13-5. Select the primary and secondary
disinfectants for the town of Stillwater which uses the
Noir River for its water supply. The design flow rate

3/8/2018
is 18,500 m3 /d. The water is treated by conventional
coagulation, sedimentation, and filtration. The time
for water to reach the most distant customer at the
minimum demand flow rate is 31 hours. The Noir
River water analysis is shown below.

83
DISINFECTION PRACTICE

3/8/2018
 Contact Facilities
 disinfection chambers or contact chambers
 pipelines,
 longitudinal-serpentine basins, and

 cross-baffled serpentine basins

 ideal reactor for chlorine, combined chlorine, and

chlorine dioxide
 Plug flow
 no longitudinal dispersion

 contact time is equal to the hydraulic residence time

 The gases Cl 2 , NH 3 , and ClO 2 are metered into a
slip stream (a portion of process water) 84
 injected into the main flow of water passing into the contact
chamber
 CONTACT FACILITIES

3/8/2018
 Pipeline ideal reactor
 without bends and restrictions
 e.g. contact time =30 minutes, Q> 0.044 m 3 /s, a velocity >0.6 m/s
a pipeline about 1 km long (MWH 2005)

 Dispersion number
 Provides an estimate of the performance of the reactor
(Sjenitzer, 1958)

Goal: a dispersion number of about 0.01

Lower dispersion numbers add little increase in kill efficiency
above about 0.05 drop off rapidly in kill efficiency (Trussell and Chao,
1977). 85
EXAMPLE 13-10 DISPERSION IN
PIPELINES (MHW 2005)

3/8/2018
A treatment plant with a capacity of 25,000 m3/d
(6.6 mgd) is planning to use a 1-km treated-water
pipeline as a chlorine contactor. Determine the
diameter of the pipeline needed for a hydraulic
residence time (τ) of 30 min and the resulting
dispersion number of the flow in the pipeline.
Using Fig. 13-7, determine whether dispersion will
have a significant impact on achieving 4 log of
inactivation with this pipeline. The Darcy-
Weisbach friction factor is 0.018.

86
3/8/2018
87
 3/8/2018
Figure 13-7
Allowable dispersion for contactor versus inactivation
goals. At 88

d , performance is short of goal by 5 percent. (MHW

max

2005)
CONTACT FACILITIES

3/8/2018
 longitudinal-serpentine basin
 approaching ideal plug flow (MWH, 2005)
 180 flow reversal – flow separation , dead spots

89
 3/8/2018
 minimum length to width ratio of at least
40:1 Marske and Boyle (1973)

 width of the flow path to the length of the flow path

 a sharp crested weir the width of the flow path

at the end of the chamber.

 Height-of-channel to width-of-channel ratios are

generally in the range of 1 to 3

90
 3/8/2018
 t10 /τ
 no reactor provides ideal plug flow
 the contact time is generally less than ideal

 A requirement -time called t10 (U.S. EPA, 1991)

 Ct value be calculated with the time that 90 percent of the
water will be exposed in the disinfection chamber
 tracer studies for design

 an alternative approach
 a baffling classification system

91
3/8/2018
92
ratio of t10 to the theoretical hydraulic detention time ( t0 ) for each of the
classifications

3/8/2018
93
3/8/2018
94
Example 13-7. Design a
longitudinal-serpentine chlorine

3/8/2018
contact chamber for a design
flow of 18,400 m3 /d. The
required t10 to achieve a Ct of
200 is 100 min. The design must
provide superior performance,
that is t10/t0 0.7.
95
SOLUTION

3/8/2018
a. Calculate the required hydraulic detention time

b. From the definition of hydraulic detention time,

the volume of the reactor is then

96
c. As recommended, assume a value for L ≥ 40 W
and H = 3W.
find L:W is a little less than 40:1.

3/8/2018
Therefore, select L:W 40:1

L= 40 W
H= 3W
W=width of channel

97
3/8/2018
98
CONTACT FACILITIES - OZONE

3/8/2018
FIGURE 13-13 99
Schematics cross-sectional views of two alternate designs for an eight-chamber, over-under
contact
chamber: ( a ) with chimneys and ( b ) without chimneys
 3/8/2018
For oxidation only (no disinfection)
two or four cells are used.
For disinfection to achieve Giardia and virus inactivation,
six or eight cells are common.
Cryptosporidium inactivation calls for 10 or more cells (Rakness,
2005).
Henry and Freeman (1996) using CMD

H:L 4:1 and W:L 1:1, t 10 / t 0 ratio of 0.65 was

H : 6 to 7.5 m. achieved
100
maximum practical concentration of ozone = 40 mg/L USEPA, 1986
O3 Transfer efficiency
CONTACT FACILITIES - UV

3/8/2018
 UV reactors
 closed vessel and open channel
 closed vessel is preferred

 Smaller footprint

 Minimized pollution from airborne material

 Minimal personnel exposure to UV

 Modular design for installation simplicity

101
3/8/2018
102
Example 13-8. Continue the design of
the ozone disinfection system for
Stillwater ( Example 13-5 ). The pH

3/8/2018
and temperature selected for the
design analysis are 7.0 and 5oC
respectively. For the design of the
contact chamber assume t10/t0 0.65.
From bench-scale test data, the second
order rate constant was determined to
be 3.5 L/mol ・ s. Assume a transferred
dose of 2.0 mg/L. 103
3/8/2018
104
1. Determine the total removal/inactivation required (Tables 13-4 and 13-9)

3/8/2018
105
2. Determine the credits for physical removal.

3/8/2018
3. Required inactivation

5 log required= 2 log removal (table 13-4) based on 106

concentration + additional 3 log removal is needed (footnote
of table 13-4)
4. Select primary disinfectant
Example 13-5

3/8/2018
FIGURE 13-8
Flow diagram to narrow selection of a new
primary
TOC >2 mg/L, high disinfectant for systems that filter.
( Source: Adapted from U.S. EPA, 1999.)

Not detected ClO2 and

UV doses Ozone
are high
(Ct tables) is the
choice 107
5. Determine Ct values
EPA’s Ct tables in Appendix D 5o C

3/8/2018
Cryptosporidium Ct governs
6. Compute t10 for the water to reach the first customer
Determine the required hydraulic residence
transferred dose of 2.0 mg/L
time.
required t10

108
 Consider decay into account by numerical integration (Rakness (2005))
Rakness, K. L. (2005) Ozone in Drinking Water: Process Design, Operation, and Optimization, American
Water Works Association, Denver, Colorado, pp. 109–187.

To perform the numerical integration, the concentration leaving each

3/8/2018
chamber must be estimated.
This requires the decay rate constant in compatible units for Ct
calculation

Assume 10 cells
First trial

initial dose = 2.0 mg/L Ct values of 32 mg.min/L not achieved

109
 3/8/2018
initial dose = 2.30;
hydraulic detention time (HDT)= 2.46 min = 24.6/10=2.46
calculated concentration of the influent dose after 2.46 min using the
second order decay (example 13-3)

first cell

Ct for this cell is not counted because the influent water has no ozone 110

11th cell is added to achieve the required Ct of 32 mg ・ min/L

6. Design the contact chamber

3/8/2018
Assume a depth = 6.0 m and H = 4 L Henry and Freeman (1996)

111
MULTIPLE CONTACT REACTORS

3/8/2018
Example 13-9. Estimate the total log inactivation
for Giardia for disinfection contact in a contact
basin followed by a pipeline as described below.
The water temperature is 5oC and the pH is
7.5 for both reactors.

112
a. Calculate Ct for the clearwell
Ctcalc. (1.0 mg/L)(67 min)=67mg min / L

3/8/2018
b.Find the Ct 99.9 for Giardia from Appendix D.
At a temperature of 5o C, pH 7.5, and C= 1.0
mg/L, Ct 99.9 = 179 mg ・ min/L.

113
 3/8/2018
3 for Giardia and by 4 for viruses because of the requirement for 3 log and 4 log
inactivations, respectively
114