EFFICIENCY COMPARISON OF VARIOUS SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANTS IN

BANGALORE CITY

Practical Training Report

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY in
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
by
PRETTY MARY
(192EN024)

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY KARNATAKA
SURATHKAL, MANGALORE – 575025
OCTOBER 2020
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
With deep sense of pride and gratitude, I sincerely would like to thank everyone who have supported, guided
and encouraged me for the successful completion of the summer internship at Karnataka State Pollution
Control Board (KSPCB),Bangalore, Karnataka.

I’m very thankful and would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. J. Alexander, IAS (Retired), Former
chairman of Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, Bangalore for providing me an opportunity to do
summer internship project at KSPCB.

I sincerely thank my supervisor Dr. BR. Balagangadhar, Chief Scientific Officer, KSPCB for providing me
an opportunity to work on the topic “ Efficiency comparison of various sewage treatment plants in
Bangalore city.”
I thank Dr. H. Roopa Devi, Senior Scientific Officer, KSPCB, for her consistent guidance, monitoring and
constant encouragement throughout the course of this internship.
I would like to thank each and everyone at KSPCB for their support and encouragement and for providing a
very good working environment.
I am thankful to Assistant Professor A.Azhoni and Associate Professor B. Manu, Department of Civil
Engineering, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Surathkal, for providing all the necessary facilities
for the successful completion of the internship. My profound gratitude to Dr. K.Swaminathan, Professor and
Head, Department of Civil Engineering for granting me the permission to present this internship report.I take
this opportunity to thank my family and friends who have stood by me as always and especially for their
thoughts, ideas and encouragement during the course of this internship.
 DECLARATION
I, PRETTY MARY (192EN024) student of third semester Environmental Engineering, National Institute of
Technology, Karnataka hereby declare that the Internship work at Karnataka State Pollution Control Board
(KSPCB) has been carried out by me under the guidance of Dr. BR. Balagangadhar (Chief Scientific Officer
- KSPCB) in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Technology in
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING. Further, the matter embodied in the internship report has not been
submitted previously by anybody for the award of any degree.

PRETTY MARY (192EN024)

Place: KSPCB, Bangalore

Date: 15-09-2020
 ABSTRACT
This study was conducted to evaluate the performance of existing sewage treatment plants (STP’s) in
Bangalore City, India. Currently, there are four different types of STP’s operating in Bangalore. They are
Sequential Batch Reactor, Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor, Extended Aeration Activated Sludge, and ECOSTP.
Sewage samples from each STP ( Influent and Effluent ) were collected and analyzed. The evaluation was
based on the percentage removal of various parameters like BOD, COD, TSS, Total Nitrogen and
Ammoniacal Nitrogen. Other tests like Fecal coliform and Toxicity factor were also conducted to understand
the quality of water. The overall efficiency of STP in the order from best to least is EAAS > MBBR >
ECOSTP > SBR. The result of the study concludes that EAAS technology shows the best efficiency of
treatment technology and SBR , the least efficient technology.
`

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SL.No CONTENTS PAGE.No

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

1. INTRODUCTION 1

2. TECHNOLOGIES USED FOR SEWAGE 3

TREATMENT

3. METHODOLOGY 9

4. PARAMETERS TAKEN 10

5. SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS WATER QUALITY 11

PARAMETERS

5.1. pH 11

5.2. Chemical Oxygen Demand 12

5.3. Biological Oxygen Demand 13

5.4. Total Suspended Solids 14

5.5. Nitrogen 15

5.6. Fecal Coliform 17

5.7. Toxicity Factor 18

6. TEST RESULTS 22

6.1. Calculation of Efficiency 22

6.1.1 SBR 23

6.1.2 MBBR 23

6.1.3 ECOSTP 24

` i
`

6.1.4 EAAS 24

6.2. Toxicity Test 25

7. CONCLUSIONS 26

REFERENCE 28

LIST OF TABLES

S.No CONTENT PAGE.No

1. Effluent discharge standard for Sewage Treatment Plant 10

2. Dilution series for Range Finding Test 20

3. Lograthmic Progression Scale for Standard Test 20

4. Percentage removal for different STP’s 22

5. Overall efficiency calculation of SBR 23

6. Overall efficiency calculation of MBBR 23

7. Overall efficiency calculation of ECOSTP 24

8. Overall efficiency calculation of EAAS 24

9. Analysis of toxicity 25

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Map of Bengaluru District 1

2a. Process flow diagram of a typical SBR 3

2b. Bar screen chamber of SBR at Greens SLR Cassia Court, 4

Horamavu, Bangalore

` ii
`

3. Flow diagram of MBBR 5

4a. Figure representing modules of ECOSTP 6

4b. Flow chart of ECOSTP 6

4c,4d. Sample collection (Inlet and Outlet) at ECOSTP in Geetanjali 7

Aristocracy, Whitefield, Bangalore

5a. Process flow diagram of a typical EAAS technology 8

5b. Aeration at EAAS STP at Golden Blossoms Apartment, 8

Whitefield, Bangalore

6. pH testing of collected samples using pH meter at KSPCB 11

7a. COD digester at water and wastewater laboratory, KSPCB 12

7b,7c. COD testing of samples using DOSIMAT plus at water and 13

wastewater laboratory, KSPCB

8. BOD testing of samples using Oxymeter plus at water and 14

wastewater laboratory, KSPCB

9a,9b. Testing of TSS using Imhoff cone and weigh balance at water 15
and wastewater laboratory, KSPCB

10a. Testing of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen at water and wastewater 16

laboratory, KSPCB

10b. Testing for Ammoniacal Nitrogen at water and wastewater 16

laboratory, KSPCB

10c. Test result of Nitrate in the sample collected from EAAS STP 17

11. Testing the samples to detect the presence of fecal coliform at 18

Microbiology Laboratory, KSPCB

12. Toxicity test of a sample collected at Aquatic Ecotoxicology 20

Laboratory, KSPCB

` iii
1. INTRODUCTION

The overall water management objectives of sewage treatment are associated with the
removal of pollutants and to protect and preserve our natural water resources. Protection
of human health from the pathogenic organisms present in sewage prior to the treated
effluent being discharged to the receiving water bodies are of specific concern. The
purpose of sewage treatment is to remove the organic and inorganic compounds where the
organic compounds are decomposed by microorganisms and inorganic compounds due to
sedimentation. As the rivers are the major sources of drinking water needs, the treatment
of sewage becomes necessary before discharging into the rivers

Bangalore also known as Bengaluru , the capital of of Karnataka state of India is widely
regarded as the "Silicon Valley of India" (or "IT capital of India") because of its role as the
nation's leading information technology (IT) exporter. A demographically diverse city,
Bangalore is the second fastest-growing major metropolis in India. Located in southern
India on the Deccan Plateau, at a height of over 900 m (3,000 ft) above sea level,
Bangalore is known for its pleasant climate throughout the year. Its elevation is the highest
among the major cities of India.

Fig.1: Map of Bengaluru District

Source: mapsofindia.com

`
The waste management scenario in the state of Karnataka is regulated by the Karnataka
State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) under the aegis of the Central Pollution Control
Board (CPCB) which is a Central Government entity.

Sewage-riddled storm-water drains and smelly, frothy lakes are a reality in Bengaluru.
Even the city’s residents are aware of the reasons behind both – illegal sewage dumping
and badly-functioning sewage treatment plants (STP). While Bengaluru has more than
2800 sewage treatment plants, the city produces 1,440 million liters per day (MLD) of
sewage. And a major concern about these sewage treatment plants are that more than 80%
of them are dysfunctional at various degree mainly due to wrong technology, incorrect
design and poor engineering which further leads to little benefit and huge operation and
maintenance costs.

The reason why the treated water does not meet the quality standard is because of the
wrong installation of the wrong technology at the wrong situation or wrong place. More
than 80% of the STP’s in Bangalore are Sequential Batch Reactor sewage treatment plants.
Marketing of STP’s is no different from other consumer products. Each seller claims
theirs to be the best. Its very difficult for a layman to choose among the different options.
An experienced consultant must specify the most appropriate technology not the one
vendor is most comfortable with. Typical open STP tender from most acceptable
technologies include SBR, MBBR, ECOSTP, EAAS, FAB, SAFF, FBBR, RBC, UASB
and MBR.

2
2. TECHNOLOGIES USED FOR SEWAGE TREATEMENT

The technologies currently being used to treat the sewage generated in the city of
Bangalore are as follows:

 Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR)

 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR)

 Extended Aeration Activated Sludge (EAAS)

 ECOSTP

The 50 KLD SBR based technology is used in the residence Greens SLR Cassia Court,
Horamavu, Bangalore. The 500 KLD (250 KLD × 2 streams) MBBR based technology is
functioning in the Samsung building of Bagmane Techpark, C.V.Raman Nagar, Bangalore.
The 400 KLD EAAS based technology is installed in the Golden Blossoms apartment,
Whitefield, Bangalore. The 17 KLD ECOSTP is build in the Geetanjali Aristocracy
apartment, Whitefield, Bangalore.

The Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR) is a fill and draw activated sludge system for
waste-water treatment. In this system, waste-water is added to a single “batch” reactor,
which treats water by removing undesirable components, and then discharged.
Equalization, aeration, and clarification can all be achieved using a single batch reactor.
To optimize the performance of the system, two or more batch reactors are used in a
predetermined sequence of operations. SBR systems have been successfully used to treat
both municipal and industrial waste-water. They are uniquely suited for waste-water
treatment applications characterized by low or intermittent flow conditions.

Fig.2a : Process flow diagram of a typical SBR

Source: Parsons Engineering Science, 2000

3
 Fig.2b : Bar screen chamber of Sequential Batch Reactor at Greens SLR Cassia Court, Horamavu,
Bangalore.

The Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) is a biological technology used for waste-
water treatment process suitable for municipal and industrial application. Another
common name is moving bed film reactor. MBBR offer an economical solution
for wastewater treatment. MBBR technology is the use of a moving bed bio-film reactor in
sewage treatment plants. MBBR waste-water treatment system enables efficient results of
the disposal using low energy. The technology is used to separate organic substances,
nitrification and denitrification. MBBR process uses the principle of aerobic digestion to
reduce the BOD and COD present in the effluent. In aerobic digestion, microorganisms
are grown on the biofilm in the presence of oxygen. Oxygen is used as a catalyst in this
process as it enhances the growth of microorganisms. The media used in the MBBR
process has a surface on which biofilm can grow. Generally, this media is made from
virgin HDPE material. However, there are media with different MOC’s as well, the most
common is PU (Polyurethane). There is a protected surface on each biofilm carrier which
increases the productivity and growth of heterotrophic and autotrophic bacteria within its
cells. It is this high-density population of bacteria that achieves high rate biodegradation
within the system while also offering process reliability and ease of operation.

4
 Fig.3 : Flow diagram of Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
Source : ecologicxsystem.com

The ECOSTP or the “Zero Power Zero Maintenance” Sewage Treatment Technology has
no moving parts compared to conventional STP's which use energy, hogging motors,
exhaust fans, pumps, and blowers. The product is a replica of a cow’s stomach based on
bio mimicry concepts.The ruminant stomach in a cow turns grass into milk, meat, and
wool. This technology biologize the same method to convert “bad” water to “good” water
using exactly the same ruminant stomach process.The natural digester model based on the
biology of a cow’s stomach is used to break down organic fecal content into treated water.
An anaerobic bacteria catalyst seed (one time addition) from a cow dung substrate is
added and the end result is that sewage you put in is converted to water, some gas, and
very little sludge. This is classic biomimicry―mimicking the self-healing processes of
nature and the use of an organism to perform a function, which in this case is the
anaerobic bacteria.

The Modules of ECOSTP are as follows:

 1st Stage Rumen Digester Filter (RDF)

 2nd Stage Rumen Digester Filter (RDF)

 3rd Stage Rumen Digester Filter (RDF)

 4th Stage tertiary treatment modules are:

 Planted Bio Filter (PBF) OR Activated Charcoal Filter+ Pressure Sand Filter

 Sand filter (SF) (slow, rapid, aerated)

5
Disinfection : Ozoniser /Chlorine Dozer/ UV Lamp

Fig.4a : Figure representing modules of ECOSTP

Source : ECOSTP Technologies,2020

The design concept is as per the flowchart below:

6
 Fig.4b : Flowchart of ECOSTP

Source : ECOSTP Technologies,2020

Fig. 4c, 4d: Sample collection (Inlet and Outlet) at ECOSTP in Geetanjali Aristocracy,
Whitefield,Bangalore.

This technology offers a sewage treatment solution taking maximum advantages of natural
processes to achieve a reliable and eco-friendly sewage treatment system. The technology
works independent from power supply and daily surveillance.

The Extended Aeration Activated Sludge (EAAS), which is a modification of the

conventional activated sludge process is widely used to treat domestic wastewater. EAAS
is designed to provide an aeration period much longer than the conventional activated
sludge process (generally 18-24 hours) followed by a 3-6 hour period in a final settling
tank for separation of the liquid and the sludge. Fig. 5a illustrate the process flow diagram
of EAAS. The flow scheme of EAAS is similar to that of the completely mixed process
except that primary settling is omitted. The process employs long aeration time, high
MLSS (Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids) concentration and therefore low F/M (Food
Micro Organisms ratio).

7
Fig.5a : Process flow diagram of a typical Extended Aeration Activated Sludge technology.

Source: Parsons Engineering Science,1999

Fig.5b : Aeration at EAAS STP at Golden Blossoms apartment, Whitefield, Bangalore.

8
3. METHODOLOGY

Inlet and outlet waters were collected from each STP. It was collected in plastic Jerry cans.
One liter water (separately for inlet and outlet) were collected for general parameters
which includes pH, BOD, TSS, and Total Nitrogen. One liter for COD and Ammoniacal
Nitrogen preserved with diluted Sulfuric acid. After the addition of acid, pH was tested on
site with pH paper. pH< 2 was considered ideal. 5 liters of water were collected for
Toxicity factor test.

The main objective of this study is to review and technically compare the performance of
all the four STP’s chosen.Water quality parameters namely pH, BOD, COD, TSS,
Ammoniacal Nitrogen, Total Nitrogen, Fecal Coliform, and Toxicity Factor were analyzed
under controlled conditions of temperature. Then, the most effective and efficient STP for
the city of Bangalore was chosen from the analysis of the influent and effluent of all the
STP’s in terms of percentage removal. Analysis was done as IS standards.

To calculate the percentage removal, parameters namely BOD, COD, TSS, Ammoniacal
Nitrogen, and Total Nitrogen were considered.

Overall efficiency was later calculated from the average of all values.

The tests were conducted in Central Laboratory of Karnataka State Pollution Control
Board. Overall a number of 40 samples were tested. The operating temperature were
controlled between 28- 32°C. Sampling was done in a composite manner and collected
samples were carried in ice box during the time between collection and analysis. Analysis
of the samples was done on the day of collection.

9
4. PARAMETERS TAKEN

The CPCB has issued the following discharge standards in accordance with the provision
of section 17(1)(g) of The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974.

Table 1 : Effluent discharge standard for Sewage Treatment Plant

Sl. No Parameters Parameters Limit

1. pH 6.5 - 9.0

2. Biochemical Oxygen Demand ( 3 days at Not more than 10

27°C) (mg/l)
3. Chemical Oxygen Demand (mg/l) Not more than 50

4. Total Suspended Solids (mg/l) Not more than 20

5. Ammoniacal - Nitrogen (mg/l) Not more than 5

6. Total Nitrogen (mg/l) Not more than 10

7. Fecal Coliform (MPN/100ml) Less than 100

8. Toxicity Factor -

Source : Water and Wastewater analysis - Central Pollution Control Board, India (Guide
Manual,2011)

10
5. SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS WATER QUALITY PARAMETERS ON
WATER

5.1. pH

The pH of water is a very important measurement concerning water quality. pH value is

the logarithm of reciprocal of hydrogen ion activity in moles per litre. In water solution,
variations in pH value from 7 are mainly due to hydrolysis of salts of strong bases and
weak acids or vice versa. Dissolved gases such as carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulphide and
ammonia also affect pH value of water.

The pH of water determines the solubility (amount that can be dissolved in the water) and
biological reactivity of organic constituents such as nutrients (Nitrogen) and heavy metals
(lead, copper, cadmium, etc.). Metals tend to be more toxic at lower pH because they are
more soluble. .Excessively high and low pH’s can be detrimental for the use of water.
High pH causes a bitter taste, water pipes and water-using appliances become encrusted
with deposits, and it depresses the effectiveness of the disinfection of chlorine, thereby
causing the need for additional chlorine when pH is high. Low-pH water will corrode or
dissolve metals and other substances. Pollution can change a water's pH, which in turn can
harm animals and plants living in the water. For instance, water coming out of an
abandoned coal mine can have a pH of 2, which is very acidic and would definitely affect
the aquatic life that live in it! Therefore it is necessary to keep the pH under control.

Fig.6 : pH testing of collected samples using pH Meter at KSPCB, Bangalore

11
5.2. Chemical Oxygen Demand : The chemical oxygen demand (COD) determines the
amount of oxygen required for chemical oxidation of organic matter using a strong chemical
oxidant, such as, potassium dichromate under open reflux conditions. This test is widely used
to determine:

a) Degree of pollution in water bodies and their self purification capacity,

b) Efficiency of treatment plants,

c) Pollution loads, and

d) Provides rough idea of biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) which can be used to
determine sample volume for BOD estimation.

The limitation of the test lies in its inability to differentiate between the biologically
oxidizable and biologically inert material.Higher COD levels mean a greater amount of
oxidizable organic material in the sample, which will reduce dissolved oxygen (DO)
levels. A reduction in DO can lead to anaerobic conditions, which is deleterious to
higher aquatic life forms. COD determination has an advantage over BOD test in that the
results can be obtained in less than 5 h where as BOD determination requires 3 or 5 days.

Fig. 7a : COD digester at Water and Wastewater laboratory, KSPCB.

12
 Fig. 7b, 7c : COD testing of samples collected using Dosimat Plus at Water and Wastewater laboratory, KSPCB.

5.3. Biochemical Oxygen Demand: Biochemical Oxygen Demand ( BOD ) is the most
important parameter to determine the degree of pollution in lakes and streams at any
time and their self purification capacities. It assess the biodegradable organic load of the
wastewaters for design of wastewater management system and thereafter to evaluate the
efficiency of the same. As per definition BOD of a sample is defined as the amount of
oxygen required by the micro-organisms to oxidize the organic matter by aerobic
microbial decomposition to stable inorganic forms at some standard time and
temperature.The higher the BOD value, the greater the amount of organic matter or
“food” available for oxygen consuming bacteria. If the rate of DO consumption by
bacteria exceeds the supply of DO from aquatic plants, algae photosynthesis or diffusing
from air, unfavourable conditions occur. Depletion of DO causes stress on aquatic
organisms, making the environment unsuitable for life. Further, dramatic depletion can
lead to hypoxia or anoxic environments.

13
Fig. 8 : BOD test of the samples collected using Oxymeter at Water and Wastewater laboratory, KSPCB.

5.4. Total Suspended Solids : Total Suspended Solids (TSS) is a measurement of the
total solids in a water or wastewater sample that are retained by filtration.TSS is an
important water quality parameter measure for wastewater treatment operations and
environmental health. Wastewater contains large quantities of suspended organic and
inorganic material that must be removed through screening, filtration or settling/flotation
methods prior to environmental discharge. TSS will also have adverse affects on UV
disinfection blocking/scattering UV light bound for pathogen disinfection or alternatively
requiring higher intensity for proper disinfection, increasing energy costs. If TSS is not
removed properly through treatment, high concentrations can lower the water quality in
the receiving environment. The suspended solids absorb light, causing increased water
temperature and decreased oxygen which creates an unfavorable environment for aquatic
life. For this reason, total suspended solids effluent levels are often regulated for
wastewater treatment plants discharging to the environment, such as National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits.

14
Fig.9a,9b : Testing for TSS using Imhoff cone and Weigh balance at Water and Wastewater laboratory,
KSPCB.

5.5. Nitrogen : In waters and waste waters, the forms of nitrogen of greatest interest are,
in order of decreasing oxidation state, namely, nitrate, nitrite, ammonia and organic
nitrogen. All these forms of nitrogen, as well as nitrogen gas are biochemically inter-
convertible and are components of nitrogen cycle. All these forms are of interest to water
chemist. Ammonia is present in surface and waste waters. Its concentration is generally
low in ground waters because it is absorbed in soil particles and clays and is not leached
readily from soils. Nitrates generally occur in trace quantities in surface water but may
attain high levels in some ground waters. In excessive limits, it contributes to the illness
known as methenoglobinemia in infants. Nitrite is an intermediate oxidation state of
nitrogen, both in oxidation of ammonia to nitrate or in the reduction of nitrate. Nitrous
acid which is formed from nitrite in acidic solution can react with secondary amines to
form nitrosoamines, many of which are known to be carcinogens. Organic nitrogen is
defined functionally as organic bound nitrogen in trinegative state. Analytically organic
and ammoniacal nitrogen can be determined together and called as Kjeldahl nitrogen.

15
Fig.10a: Testing for Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen at Water and Wastewater laboratory, KSPCB.

Fig. 10b: Testing for Ammoniacal Nitrogen at Water and Wastewater laboratory, KSPCB.

16
 Fig. 10c: Test result of Nitrate in the sample collected from EAAS STP.

5.6. Fecal Coliform : Fecal coliform bacteria are a group of bacteria that are passed
through the fecal excrement of humans, livestock and wildlife. The presence of fecal
coliform bacteria in aquatic environments indicates that the water has been contaminated
with the fecal material of man or other animals. Fecal coliform bacteria can enter rivers
through direct discharge of waste from mammals and birds, from agricultural and storm
runoff, and from untreated human sewage. At the time this occurs, the source water may
be contaminated by pathogens or disease producing bacteria or viruses, which can also
exist in fecal material. Some waterborne pathogenic diseases include ear infections,
dysentery, typhoid fever, viral and bacterial gastroenteritis, and hepatitis A. The presence
of fecal coliform tends to affect humans more than it does aquatic creatures, though not
exclusively. While these bacteria do not directly cause disease, high quantities of fecal
coliform bacteria suggest the presence of disease causing agents. The presence of fecal
contamination is an indicator that a potential health risk exists for individuals exposed to
this water.

17
 Fig.11: Testing the samples to detect Fecal Coliform at Microbiology laboratory, KSPCB.

5.7. Toxicity factor : Toxicity factor (TF) is the lowest dilution factor T of the test water
at which all fish survive. TF denotes the toxicity for fish. This is a dimensionless toxicity
unit, which is used as a standard parameter for compliance monitoring of waste water
discharges.Higher the TF, the greater the toxicity of the tested waste water.

It is an analytical method in which the minimum number of times an effluent/waste water

is required to be diluted for obtaining no mortality for Zebra fish.

The experiment involves a biochemical test to estimate the relative potency of a sample
compound to a standard compound (distilled water). Typical toxicity factor test involved
a stimulus ( water from STP in different dilutions) applied to a subject ( zebra fish ) and
a response ( ex. Death/Survival ) of the subject was noted. The intensity of stimulus is
varied by dilutions and depending on this intensity of stimulus, a change/response will be
followed by a subject.

The fish species used for the test is Brachidanio rerio of 30 ± 5 mm , corresponding to
approximately 0.2 to 0.3g of mass.

The fish shall be kept at temperature of approximately 25 °C in aerated chlorine free

potable water of roughly similar characteristics as the dilution water. The population
density of fish shall not exceed 1g per liter.

18
The stock shall be kept on a normal diet. The fish shall be free of manifest diseases or
visible malformations. The minimum acclimatization period shall be 10 days prior to test
under conditions of water quantity and illumination similar to those used in the test.
Mortality shall not exceed 1 percent per week.

For each test , fish shall be selected from the same stock tank, the population of which is
under conditions of water quality and illumination similar to those applied in the test.

The reagent used for the test is dilution water.

Preparation of dilution water

Dilution water is prepared by mixing 25 ml each of the following four stock solutions and
diluting to 1 litre with water. Thereafter the pH is adjusted using sodium hydroxide or
hydrochloric acid solution.

Calcium chloride solution - Dissolve 11.76 g of calcium chloride dihydrate (CaCl2, 2H2O)
in water and dilute to 1 litre.

Magnesium sulphate solution - Dissolve 4.93 g of magnesium sulphate heptahydrate

(MgSO4,7H2O) in water and dilute to 1 litre.

Sodium bicarbonate solution - Dissolve 2.59 g of sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) in water

and dilute to 1 litre.

Potassium chloride - Dissolve 0.23 g of potassium chloride (KC1) in water and dilute to 1
litre.

Aeration of the Dilution Water - The dilution water shall be aerated for 24 h prior to the
test.

Finding the Toxicity factor involves two steps. They are :

1. Range Finding Test

2. Standard Test

 Range Finding Test

Range finding test is a preliminary test for samples with unknown toxicity to determine
the range of dilution within which the TF value is expected.

In case the range of toxicity of an effluent is unknown, a range finding test should be
performed prior to the standard test to determine the concentration range within which 0%
19
and 100% mortality is observed within 24 hours. For example, in case of an effluent with
unknown toxicity, the following dilution series with a dilution factor of 10 may be used:

Table 2: Dilution series for Range Finding Test

Dilution Factor (T) Ratio of waste water to Parts of dilution water

test water to be added to one part
of waste water (by
volume)

1 1:1 0

10 1:10 9

100 1:100 99

1000 1:1000 999

 Standard Test

The test water is prepared by adding the effluent to the dilution water in a rounded
lograthmic progression scale as given below:

Table 3 : Lograthmic progression scale for Standard Test

Dilution Factor (T) Ratio of waste water to test water (by Parts of dilution water to be added
volume) to one part of waste water (by
volume)

1 1:1 0

2 1:2 1

4 1:4 3

8 1:8 7

16 1:16 15

32 1:32 31

64 1:64 63

125 1:125 124

250 1:250 249

500 1:500 499

1000 1:1000 999

20
Up to five consecutive concentrations have to be selected based on previous experience
with regard to potential toxicity of the effluent. Each test vessel is filled with 2 liters of
test water. One control vessel containing only dilution water is provided for each test. The
test may be performed with one replicate.

The dilution factor of the test solution with the highest concentration of effluent in which
all fish survive was recorded in round number as TF.

For example: If TF = 8, it shows that all or some of the fish die in the test solution for a T
value, less than 8 ( 1 part waste water + 7 parts of dilution water ) and all are alive in test
solutions for a T value of 8 and above, after 48 hours.

Fig.12: Toxicity test of a sample collected at Aquatic Eco toxicology Laboratory,KSPCB.

21
6. TEST RESULTS

Percentage removal for the four STP’s are shown on the table below:

Table 4: Percentage removal for different STP’s considered

Sl. Description SBR MBBR ECOSTP EAAS

No
( 50 KLD ) ( 500 KLD ) ( 17 KLD ) ( 400 KLD )

Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow

1. pH 7.0 7.2 7.1 7.2 6.6 7.2 6.4 6.8

2. BOD 124 80.1 78 6.2 93 66 173.7 7

( mg/l )

3. COD 371.52 206.64 324.08 83.6 422.3 156 377.2 30

( mg/l )

4. TSS ( mg/l ) 64 41 158 2 208 4 90 2

5. Ammoniaca 42 0.049 0.02 0.0163 72.8 4.8 10 0.237

l Nitrogen
( mg/l )

6. Total 57.09 2.67 3.619 0.15 94.7 8.58 19.12 4.194

Nitrogen
( mg/l )

7. Fecal >1600 Nil >1600 31 >1600 >1600 >1600 13

Coliform
(MPN/100m
l)

6.1. Calculation of efficiency

Efficiency of Sewage Treatment Plant in the removal of individual parameters is

calculated as per the following formula:

Efficiency = [( Inflow - Outflow )/Inflow] × 100

Overall efficiency of an STP is calculated by taking the average of all the individual
parameters’ efficiency.

22
6.1.1. SBR
Table 5 : Overall efficiency calculation of Sequential Batch Reactor

Sl.No Description Inflow (mg/l) Outflow (mg/l) Efficiency (%)

1. BOD 124 80.1 35.40

2. COD 371.52 206.64 44.37

3. TSS 64 41 35.93

4. Ammoniacal Nitrogen 42 0.049 99.88

5. Total Nitrogen 57.09 2.67 95.32

Average 62.18

6.1.2. MBBR
Table 6 : Overall efficiency calculation of Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor

Sl.No Description Inflow (mg/l) Outflow (mg/l) Efficiency (%)

1. BOD 78 6.2 92.05

2. COD 324.08 83.6 74.20

3. TSS 158 2 98.73

4. Ammoniacal Nitrogen 0.02 0.0163 18.5

5. Total Nitrogen 3.619 0.15 95.85

Average 75.86

23
6.1.3. ECOSTP
Table 7 : Overall efficiency calculation of ECOSTP

Sl.No Description Inflow (mg/l) Outflow (mg/l) Efficiency (%)

1. BOD 93 66 29.03

2. COD 422.3 156 63.05

3. TSS 208 4 98.07

4. Ammoniacal Nitrogen 72.8 4.8 93.41

5. Total Nitrogen 94.7 8.58 90.93

Average 74.89

6.1.4. EAAS
Table 8 : Overall efficiency calculation of Extended Aeration Activated Sludge

Sl.No Description Inflow (mg/l) Outflow (mg/l) Efficiency (%)

1. BOD 173.7 7 95.97

2. COD 377.2 30 92.07

3. TSS 90 2 97.77

4. Ammoniacal Nitrogen 10 0.237 97.63

5. Total Nitrogen 19.12 4.194 78.06

Average 92.3

24
6.2. Toxicity Test

Table 9 : Analysis of Toxicity

Details of sample : Toxicity test (TF) for samples of various STPs

Duration of Test : 48 Hours

Species : Zebra fish ( Brachidanio rerio )

Fish Length ( Average ) : 30 mm

Number of individuals : Five

Total volume : 2000 ml

Temperature of the test : 25°C ± 1°C

Method of analysis : IS 6582 ( part 2 ) : 2001

Sl. Description SBR MBBR ECOSTP EAAS

No
Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow Inflow Outflow

1. Toxicity T4 T250 T4 T250 T2 T16 T4 T1

Factor (TF)

25
7. CONCLUSIONS
This paper deals with the evaluation of total efficiency of cleaning process of selected
waste water treatment plants in Bangalore City. Performance evaluation was done for all
four STP’s and the conclusions drawn from the study are as follows:

All four sewage treatment plants are in working condition and the results of raw water and
treated water are observed as per the Central Pollution Control Board norms.

During the site visit it was observed that the Sequential Batch Reactor lacked the
motorized decanter which is the heart of the SBR technology. Motorized decanter serves
the same purpose as weir length in a settling tank. It suppresses and moderates upflow
velocity. It does not disturb top layer of settled sludge which is also the lightest. Instead
rudimentary decanters were used. The sludge hence pulled out enters the decant tank and
fouls tertiary filters. Decant tanks with sludge turns sceptic which is deadly. During the
testing of the samples collected from this STP, it was noted that the smell of the treated
water resembled the smell of bleaching powder which might be the reason for the high
toxicity content compared to the raw water.

It was observed that the STP with Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor technology skipped the
primary sedimentation which is the crux of an MBBR system. On consulting the STP
operator, it was understood that the idea of tankering out the sludge was adopted instead.
Primary sedimentation solids cannot be digested easily.Without primary settling, human
faeces slip out of MBBR tank. Solids slipping out of MBBR tank are inherently difficult
to settle, fluffy, light, and do not dewater hence it need thickening, digestion, and
conditioning.

During the site visit at the ECOSTP, it was observed that ozonization was adopted instead
of chlorination for disinfection. Black solids emitting foul odour was seen in chamber
from which the inlet water was collected.Too much of scum was seen on the top surface.
Solids was more than the liquid. Another drawback was that constant temperature check
was required to keep it within the mesophilic range. Test results shows very high fecal
coliform content in the treated water as well. This might be due to the improper
disinfection.

26
On consulting with an expert consultant of Extended Aeration Activated Sludge
technology, it was understood that extended aeration plants do not achieve denitrification
or phosphorus removal without additional unit processes.

Nitrogen is essential for cell growth, and ammonium is the preferred nitrogen source for
many microorganisms including Fecal Coliform. Hence higher the Ammoniacal nitrogen
in the treated water higher was the presence of Fecal coliforms. If the presence of Fecal
coliform is high inspite of the lower Ammoniacal Nitrogen concentration, then it might be
due to the presence of carbon or phosphorus.

COD and BOD were found to be quite high in the treated water of SBR and ECOSTP
which might be due to the other organic matter other than the Fecal coliform present in it.

Efficiency of individual parameters for all four STP’s were evaluated. In terms of BOD,
efficiency of STP’s is in the order EAAS > MBBR > SBR > ECOSTP. In terms of COD,
the order is EAAS > MBBR > ECOSTP > SBR. STP efficiency in terms of TSS is MBBR
> ECOSTP > EAAS > SBR. In case of Ammoniacal Nitrogen, the order is SBR > EAAS
> ECOSTP > MBBR . In terms of Total Nitrogen, the order is MBBR > SBR > ECOSTP
> EAAS. When looking into the overall efficiency, the STP’s can be be arranged as EAAS
> MBBR > ECOSTP > SBR.

The STP with EAAS technology was found to exhibit least toxicity and the SBR exhibited
the most toxicity. Higher toxicity in treated water might be due to the chemicals used
while disinfection.

As per the evaluation, EAAS showed better efficiency than other STP’s. Hence it can
be concluded that EAAS is the best STP.

27
REFERENCE
1. IS 3025 (Part 1) : 1987

2. IS 3025 (Part 11) : 2001

3. IS 3025 (Part 15) : 1984

4. IS 3025 (Part 34) : 1988

5. IS 3025 (Part 44) : 1993

6. IS 3025 (Part 58) : 2006

7. IS 6582 (Part 2): 2001

8. T. Mansi and Singal S.K. ( 2013), “ Performance Evaluation of Sewage Treatment

Plants in Lucknow City”.

9. Vítěz. T.,Ševčíková.J.,Oppeltová.P.(2011), “ Evaluation of the efficiency of selected

waste water treatment plant ”.

10. D.S. Pollyane and V.S. Marcos.(2017), “ Performance evaluation of a large sewage
treatment plant in Brazil, consisting of a UASB reactor followed by activated sludge ”.

11. Metcalf & Eddy, Inc., George Tchobanoglous, Franklin Burton, H. David Stensel,
“ Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Reuse ”, Fourth Edition, New York, McGraw-
Hill Education, 2002.

12. An article on “Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet - Sequencing Batch Reactors” by

United States Environmental Protection Agency, 1999.

13. An article on “Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet - Packing Plants” by United States
Environmental Protection Agency, 2000.

28