1 Ojojona Plant Design

Authors: Shada El-Sharif

Katherine Manchester
Roslyn Odum
______________________________________________________________________

Abstract
The following section of the report documents the proposed design of a gravity-
driven drinking water treatment plant intended to treat one of two distribution systems
that serve the community of Ojojona.
The following drinking water treatment plant was designed by the Cornell AguaClara
team during the 2005-2006 academic school year. This narrative explains the design
process, the critical measurements, and the resulting hydraulic profile of each treatment
process. The plant is intended to serve as a full-scale site for treatment process
experimentation in addition to its primary purpose of efficiently treating the water supply
of Ojojona, Honduras. For this reason, the plant includes three separate flocculation
processes and three sedimentation tanks that may be used in any combination.

Overview of Design Process

As the drinking water treatment plant designed for the community of Ojojona,
Honduras serves the dual purpose of reducing effluent turbidity levels to less than 5 NTU
while comparing different treatment process techniques, each process has been designed
to reliably treat influent water but also to shed light on the differences between different
process mechanisms. For example, the flocculation process of the treatment is divided
into three separate designs that may be compared to effectively determine the tradeoffs
between hydraulic characteristics and quality of floc. Likewise, three separate, parallel,
identical sedimentation tanks are to facilitate evaluation of the optimal upflow velocity as
well as the efficiency of plate settlers.
The design plant flow rate of 100 gpm (380 lpm) was chosen to accommodate
increased flow during the rainy season. The collection expansion described in the Source
Collection section of this document also contributes to this flow rate.
The datum of 0 m is set at the base of the existing storage tank. This datum is used for
all hydraulic calculations, water surface elevations, and vertical tank dimensions.
Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2 give the proposed orientation of the treatment plant about
the existing storage tank.

-5-
Figure 1.1 Overall plant view: grit chamber, sedimentation gutter, vertical flocculation
tank.

-6-
Figure 1.2. Overall view of plant and existing storage tank.

Water Surface Elevations

The water surface elevations described in this document are determined by
calculating the estimated major and minor head losses throughout the plant given the
design constants listed in Table 1 and the variable parameters described in each of the
following treatment process sections. The datum of 0 m is set at the base of the existing
storage tank. A visual summary of the water surface elevations for each process is given
in Figure 1.3.
Friction factors, f, and major head loss, hf, through PVC pipes is calculated using the
Swamee-Jain and Darcy-Weisbach equations given by Equations 1.1 and 1.2,
respectively.
0.25
f = 2
1.1
⎡ ⎛ ε 5.74 ⎞ ⎤
⎢log ⎜ 3.7 D + Re0.9 ⎟ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ ⎠⎦

8 LQ 2
hf = f 1.2
π 2 g D5
where the Reynolds number, Re, is given by Equation 1.3.

-7-
 4Q
Re = 1.3
π Dν
Minor losses (due to flow through entrances, exits, valves, and bends) are calculated
using Equation 1.4 where K is a particular loss coefficient defined in Table 1.

8Q 2 K
hmin or =
gπ 2
∑D 4
1.4

Total head loss through each process is simply the sum of major and minor head
losses through that particular process, as shown in Equation 1.5.
hl = h f + hmin or 1.5
Constants used for head loss calculations include those tabulated in Table 1.1.

Table 1.1. Constant values used

for head loss calculations.
Kentrance 0.5

Kexit 1.0

Kvalve 1.0

Kbend 0.7
ν 0.00001 m2/s
εPVC 0.12 min
Qdesign 100 gal/min

Calculations of head loss and the consequent hydraulic levels are documented in the
associated MathCAD files entitled Ojojona Plant Design, Sedimentation Tank Design,
Rectangular Channel Horizontal Flocculation, and Rectangular Channel Vertical
Flocculation.

-8-
Figure 1.3. Summary of water surface elevation in each treatment process.

Source Collections
Collection Box Sources
Collection Box #1 (CB1), as sketched in Figure 1.4, is fed by surface water directly
uphill from the box as well as by a pipe that taps a small underground water source. The
box collects water with year-round turbidity levels of 1 NTU. Although expansion of this
source would be ideal, the majority of nearby surface water is already being collected and
a hydrological survey would be necessary to determine if additional underground water
sources exist and are available for collection at this box.
CB2 is fed by two trenches that collect water from an uphill marsh. These trenches
are typically constructed perpendicular to the downhill flow of the groundwater. Ideally,
the downhill side of the trench is constructed with impervious material such as concrete
blocks or bricks, while the uphill side is left earthen. This design allows water to
naturally percolate into the trench that conveys the flow to the collection box. In order to
collect more water in CB2, one of the two trenches was extended and a third trench was
constructed.
CB3 opens directly to the marsh and is primarily fed by water that percolates into the
expanded mouth of the box. A trench that measures approximately 110 ft in length has
been added to catch water that previously flowed out of the marsh alongside CB3. The
added trench was modeled after the collection trenches of CB2 with an earthen wall

-9-
uphill from an impervious concrete wall. As the groundwater flows significantly below
the surface at some locations along the trench, the channel ranges in depth from 3 inch to
2.5 ft to increase collection.
Construction of the added channel resulted in significant disturbance to the site. In
anticipation of increased soil runoff and consequent turbidity during the wet season, grass
was planted along the uphill side of the trench. Metal screening was also laid against the
upgrade side of shallow sections of the channel to prevent potential soil erosion.
At the time of this documentation, the added channel is not in use. When the third
channel of CB3 is brought online, flow from the new channel will be conveyed to CB3
through a pipe and valve that may be opened or closed by the operator. A second pipe
leading out the side of the channel can also be opened to divert highly turbid water.

Collection Box Filters

Collection Boxes #2 and #3 also serve as preliminary filters to the proposed water
treatment plant and distribution system. The previous design of the collection box filters
simply had the bed of the collection boxes lined with loose gravel. The boxes were
maintained by periodically removing, washing, and replacing the gravel. As this process
took a single individual an entire day to do, the filters were cleaned infrequently. Without
sufficient maintenance, the filters clogged and caused the influent water level to rise and
eventually overflow the collection box and/or trenches. To facilitate cleaning, the gravel
has been placed into five manageable boxes constructed of metal screen with ½ inch
mesh. Regular maintenance now requires an individual to simply remove, wash, and then
return these units; each box can be cleaned in approximately twenty minutes. Similar
boxes of gravel have also been placed in several locations within the CB2 trenches to
filter sediment before it reaches the collection box.
Additional screens with fine wire mesh are located after the gravel boxes of CB3 to
improve the removal of fine sediment. Also, a large metal screen has been placed at the
entrance to CB3 and fine mesh tops have been placed over the entire box to protect
against pine needles. All screens can be easily removed and washed and the fine mesh
tops need only be swung open to clear the debris that has collected on top.

Collection Box #4
To expand collection, the construction of a fourth collection box has been proposed in
a location that would yield a higher quality of water. Given current water demand, the
addition of the fourth collection box would allow the operator to close off one of the
more turbid sites during the wet season. In the future, when community growth increases
water demand, this box would help provide the necessary additional water supply.
The proposed site for CB4 is mostly clay soil with low permeability. While the area
uphill from the site is saturated, the water flow is slow and it is unclear whether there
would be appreciable additional supply. CB4 would have collection trenches similar to
those described above, however, the construction of these trenches may cause significant
disturbance to the site that should be avoided based on the experienced disturbance as
CB3. One alternative to constructing trenches is to extend perforated pipe encased in
gravel into the marsh. While it is believed that this construction will cause fewer
disturbances to the site, the vegetation in this region is thick grass and the infiltration of
roots into the perforated pipe is a concern.

- 10 -
 As the trenches may be a more effective collection system in the long run, it might be
appropriate to construct CB4 this season and the trenches next season. By that time, the
site near CB3 should have experienced enough re-growth that the third trench of CB3 can
be brought online, while CB4 would remain closed for the season due to the high
turbidity that follows the construction of trenches.

Ro
ad

Collection Box #2

Proposed
Collection Box #4
#2

Collection Box #3
r
Collecto

Co
llec
tor
#1
r #3
to
c
lle

Collection Box #1
Co

Existing
Storage
Tank

To
Ojojona

Figure 1.4. Illustration of existing source catchments for Ojojona, January 2006.

Grit Chamber
The grit chamber (Figure 1.5) provides the first, basic treatment for the flow through
the plant and it serves as the point of flow measurement, which is important when
determining the chemical dose. A 4 inch pipe conveys water from the three collection
boxes to the grit chamber where turbulence is dampened by a metal screen to facilitate
reading the water surface elevation, and large, heavy particles are allowed to fall out of

- 11 -
suspension. The effluent flow from the grit chamber is measured using orifice flow
through a system described in the Flow Measurement section of this report. The flow
measurement system has been designed to allow the operator to control flow division
among the three different flocculation systems, as explained in the Division of Flow
section of this report.
A heavy, course-mesh screen that stretches the width and depth of the chamber will
be secured between the influent and effluent pipes of the grit chamber to further dampen
turbulence and to filter large organic matter that enters the plant. The purpose of the
screen is to prevent the rapid mix units from clogging with debris though small particles
can pass through the rapid mix and flocculation systems without causing any damage. If
the screen is too fine it will clog quickly and unnecessarily disable the plant.

Figure 1.5. Side view of grit chamber with orifice flow system connected to inline rapid
mixers.

- 12 -
Figure 1.6. Plan view of grit chamber with orifice flow system.

Flow Measurement
The flow through the plant is to be measured using orifice flow at the outlet of the grit
chamber. Orifice flow is described by Equation 1.6.

Q0 = CA 2 gH 0 1.6
The plant flow is measured through two 6 cm orifices, each located at a height of 1 m
from the grit chamber floor along six vertical 4 inch pipes that connect to the grit
chamber effluent pipes, as illustrated in Figure 1.5. The constant C is due to the vena
contracta and is approximately 0.6. The depth of water in the grit chamber is a function
of this head loss and the respective flow measurements can be read as water surface
elevations along the interior of the grit chamber wall. Figure 1.7 describes the
relationship between measured depth and the flow of water through the grit chamber.

- 13 -
 0.2

0.15
Depth (m)
0.1

0.05

0
0 100 200 300 400
Flow (Lpm)

Figure 1.7. Water depth increases above the orifice centerline in the grit chamber as a
function of plant flow when using two orifices 6 cm in diameter.

Division of Flow
This plant is intended to be used for research and experimentation in order to compare
the efficiencies of different flocculation and sedimentation treatment process. This
experimentation will include the examination and comparison of three different
flocculators. In order to compare the horizontal, vertical, and tube flocculators being
explored, the operator must be able to easily vary the flow through each of the systems. A
simple means of diverting the flow to the different flocculators that does not require the
use of costly 4 inch valves is to plug four of the six flow measurement orifices in the grit
chamber so that only two orifices are measuring head loss at any given time. Since the
vertical pipes through which the flow is measured each connect to their respective
flocculators, and since 50% of the flow is always measured through any given 6 cm
orifice, the operator can split the flow between any two flocculators, or send 100% of the
flow to any one flocculator by selectively plugging or un-plugging the proper orifices..

Elevations and Dimensions

The elevation of the grit chamber is determined by the critical water surface
elevations of the flow measurement system relative to the water surface in the rapid mix
system.
A schematic of critical grit chamber elevations is shown in Figure 1.5. The water
surface level in the inline rapid mixer is determined by the head loss through the rest of
the plant. It is expected that there will approximately 2.7 cm of head loss through 0.75 m
of 4 inch effluent pipe that conveys water from the grit chamber to the rapid mix.
Positioning the orifices 17.7 cm above the water surface of the inline mixer ensures that
the orifice flow experiences free fall. This results in an orifice elevation of 3.01 m.
At the design flow rate of 380 lpm, the height of water in the grit chamber will read
20 cm above the center of these orifices, which determines the maximum elevation of
water in the grit chamber, as shown in Figure 1.7. In an effort to simplify construction by
sharing a common platform with the horizontal flocculation tank, the grit chamber floor

- 14 -
is at the same elevation of 2.02 m, as shown in the overall plant side view illustrated in
Figure 1.22. This results in a maximum depth of 1.2 m in the grit chamber.
To provide adequate space for the screen and the 6 flow measurement pipes, the
(inside) footprint of the grit chamber is chosen as 1 m2. The 4 inch inlet pipe will enter
over the side at one end of the grit chamber while the effluent orifice flow is measured at
the other end of the chamber, as shown in Figure 1.5. The influent pipe is to be fully
submerged in a vertical position to help dampen influent turbulence. The grit chamber
will also have a 3 inch drain pipe to facilitate cleaning and grit removal.

Rapid Mix
The rapid mix device (Figure 1.8) is an important component of the flocculation
process that provides 1-3 seconds of even, rapid mixing immediately after the alum and
lime or sodium carbonate is dosed to the influent water. The rapid mix device may be
constructed of ½ inch PVC pipe and ½ inch PVC crosses, and must be removable for
occasional cleaning.

Figure 1.8. Side view of inline rapid mix. The inline mixer goes in the 0.96 m section of
the 4 inch PVC pipe.

Design
The inline rapid mixer for the Ojojona plant is similar to the inline mixer used in the
La 34 plant. The obstructions are made of ½ inch PVC crosses connected to a length of ½
in PVC, and the entire device is 1 m long. The inline mixer is inserted into a 4 inch PVC

- 15 -
pipe. Figure 1.9 shows a schematic of the proposed design for the inline mixer. Each
flocculation system has its own inline rapid mix unit.

Figure 1.9. Inline rapid mixer constructed of ½ inch PVC crosses measures 1 m in
length.

Elevations and Dimensions

The water surface in the rapid mix device should be above the inline mixer itself, as
shown in Figure 1.8. Head loss through the inline mixer is function of both flow rate and
the number of segment connections that make up the mixer. Each segment connection
exhibits a minor loss value K of 0.3, as observed in the laboratory. Head loss for a range
of flow rates was measured in the laboratory as the pressure difference across a 1 m long
inline mixer placed inside a length of 4 inch pipe that included the three PVC bends
necessary for connection to a subsequent flocculator. Data was collected over a range of
flow rates in order to derive an approximate relationship between flow rate and head loss
through the mixer. Head loss of 12 cm is predicted for the design flow with 12 PVC pipe
cross segments. If the head loss exceeds the expected value segments can be removed
from the inline mixer.
The elevation of the water surface above the inline mixer is determined by this
estimated head loss and the calculated head loss through the rest of the plant. The
elevation of the water surface above the rapid mix should be 2.82 m. Choosing to
submerge the rapid mix device by 2 cm means that the base of the 1 m rapid mix device
should sit at 1.86 m. (Note: At flow rates lower than the design flow rate of 380 lpm, the
water surface in the inline rapid mixer will likely fall below the top of the mixer. This
should not negatively affect flocculation, as observed in the La 34 treatment plant.)

Alum Addition
The alum feed device (Figure 1.10) is designed to dose an adjustable, constant flow
rate of alum solution to the plant flow just upstream of the inline rapid mixer. In
conventional designs, chemical feed systems often use pumps to ensure that a correct and
constant amount of chemical is being added. In this case, however, the goal is to provide
reliable chemical dosage without the use of electricity. This challenge is complicated by
the fact that the amount of alum solution storage varies with time, and the desired alum
flow rate varies as a function of influent turbidity.

- 16 -
Figure 1.10. Side view of alum feed system.

Design
The chemical feed system uses a constant head device and a head loss mechanism to
effectively control the flow rate. A simple float valve in the constant head tank provides
the constant head that results in a constant flow rate through the effluent tubing despite
fluctuating levels of alum solution in the storage tank. A length of flexible 4 mm tubing
on the order of 1 m in length provides a well defined relationship between head loss and
flow rate. The flow rate is controlled by the position of the tubing outlet with respect to
the alum solution level in the constant head tank. Relevant height differences are
illustrated in Figure 1.8. The holes drilled along the 4 inch PVC pipe are spaced about 1
cm apart and measured incremental flow rates are written at the side of each tube
position. The measured flow rates should match theoretical values predicted by the
Hagen-Pouseilles equation for laminar flow (Equation 1.7). Some departure from this
equation will occur if the flow is transitional or turbulent and if the tubing is coiled. Thus
actual flow measurements should be made after construction.

π D 4 ρ ghl
Q= 1.7
128µ l

Elevations
There are several critical elevations within the chemical feed system. Each elevation
is determined by the water surface level in the rapid mixer. Alum solution added to the

- 17 -
plant flow should experience free fall to ensure that the chemical flow rate is not affected
by the plant flow rate. Thus the lowest point of alum addition (the point of maximum
dose) should be 10 cm above the water surface of the rapid mix during the design flow of
380 lpm, as shown in Figure 1.10. The length of tubing combined with the range of outlet
elevations determines the accuracy of the alum flow dose; 25 cm of head above this
lowest point provides adequate accuracy of alum flow measurement, given the estimated
values of turbidity, plant flow and respective alum dose. The topmost hole in Figure 1.8
should be slightly above the water surface in the constant head tank to eliminate any
driving head and thus provide a method to stop alum flow.
There is no critical elevation for the bottom of the constant head tank, though it was
discovered at the La 34 plant that a taller column of water provided the hydraulic
pressure needed to force any air bubbles that accumulated in the 1 m tube up and out of
the system. It is assumed that the constant head tank will sit on the chemical feed
platform as shown in Figure 1.10.
The storage tank for the alum feed simply needs to be elevated high enough so that it
can drain completely into the constant head tank (i.e. the bottom of the tank should be
elevated about 5 cm above the inlet of the constant head tank). It is very possible that
some aluminum sulfate will precipitate out during storage so the chemical feed outlet of
the storage tank should be a couple centimeters above the bottom of the tank. The storage
tank should have a separate drain connection to facilitate cleaning.

General Design Procedure for Horizontal and Vertical Flocculators

The design process for both the vertical and horizontal flocculation tanks followed a
similar series of steps. The algorithm was carried out in MathCAD, and the files for both
designs are attached and available on the AguaClara website by clicking the hyperlinked
file names: Rectangular Channel Vertical Flocculation and Rectangular Channel
Horizontal Flocculation. The general calculation steps conducted for both designs are
summarized in the three steps below:

1. Calculate the unknown flow passage dimensions based on maximum shear allowed,
Gmax.
2. Calculate the length of flow passage based on required Gθ.
3. Calculate the head loss due to major and minor losses.

The main difference in the calculations for vertical and horizontal flocculation is the
different definition of the cross-sectional area through which the water flows. In vertical
flocculation, this area is the width of the channel itself (dictated by the width of the
roofing material used) multiplied by the baffle spacing. In the horizontal flocculator,
however, the area is defined as the depth of the water multiplied by the baffle spacing.
The maximum shear allowed which was found not to cause the breakup of formed flocs,
Gmax, was experimentally determined to be 50 sec -1. More information on this
experimental result is presented in the Flocculation Research section of the report. As for
the Gθ, two different values were used for each kind of flocculator; 20,000 for the
vertical flocculation tank and 25,000 for the horizontal. The lower value was used for the
vertical flocculator since a larger value of Gθ would result in a larger flocculation tank.
This in turn would make it difficult to fit the flocculation tank with the dimensions of the

- 18 -
adjacent sedimentation tanks. Currently, the design recommends identical dimensions for
both the vertical flocculation tank and the sedimentation tanks. This lower Gθ could
potentially be a source of concern at lower flow rates, since Gθ dictates the process of
collision and floc formation. This could be mitigated, however, by introducing more
minor losses, such as more closely spaced baffles or 1/2 inch diameter PVC pipes placed
between baffles. In order to ensure that the recommended design takes into account head
loss through the flocculation tanks, these calculations are conducted at the end of each
MathCAD file, including both the major and minor losses. It is found that head loss is
largely due to minor losses around the corrugated baffles.

Horizontal Flocculation
The horizontal flocculator is one of three methods of gravity-driven flocculation that
are to be tested at the Ojojona treatment plant. The horizontal flocculator may be
considered the “control” for performance testing since it has a similar design to the La 34
plant. Figure 1.11 and Figure 1.12 show the side view and plan view of the horizontal
flocculator, respectively.

Figure 1.11 Side view of horizontal flocculation tank.

- 19 -
Figure 1.12. Plan view of horizontal flocculation tank.

Design
The dimensions of the horizontal flocculation tank were determined by first
considering the maximum shear level that does not cause floc breakup during the gentle
mixing process, the ensuing channel and baffle dimensions, and finally the length of the
serpentine path necessary to achieve the required value for Gθ, the product of the average
velocity gradient and the hydraulic residence time.
All calculations are documented in the associated MathCAD file entitled Rectangular
Channel Horizontal Flocculation. Design parameters are listed in Table 1.2 below. These
are the same parameters used in the vertical flocculator design with the difference in the
definition of the width as described in the section on General Design Procedure for
Horizontal and Vertical Flocculators above.

- 20 -
 Table 1.2. Parameter input to flocculator design
algorithm.
Max G Maximum velocity gradient acceptable in the
system before formed flocs begin to
disintegrate in s-1
Min Gθ The minimum number of collisions in the
system needed for floc formation
Q Flow rate in the plant in gpm
ε Baffle surface roughness due to baffle material
and corrugation. This number is the same for
both vertical and horizontal flocculation if it is
ensured that the water flowing in both cases
does so in a direction parallel to the
corrugation. The roughness coefficient would
increase if the water were to flow across the
corrugations.
H Tank depth in cm
w Channel width in m
K180 Coefficient of minor losses
µ Dynamic viscosity in Newton·s/m2
ρ Density of water in kg/m3

Channel Dimensions
The horizontal flocculation tank consists of two channels, each 5.25 m long with an
inside width of 1 m and wall height of 0.61 m. It should be noted that the cross-sectional
flow area of the horizontal flocculator is considered to be the depth of the water
multiplied by the baffle spacing. A water depth of 40 cm, consistent with the depth in the
sedimentation gutter, was chosen for the outlet of the horizontal flocculator. Based on
these dimensions and the baffle spacing described below, 18 cm of head loss through the
flocculator sets the influent water depth at 58 cm. The short connecting channel between
the two baffled channels is 10 cm wide. The actual head loss will be less because the
head loss calculation was based on the simplifying assumption that the depth was always
40 cm. Head loss will cause the influent depth to increase and that will in turn cause the
head loss to decrease. If the resulting head loss is significantly less than expected, then
flocculation performance could be improved decreasing the spacing between baffles in
the first concrete channel.

Baffle Spacing
The baffle spacing for the horizontal flocculator is determined by the maximum shear
levels that allow sufficient mixing but prevent floc breakup. The maximum shear value is
50 s-1, as measured in the lab (see the Flocculation Research section of this report for
additional details). The input parameter Gθ, cited in Table 1.2, was calculated as the

- 21 -
spatially and temporally averaged Gθ based on the residence time and head loss through
the horizontal flocculator of La 34. According to the measurements collected and
presented in Copin’s thesis, the residence time θ of the flocculation tank at La34 is
approximately 15 minutes and the head loss is approximately 10 cm (Coppens, 2005).
Using Equation 1.8 to relate Gθ to the head loss, Gθ of about 31,500 was calculated for
the La 34 plant.
2⎛ ν ⎞
1.8
θ = ( GCampθ ) ⎜ ⎟
⎝ ghl ⎠
At La 34 it was observed that flocs formed and began to settle in the last of the three
flocculation channels. This implies a Gθ that was more than sufficient for floc formation.
As a result, the calculations for the Ojojona plant’s horizontal flocculator design use a Gθ
of 25,000 for the minimum flow rate. This is still a value that ensures sufficient particle
collisions needed for flocculation to occur.

4
3.5 .10

4
Gθ ( Q ) 3 .10

4
2.5 .10
200 250 300 350 400
Q
l
min

Plant Flow (lpm)

Figure 1.13. Relationship between Gθ and plant flow rate for the horizontal flocculator.

According to Schulz and Okun, a Gθ that falls within the range of 20,000 – 150,000
is appropriate for a process of turbidity removal, where the velocity gradient G falls
between 2 and 100 seconds-1 (Schulz and Okun , 1984). In addition, the flocculation
designs in Ojojona and La34 are considered to be hydraulic flocculators as opposed to
conventionally used mechanical, electricity-driven flocculators. It is logical to assume
that flow in these hydraulic flocculators is closer to plug flow than the case of mechanical
flocculators, and so a smaller value of Gθ than is commonly used would be acceptable.
The baffle spacing is determined by iteratively solving a series of equations that
consider f as a function of velocity, velocity as a function of cross-sectional area, and the

- 22 -
cross-sectional area as a function of baffle spacing. Here, f is the friction factor,
calculated by the equation developed by Swamee-Jain for turbulent flow. Equation details
and the iterative calculation process are presented in the attached MathCAD entitled
Rectangular Channel Horizontal Flocculation. The baffle spacing is 13.1 cm. Following
the recommendation from Schulz and Okun, the “distance between the end of each baffle
and the wall is about 1 ½ times the distance between the baffles” which yields a distance
of 19.7 cm (Schulz and Okun , 1984). Tapered flocculation where the width between
baffles increases towards the end of the flocculation tank is not employed in this design.
The final baffle design will be flexible, allowing for the alteration of the baffle spacing if
need be. This may be particularly useful at the beginning of the flocculation tank if
improved flocculation is desired. In that case, it would be possible to decrease the baffle
spacing at the beginning of the tank, thus increasing the shear and collisions contributing
to flocculation.

Baffle Dimensions
To establish consistent horizontal flow velocities about the baffles (i.e. constant
cross-sectional area), the baffle width should be approximately 0.8 m (31.5 inch), as
described by Equation 1.9 where b is the baffle spacing found to be 13.1 cm as described
in the previous section. The baffle material (a common plastic roofing material found in
Honduras) is rectangular with a length of 72 inch and a width of 32 inch. To facilitate
baffle construction and consistency, the actual baffle width will be 32 inch.
wbaffle = wchannel − 1.5* b 1.9

It is preferred that the baffles extend above the water surface to prevent short
circuiting of water above the baffles. Since the baffles will be removed occasionally for
cleaning, it is best to construct the baffles identically so that replacement is simple. The
baffle material is sold in lengths of 72 inch (183 cm) and the height of each baffle may be
cut to 24 inch (61 cm), resulting in two baffles per sheet of roofing material with
dimensions of 32 inch wide by 24 inch long each. Unfortunately, some wastage is
expected since it is preferred to cut baffles such that water flows in the directions of the
corrugations on the roofing material. For horizontal flocculation, this corresponds to the
width dimension of the baffle. The direction of water flow, whether along the
corrugations or in the perpendicular direction, affects the roughness coefficient ε and
subsequently the calculations of the friction factor f. This baffle design will result in a 3
cm of baffle height above the influent water surface. It is possible to save some
corrugated roofing material by cutting baffle sheets such that the width (32 inches) has
corrugations running in a direction perpendicular to water flow, particularly at the
beginning of the flocculation tank. This causes more shear at the beginning, but this is
acceptable so long as shear is decreased by installing baffles with corrugations parallel to
water flow afterwards. Cutting 24 inch by 32 inch baffles with the corrugations running
vertically, and hence perpendicular to water flow, results in exactly three baffles per sheet
of roofing material.
If there is concern over costs related to roofing materials, it may be possible to
conserve material by reducing the height of the baffles in the second channel. This is

- 23 -
because some of the head loss would have occurred already at the beginning of the
flocculation tank.

Flow Path
Given the baffle spacing, the depth of water, the flow rate and Gθ, the flow path
length was determined by calculating the length necessary given major and minor head
losses. The total flow length required given the major and minor losses is calculated in
order to give a value for the actual length of the concrete channels. These calculations are
presented in detail in the MathCAD file entitled Rectangular Channel Horizontal
Flocculation. Given 80 baffles, as computed by Equation1.10, the actual serpentine flow
path through 10.5 m of concrete channel length is 74 m.
L
N baffles = actual 1.10
b
The baffles should be assembled for easy installation. One design suggestion is a
PVC pipe frame that secures three or four baffles so that bundles of baffles could be
easily removed and replaced. A photograph of this suggested design is shown in Figure
1.14 below. The proposed design requires a minimal quantity PVC pipe. A robust baffle
design is important for long term sustainability. Experience from the La 34 baffle design
confirms that PVC glue, wooden baffles, and slots built into the concrete are not
acceptable techniques for the construction of flocculator baffles. It is observed that the
wood swells and warps over time, and PVC glue is not a durable solution for holding the
components in place.

Figure 1.14. Suggested baffle design, made of PVC pipes and corrugated roofing
material.

Total head loss through the proposed horizontal flocculation tank is approximately 18
cm. Nearly all of the head loss is due to minor head loss about the bends of the baffles. It
should be noted that the value of 3 used for the coefficient of minor loss K is within the
range of 2.5 to 4 suggested by Schulz and Okun (Schulz and Okun , 1984).
The last baffle spacing is the outlet of the horizontal flocculation tank and the inlet to
the sedimentation gutter. The sedimentation gutter will be slightly wider than the flow
channel of the horizontal flocculator and will have the same depth so that critical velocity

- 24 -
gradients are not exceeded. It is assumed that there is no appreciable head loss between
the flocculator outlet and the open channel flow through the sedimentation gutter. A
sluice gate at the exit from the flocculation tank may be closed to shut down the
horizontal flocculator and prevent flow into the sedimentation tanks.

Elevations
The elevation of the water surface at the beginning of the horizontal flocculator is
determined by the head loss through the flocculator and the calculated head loss through
the rest of the plant. The elevation of the water surface at the inlet of the horizontal
flocculator should be 2.5 m. Based on total head loss calculations described below and a
chosen water depth of 40 cm at the outlet of the horizontal flocculator, the elevation of
the water surface at the outlet of the horizontal flocculator will be approximately 2.319
m. The elevated flocculation tank walls are 3 cm higher than the influent water surface
level due to structural convenience. Figure 1.11 gives a schematic of the horizontal
flocculator. If excessive head loss should ever cause the water level to overtop the walls,
the head loss through the flocculation basin could be reduced by removing some of the
baffles.
It should be noted that the head loss through the horizontal flocculator is the limiting
head loss for the overall plant design elevations.

Vertical Flocculation
Purpose
The vertical flocculator is one of three methods of gravity-driven flocculation that are
to be tested at the Ojojona treatment plant. The vertical flocculator is favorable in that it
has a much smaller footprint than that of the horizontal flocculator. The construction of
the vertical flocculator will be easier because the tank is not elevated, the dimensions are
similar to those of the sedimentation tanks, and it will share a wall with one of the
sedimentation tanks. Narrow baffle spacing in the vertical flocculator may complicate
maintenance, however.

Channel Dimensions
The vertical flocculator has the same inner width and length as each of the three
sedimentation tank channels and shares a wall with the sedimentation channel furthest
from the storage tank, as shown in Figure 1.16. The inner wall dimensions of the vertical
flocculator tank are 3 m long, 2.2 m deep, and 0.81 m (32 inch) wide as determined by
the width of the 32 inch baffle lamina. The inlet water depth is 2.1 m from the floor of the
vertical flocculator which results in a surface elevation of 2.5 m (relative to the datum) at
the inlet. The 10 cm difference between the height of the water in the sedimentation tank
gutter and the inlet depth in the flocculation tank is due to the 10 cm head loss through
the tank. To facilitate construction, the vertical flocculation tank walls are at an elevation
of 2.65 m, which results in 15 cm of freeboard above the inlet water surface. Calculations
that derive the dimensions of the vertical flocculator tank can be found in the appended
MathCAD file, entitled Rectangular Channel Vertical Flocculation.

- 25 -
Figure 1.15. Side view of vertical flocculation tank.

- 26 -
Figure 1.16. Plan view of vertical flocculation tank.

Baffle Spacing
The baffle spacing for the vertical flocculator is found using the same design
algorithm as the horizontal flocculator, but with a cross-sectional area defined as the
channel width times the baffle spacing. The baffle spacing is based on the same
maximum shear level of 50 s-1 that was used for the baffle spacing of the horizontal
flocculator, but a different value of Gθ 20,000 used in Equation 1.8. The reason for this
different value of Gθ is discussed in the section entitled General Design Procedure for
Horizontal and Vertical Flocculators above. The baffle spacing is 7 cm throughout the
vertical flocculator, which results in an average flow velocity of 0.11 m/s. Baffles are
arranged so that flow is alternately directed above and below the baffles, as shown in
Figure 1.15. It is worth noting that for vertical flocculation, it was not possible to keep
with the recommendation put forth by Schulz and Okun regarding the distance between
the end of each baffle and the wall being 1 ½ times the distance between the baffles,
which would yield a distance of 10.5 cm (Schulz and Okun , 1984). Instead, this distance
is found to be 40 cm given the length of the baffle and the height of the water entering the
flocculation tank. Once again, baffle spacing calculations can be found in the MathCAD
file entitled Rectangular Channel Vertical Flocculation.

- 27 -
Baffle Dimensions
To establish consistent velocities about the baffles, the cross-sectional area above and
below the baffles should be consistent with the baffle spacing. The baffles have the exact
dimensions of the corrugated roofing material, with a width of 32 inch by length of 72
inch (1.83 m). This design prevents wasting of roofing material, and ensures flow of
water along the corrugations preventing unwanted shear. The design is found to require
42 baffles. It is important that the baffles are constructed to prevent short circuiting about
the sides of each baffle. Baffles should be easily removed and installed for occasional
cleaning. As mentioned in the previous section on Baffle Spacing, the distance between
baffles and tank walls is 40 cm, given the length of 1.83 m of the corrugated roofing
material. The 40 cm do account for the height of the water entering the tank, which is 2.2
m, the head loss through the vertical flocculator of 10 cm and some additional freeboard.

Flow Path
The residence time in the vertical flocculator is 13 minutes As computed by Equation
1.10, for and the an actual serpentine flow path through 3 m of concrete channel of 84 m,
the vertical flocculator has 42 baffles. The last baffle spacing is actually the outlet of the
vertical flocculation tank and the inlet to the sedimentation gutter. It is recommended that
a sludge drain be located at the effluent end of the vertical flocculator. It is assumed that
there is no appreciable head loss between the flocculator outlet and the sedimentation
gutter.

Elevations
The head loss through the vertical flocculator was determined using the same design
algorithm for flow through a rectangular channel as described in the Horizontal
Flocculation section of this report and detailed in the MathCAD file entitled Rectangular
Channel Vertical Flocculation. The primary difference in the calculation of the
flocculator head loss, however, is that the cross-sectional area of the vertical flocculator
flow is defined as the width of the channel multiplied by the baffle spacing. Total head
loss through the vertical flocculator is approximately 10 cm.
The elevation of the water surface at the beginning of the vertical flocculator is
determined by the head loss through the flocculator and the calculated head loss through
the rest of the plant. The last baffle spacing is actually the outlet of the vertical
flocculation tank and the inlet to the sedimentation tank gutter. As water flows freely
from the vertical flocculator to the sedimentation gutter, it is assumed that there is no
appreciable head loss between these two processes. Thus, the elevation of the water
surface at the outlet of the vertical flocculator should be 2.439 m. Based on total head
loss calculations described above and a chosen water depth of 2.1 m at the inlet of the
vertical flocculator, the elevation of the water surface at the inlet of the vertical
flocculator will be approximately 2.54 m from the datum. The vertical flocculation tank
walls are approximately 15 cm higher than the influent water surface level.
A sluice gate can be closed at the effluent of the vertical flocculator to prevent water
from flowing into the sedimentation tank gutter if desired.

- 28 -
Construction
The spacing between the sheets of corrugated roofing can be set using thin walled
PVC pipe. Modules of the several sheets of corrugated roofing should be built so that the
modules can be easily removed.

Tube Flocculation
Purpose
The third type of flocculator to be tested at the Ojojona plant will be a tube
flocculator. The basic idea of a tube flocculator is that raw water mixed with alum is
allowed to flow through a long coil of tubing where the velocity gradients developed
from the flow provide the mixing required for flocculation. Tube flocculators have the
potential to be simple and reliable means of achieving flocculation, and could possibly be
more cost-effective than baffled tank flocculators. Some precedent exists for the use of
tube flocculators for water treatment. Oxfam, the world relief agency, uses a coiled tube
flocculator in conjunction with an upflow clarifier for emergency water treatment in their
post-disaster work (Clarke, Crompton and Luff , 2004).
Initial research into the feasibility of using tube flocculation for the AguaClara
treatment plants was conducted during the spring semester 2006, but future work remains
to be done before a full-scale design can be made for a field trial in Ojojona (Cannan and
Smith , 2006). Sufficient space has been included in the proposed Ojojona plant design,
however, for future testing of a tube flocculator. There is approximately 40 m3 of free
space below the main platform and additional space beneath the horizontal flocculator
where the necessary tubing could be installed. The effluent of the tube flocculator would
enter the sedimentation gutter as described in the Sedimentation Gutter section of this
report.

Sedimentation Gutter
In order to control the flow division between different flocculators and sedimentation
tanks, a sedimentation gutter was designed to convey effluent from each of the
flocculators to any of the sedimentation tanks. Figure 1.17 shows how the sedimentation
gutter connects the flocculation and sedimentation processes.

- 29 -
Figure 1.17. Plan view of sedimentation gutter.

The cross-sectional flow area of the gutter is simply the inner width of the gutter
multiplied by the water depth within the gutter. For structural convenience, the water
depth is consistent with the effluent water depth of the horizontal flocculator, equal to 40
cm. To accommodate the pipes that convey flow from the sedimentation gutter to the
sedimentation tanks, the width of the gutter has been set to 25 cm. The maximum
velocity in the gutter is slower than the velocity about the baffles in the flocculators and
thus this width is sufficient to prevent floc breakup.
At the junctions between the horizontal and vertical flocculators and the
sedimentation gutter, a sluice gate can be closed to stop flow from either flocculator to
the sedimentation tanks.
Effluent from the tube flocculator will enter through the floor of the gutter via 4 inch
diameter pipes. PVC caps can be screwed into the embedded PVC nipples to stop flow
from the tube flocculator to the sedimentation tanks.
Water is evenly discharged into the sedimentation tanks through three 6 inch pipes or
four 4 inch pipes. The tank with the three 6 inch pipes is designed to be able to handle the
entire plant flow. To shutoff flow from the gutter to a sedimentation tank each pipe may
be extended above the water surface or plugged with a PVC cap.
The limiting head loss case is modeled as 1/3 of the plant flow conveyed through one
of the 6 inch pipes. The longest influent pipe to the sedimentation tank runs the length of
the sedimentation tank and is modeled as 4 m, as shown in Figure 1.18. The head loss
through this pipe, 0.2 cm, sets the water surface elevation in the gutter at 2.439 m.

- 30 -
 Sedimentation
The three identical sedimentation tanks (Figure 1.18 and Figure 1.19) are designed to
test the efficiency of plate settlers and to determine the maximum critical velocity that
can effectively settle particles. A larger range of flow rates through the tanks can be
tested by sending flow through one, two, or three tanks at a time. In this way performance
can be tested at significantly higher flow rates, as can the hypothesis that a single,
smaller, “modern” sedimentation tank filled with plate settlers can handle the entire
design flow. Although it is expected that the maximum recommended upflow velocity
can be reached using one tank, two additional tanks create a conservative design that
should keep effluent turbidity below 5 NTU without filtration.
Critical or sedimentation velocity is the sedimentation velocity that a particle must
have for it to enter at the worst location in the sedimentation tank and yet arrive at a
surface where it can be removed. This is the same as the upflow velocity for a
conventional open tank. When plate settlers are added, the distance that a particle has to
fall in order to reach a surface is decreased and thus the upflow velocity and the
sedimentation velocity are no longer the same. The design parameter for sedimentation
tanks is fundamentally the sedimentation velocity. The sedimentation velocity in the
proposed sedimentation tanks is less than that at the La 34 plant. For the plate settlers,
design recommendations from industry were followed.
A perforated collection launder positioned above each tank conveys effluent to the
respective outlet weir and manifold pipe that carries all treated effluent to the chlorinated
storage tank.

- 31 -
Figure 1.18. Side view of sedimentation tank.

- 32 -
Figure 1.19. Plan view of sedimentation tank.

Sedimentation Tanks
The size of the sedimentation tanks is determined by the maximum upflow velocity.
Industry tube settlers handle maximum application rates up to 11.00 m/hr while the
recommended application rate for design purposes is 3.66 m/hr. These values were used
as the maximum and minimum upflow velocities, respectively. Equation 1.11 shows that
the ratio of the design upflow velocities is three and thus if three sedimentation tanks are
constructed with a design upflow velocity of 3.66 m/hr then it would be possible to test
the maximum upflow velocity by taking two sedimentation tanks off line.
V
designvelocityratio = upflow max = 3 1.11
Vupflow min

The sedimentation tank water depth was reduced to 2 m. This depth allowed for 25
cm of water above the plates for the effluent launders with 1 m remaining below the
plates for sludge storage and flow distribution. At the conservative upflow velocity of
3.66 m/hr and a 2 m depth the hydraulic retention time is 33 minutes. With a design flow
of 380 lpm (22.8 m3/hr) the plan area of the sedimentation tanks is 6.2 m2. Additional
area was included to accommodate the dead space at the end of the sedimentation tank
caused by the angled plate settlers.

- 33 -
Plate Settlers
Plate settlers are added to decrease the distance that a particle has to fall in order to
settle to a surface. The plates will be made from the same roofing material used to
construct the baffles. As the material is available in widths of 32 inch x 72 inch, each
plate settler is 0.914 m (36 inch) long and 32 inch wide. At a tilt of 60 degrees, the
horizontal projection is 0.457 m. Thus the sedimentation tanks are each 0.46 m longer
than required by the minimum area calculated from the upflow velocity. With plates
spaced at 5 cm (perpendicular to the plates) the horizontal spacing is 5 cm/sin60 or 5.77
cm. The ratio of critical velocities for plate settlers to conventional sedimentation is the
ratio of the projected area of the plate settlers to the plan area of the tank. This can be
evaluated by looking at a single plate. Equation 1.12 states that plate settlers should
reduce the required area by a factor of 8.9, where Lplate is the length of a single plate
settler, θ is the degree of inclination, and b is the baffle spacing of 5 cm.
b
L plate *cos(θ ) +
sin(θ )
performanceratio = = 8.919 1.12
b
sin(θ )

There are 44 plates, as determined by Equation 1.13.

L
N baffles = sed 1.13
b
sin(θ )
Where Lsed is the effective length of the sedimentation tank (3 m – 0.46 m) and b is the
plate spacing.
The plate settlers should be constructed in bundles and installed to lean against one
another along a PVC support. This support should be built so that the base of the plate
settlers sit 1 m from the floor of the sedimentation tank. Figure 1.20 illustrates the
orientation of the plate settlers and support frame.

- 34 -
Figure 1.20. Side view of plate settlers.

Perforated Launder
Effluent from the sedimentation tank is collected through thirty-two 2.0 cm orifices
on alternating sides along the central axis of a horizontal 4 inch diameter launder that
runs the length of each sedimentation tank, as shown in Figure 1.18.
To optimize sedimentation through the plate settlers, the system must experience
uniform upflow. Thus, minor head loss through the orifices must be greater than the
major head loss through the collection pipe to ensure uniform flow into the launder.
Additionally, the inlet pipes to the sedimentation tank have been designed to evenly
distribute flow along the length of the sedimentation tanks, as shown in Figure 1.19.
Together, these two measures should create uniform upflow through the system such that
head loss from anywhere in the sedimentation tank to the outflow weir is the same
regardless of which plate settlers and subsequent launder orifice the water flows through.
The launder is submerged by several cm in order to avoid collecting any organic
material that may float instead of settle. It may be advisable to position the orifices of the
launder on the underside of the launder to further ensure that the sedimentation tank
water level does not fall to the orifice elevation when plant flow decreases or when
several sedimentation tanks are used at once.

Outlet Weir
A sedimentation outlet weir, constructed as a length of vertical 4 inch pipe open to the
atmosphere, prevents backflow into each sedimentation tank, as shown in Figure 1.21.

- 35 -
Since the launder has a diameter of 4 inch (approximately 10 cm) and since the water
surface in the sedimentation effluent weir must be low enough so that no water flows
back into the launder (approximately 2 cm difference), the water surface below the
effluent weir must be approximately 12 cm below the elevation of the water surface in
the sedimentation tank. The water surface elevation below the weir, inside the effluent
manifold, is 2.238 m. Critical water surface elevations are illustrated in Figure 1.21.

Figure 1.21. Schematic of outlet weir.

Effluent Manifold
A single horizontal 4 inch pipe conveys effluent from each of sedimentation outlet
weirs to the chlorinated storage tank. The entire length of pipe is approximately 5 m.

Elevations
The water surface elevation in the sedimentation tank depends on the head loss
through the outlet weirs and the perforated collection launders. The water level in the
sedimentation tank is also related to head loss through the chlorinator and the manifold
effluent pipe. The datum is 0 m at the base of the existing storage tank.
It is assumed that approximately 5 cm of head is lost through the existing chlorinator
at the storage tank, as well as 3 cm due to the entrance loss into the storage tank.
Major head loss through the 4 inch manifold effluent pipe that connects the
sedimentation outlet weir to the chlorinator is approximately 5.73 cm over its entire
length of 5 m. The combined head loss through the chlorinator and the manifold

- 36 -
collection pipe positions the water surface below the weir of the sedimentation tank
furthest from the chlorinator at an approximate elevation of 2.24m.
Head loss through the outlet weir is minimal as effluent from the sedimentation tank
experiences free fall from the launder over the weir. This weir (perhaps an obstruction in
the of the effluent launder pipe?) may be adjusted to increase head loss in the event that
low flows through sedimentation tanks decrease the water surface elevation in the
sedimentation tanks to a level that allows water from the surface to flow through the
orifices in the perforated launder.
Head loss for the 4 inch perforated launder of each sedimentation tank is calculated
for two different flow models: (1) 1/3 of the plant flow through each sedimentation tank
and (2) full plant flow through a single sedimentation tank. Given a launder pipe length
of 3 m, the limiting head loss of full flow through one sedimentation tank is 2.14 cm.
Minor head loss of the full flow through the thirty-two 2.0 cm orifices of each manifold
collector is approximately 5.58 cm. As stated, uniform upflow through the sedimentation
tank necessitates the minor loss through the orifices be large compared to the major loss
through the launder.
It is assumed that no appreciable head is lost through the sedimentation tank or plate
settlers due to very low flows.
Finally, the limiting head loss through the inlet pipes that convey flow from the
sedimentation gutter is modeled as Q/3 through the 6 inch inlet pipe that runs the length
of the sedimentation tank. The head loss from 4 m of pipe, one entrance, and two bends is
calculated as 0.21 cm. See Figure 1.18 for a schematic of the inlet pipe orientation.

Dimensions
The three sedimentation tanks are identical in size. The sedimentation tank nearest to
the storage tank shares a wall with the second sedimentation tank; the middle
sedimentation tank shares walls with sedimentation tanks on either side; and the third
sedimentation tank shares a wall with the vertical flocculator. Figure 1.1 and Figure 1.2
illustrate the position of the sedimentation tanks. Each tank is 3 m long, 0.81 m wide
(inner width), and has a wall height of 2.25 m (Note, this wall height is in addition to the
floor elevation of 40 cm). The water should be 2 m deep with a water surface elevation of
2.437 m. Thus, the walls extend approximately 20 cm above the water surface elevation.
Dimensions are shown in Figure 1.18 and Figure 1.19.

Chlorination
Treated effluent from the proposed drinking water treatment plant will be disinfected
by the existing drip chlorination system currently used in Ojojona.

- 37 -
Figure 1.22. Overall plant side view: grit chamber, chemical feed, horizontal flocculation
tank.

Figure 1.23. Overall plant side view: grit chamber, vertical flocculation tank.

- 38 -
Figure 1.24. Overall plant plan view.

Construction and Operational Details

The sedimentation tank effluent launders, plate settlers, and inlet tubing must all be
removable. The pipe fittings can simply use the PVC slip fittings without glue. There is
no need for any of the pipe connections within the sedimentation tank to be leak tight.
The highest pressure water source should be valved so that it can be used as a
pressure wash system for the plant. It should be possible to use the high pressure source
to wash the sediment from the sedimentation tanks without removing all of the plastic by
inserting a high pressure line between the concrete wall and the plate settler closest to the
effluent manifold.
The three alum feeders and all of the alum stock tanks (minimum of two so that one
tank can be turned off and used to mix the chemical) should be connected with a ½” PVC
tubing manifold. Each stock tank and each constant head tank should have a valve where
it connects to the tubing manifold.
The pipe connecting the rapid mix to the horizontal flocculation tank would be
protected if it were located under the platform and if it entered the flocculation tank
through the bottom of the tank.
In the likely event that sodium carbonate is used to adjust the pH, a duplicate of the
alum feed system should be used for the sodium carbonate addition.
The chemical stock tanks should all have drain valves at the very bottom of the tanks.
Provision for these valves needs to be made in the chemical platform. They also need to
have inlet water that comes from the highest pressure water source. During high turbidity

- 39 -
events it will be desirable to use treated water to prepare the alum and sodium carbonate
stock solutions. Treated water is available from the top of the sedimentation tanks. A 2
inch PVC pipe should pass through both walls of the gutter from the sedimentation tank
so that 5 gallon buckets resting on the platform can be filled with clean water from the
sedimentation tank. The 2 inch line should have a valve.
The current design has the treated water leaving the sedimentation tanks and heading
for the distribution tank. This design requires that the chlorinator be at a different location
and hence chlorinator maintenance will not be seamlessly integrated into plant operation.
This problem could potentially be remedied by passing the settled water launder pipes
through the gutter (as 4 inch PVC pipes) and unto the platform. There should be enough
elevation difference between the sedimentation tanks and the platform for it to be
possible to install the chlorinator on the platform.
All drains should lead to well-made channels that carry water away from the
treatment plant and areas that might collect stagnant water.
Protective covers/roofs will protect PVC from UV damage and may deter animals
from a favorite new water source.
To manage small insects and/or algal growth, it may be advisable to pre-chlorinate
periodically. This generally entails applying a short but strong dose of chlorine to the
plant flow at the grit chamber.
Additional construction and operational details should be documented as they are
recognized.
Does APP know how large an opening to leave for the rapid mix units?
More thought should be given the sedimentation effluent weirs. These weirs would
ideally allow regulation of the water level in the sedimentation tank.

Preliminary Operational Cost Analysis

An operational chemical cost analysis was performed on the plant to provide
estimates of how much it will cost to run the water treatment plant, given a range of
turbidities. Two sets of estimates were created: one based on flow into the plant (low,
design, and high), and the other based on usage per person. Assumptions for both
methods are the same and are listed below in Table 1.3. It is assumed that chemicals will
need to be added for the entire duration of the rainy season. All costs are presented on a
monthly cost basis.

- 40 -
 Table 1.3. Assumptions necessary to estimate chemical cost analysis.
$1 US 18.8 Lempiras
Cost of Lime $0.30/kg
Cost of Aluminum Sulfate $0.38/kg
Cost of Sodium Carbonate $0.53/kg
Cost of Sodium Hydroxide $0.78/kg
Length of dry season 8 months
Length of rainy season 4 months
Dose range of Alum 20 – 70 mg/L
Per person usage 35 gal/day
Days per month 30
Persons per house (on average) 6
Number of households 500
High flow 100 gpm
Low flow 50 gpm
Design flow 75 gpm

Flow-based Model
The approximate chemical cost analysis based on flow through the plant is
determined using the following equation and the variables stated in Table 1.4:

Lempiras/Month = {(DoseA) * (FR) * (DPM) * 0.000001mg/kg * (L/ $) * [($ /kg) AS + ($ /kg) C * MWconv* MWchem ]} /H
1.14

Table 1.4. Variables used to determine flow-based cost

analysis.
DoseA Aluminum Sulfate dose in mg/L
FR flow rate in Liters per Day (high, low, or
design)
DPM days per month
L/$ exchange rate in Lempiras per US$
MWconv equivalents of chemical needed for
aluminum sulfate dose (3 for lime, 6 for
sodium hydroxide, 3 for sodium carbonate)
MWchem molecular weight of chemical needed for
aluminum sulfate dose in mg/L
($/kg)C cost of base in US$ per kg needed
($/kg)AS cost of aluminum sulfate in US$ per kg
needed

- 41 -
Table 1.5 - Estimated cost analysis of flow-based model

High Flow (100 gpm) Design Flow (75 gpm) Low Flow (50 gpm)

Alum Alum Alum Alum+ Alum + Alum Alum Alum+ Alum Alum Alum+ Alum+ Alum+
Dose Cost + NaOH Na2CO3 Cost +Lime NaOH + Cost Na2CO3 NaOH Na2CO3
Lime Na2CO3
mg/L L/H/m L/h/m L/h/m L/h/m L/H/m L/h/m L/h/m L/h/m L/H/m L/h/m L/h/m L/h/m

20 4.67 5.92 8.16 7.81 3.50 4.44 6.12 5.86 2.34 2.96 4.08 3.91

30 7.01 8.87 12.24 11.72 5.26 6.65 9.18 8.79 3.50 4.44 6.12 5.86

40 9.35 11.83 16.32 15.63 7.01 8.87 12.24 11.72 4.67 5.92 8.16 7.81

50 11.68 14.79 20.40 19.53 8.76 11.09 15.30 14.65 5.84 7.39 10.20 9.77

60 14.02 17.75 24.48 23.44 10.51 13.31 18.36 17.58 7.01 8.87 12.24 11.72

70 16.36 20.70 28.56 27.35 12.27 15.53 21.42 20.51 8.18 10.35 14.28 13.67

42
 Results are summarized in Table 1.5, for flows ranging from high to design to low,
and for a range of potential Aluminum Sulfate doses, with the costs in Lempiras per
household per month.

Demographic-based Model
The approximate chemical cost analysis based on flow through the plant is
determined using the following equation and the variables stated in Table 1.6.

Lempiras
= (DoseA)(DLPP)(DPM) ⋅ 0.000001mg/kg ⋅ (L/$)(PPH)[MWconv ⋅ MWchem ⋅ ($/kg)C + ($/kg)AS] 1.
Month
15

Table 1.6. Variables used to determine demographic-based cost analysis.

DoseA aluminum sulfate dose in mg/L

DGPP average daily water use in Liters per person
DPM days per month
PPH average number of persons per household
MWconv molecular weight conversion of chemical needed for aluminum sulfate dose
(3 for lime, 6 for sodium hydroxide)
MWchem molecular weight of chemical needed for aluminum sulfate dose in mg/L
($/kg)C cost of chemical in US$ per kg needed
($/kg)AS cost of aluminum sulfate in US$ per kg needed

Table 1.7 summarizes the chemical costs in Lempiras per household per month for a
range of Aluminum Sulfate doses. The second column lists the cost of using Aluminum
Sulfate alone, and the third, forth and fifth columns list the possible total chemical costs
(Aluminum Sulfate cost plus cost of the adjustment chemical). Although it may be easier
to design for the use of Sodium Hydroxide over Lime, from a cost standpoint Sodium
Hydroxide is much less efficient. Another option is the use of Sodium Carbonate, also
included in the analysis. Sodium Carbonate is slightly more cost efficient to use than
Sodium Hydroxide. Figure 1.25 shows a visual comparison of the cost results.

- 43 -
 Table 1.7. Estimated cost analysis for demographic-based model.

Alum Dose Alum Alum+Lime Alum+NaOH Alum+Na2CO3

(mg/l) L/h/month L/h/month L/h/month L/h/month
20 3.41 4.31 5.95 5.70
30 5.11 6.47 8.93 8.55
40 6.81 8.63 11.90 11.39
50 8.52 10.78 14.88 14.24
60 10.22 12.94 17.85 17.09
70 11.93 15.10 20.83 19.94

Chemical Costs Per Aluminum Sulfate

25

20
Lempiras (per month)

15

10

0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Alum Dose (m g/L)

Alum L/h/m Alum+Lime L/h/m Alum+NaOH L/h/m Alum+NaCO3 L/h/m

Figure 1.25. Estimated results of flow-based and demographic-based cost analyses.

- 44 -