Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering (2021) 19:1005–1013

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40201-021-00665-2

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of iron and manganese removal effectiveness

by treatment plant modules based on water pollution index;
a comprehensive approach
Nima Kalvani 1 & Alireza Mesdaghinia 1,2 & Kamyar Yaghmaeian 1,3 & Samaneh Abolli 1,4 & Sommayeh Saadi 1 &
Abdollah Rashidi Mehrabadi 1,2,5 & Mahmood Alimohammadi 6

Received: 6 February 2021 / Accepted: 5 April 2021 / Published online: 2 May 2021
# Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Abstract
Groundwater is a viable alternative when access to surface water resources is limited. Iron and manganese are known
ions in soil and naturally in groundwater sources. However, human activities also are responsible. To identifying the best
module for removing manganese and iron in the water treatment plant (WTP) of Mazandaran, 516 samples were taken
from raw and treated water. The concentration of manganese, iron, was measured by atomic absorption spectrophotom-
etry, and turbidity was used with the nephelometry method. The water pollution index (WPI) was applied for catego-
rizing the status of pollution in treated water. The effect of seasonal temperature and backwashing (At flow rates of 3.5,
9.2, and 15.3 m h-1) on the sand filter efficiency was also investigated. The highest concentrations of manganese, iron,
and turbidity in raw water were 0.744, 6.70 mg L-1, and 41.8 NTU, and in treated water were 0.67, 1.09 mg L-1, and
5.58 NTU, respectively. The mean concentration of manganese and iron in raw and treated water were 0.24 ± 0.1, 0.93 ±
0.91, 0.105 ± 0.06 and 0.18 ± 0.14 mg L-1 respectively. The WPI statuses in drinking water were excellent for manga-
nese and iron in 95.74 and 53.88 % of the samples and very poor in 1.16 and 12.01 % of the samples, respectively, and
its classification for drinking water for manganese and iron was excellent ˃ good ˃ extremely polluted ˃ polluted and
the concentration of iron was more than manganese in treated water. The study of temperature’s effect on sand filters
showed that the removal efficiency in warm seasons was higher than in cold seasons. Also, the turbulence in the
backwash with the 9.2 m h− 1 rates, is lesser than other speeds, and in this flow, after 270 s, the turbidity decreases
to less than 10 NTU. Spearman correlation comparison showed that the parameters amounts after filtration decreased
significantly (p ≤ 0.0001) in comparison to raw water. The results showed that module #1 that used open-aeration and
chlorine as oxidations, was most effective in removing iron and manganese. In the end, the WTP couldn’t diminish the
parameters completely and need subsidiary units.

Keywords Water . Manganese . Iron . WPI . Mazandaran

* Abdollah Rashidi Mehrabadi 3

Centre for Solid Waste Management (CSWM), Institute for
a_rashidi@sbu.ac.ir Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
* Mahmood Alimohammadi
4
m_alimohammadi@tums.ac.ir Health Center of Garmsar, Semnan University of Medical Sciences,
Semnan, Iran
1
Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public 5
Health Equity Research Center (HERC) Tehran University of
Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2
Center for Water Quality Research (CWQR), Institute for 6
Civil, Water and Environmental Engineering Faculty, Shahid
Environmental Research (IER), Tehran University of Medical Beheshti University, 19839-69411, Tehran, Iran
Sciences, Tehran, Iran
1006
Introduction
Without exaggeration, after air, water is the most significant
need of all creatures, especially humans, and it is necessary to
perform all the vital functions of the body [1, 2].
Groundwater is one of the best resources available to
humans, and on the other hand, the reduction of desir-
able surface water resources or sometimes the contami-
nation of these resources is a strong reason to increase
the tendency to extract groundwater [3–5].
A group of mineral ions such as iron and manganese, in
specified doses, are essential and useful for human survival.
But when their rate increases significantly, adverse effects
occur. For example, too much manganese intake affects the
central nervous system [6, 7]. Also excessive iron intake can
lead to health problems such as affecting the digestive system
(anorexia or diarrhea), disrupting other organs such as the
spleen and nervous system, and in more severe cases, death
[8, 9].
Contamination of groundwater with iron and manga-
nese ions can be of natural or anthropogenic origin. As
a result of human activities such as mining or improper
disposal of wastewater, water sources become contaminat-
ed with these mineral metals [10, 11]. These ions are
divalent in the absence of oxygen. After the necessary
conditions for oxidation and the presence of sufficient
oxygen, these ions increase to their higher capacities
[12, 13].
Problems such as increased turbidity, discoloration,
taste, and odor in water can be related to the presence of
iron and manganese ions. They can also cause acute dis-
ruptions in various parts of the treatment plant or distri-
bution network. For example; Due to the growth of bac-
teria, the quality of distribution network pipes decreases
and gradually wears out. On the other hand, the chlorine
depletion and the absence of sufficient free chlorine to the
point of consumption are side effects of these ions pres-
ence that cause secondary contamination. Also, if water
with a high concentration of mineral elements is used in
industries with boilers, it will lead to dangerous accidents
[14].
What has been said is only part of these ions conse-
quences and problems in groundwater. Due to the wide-
spread use of groundwater as a reliable source, increasing
water use in human service and industrial activities, the
lack of a proper and uniform understanding of the protec-
tion of groundwater aquifers, and the permanent depen-
dence of the planet Earth on water, the study of these ions
in groundwater in Mazandaran province is beneficial.
Considering the geographical and study conditions of this
region, the aims of this study were;
In this study, the quality of drinking water that outs of
treatment plants related to 10 cities out of 21 cities in
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
Mazandaran province has been studied. These water supply
systems direct the raw water from the underground wells to
the treatment plant and ultimately provide the drinking water
needed by 116,000 residents.
& Identify the best water treatment layout to reduce the
concentration of iron and manganese and the turbidity
in drinking water
& Measuring water quality with the help of water pollution
index (WPI)
& Investigation the effect of temperature and backwashing
on the efficiency of sand filters in water treatment plant
(WTP)
Materials and methods
Study area
Mazandaran province had ~ 23,756 km2 area and, it had
1.46 % of the total space of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
This province is located in the northern part of Iran in the form
of a green strip. According to the latest census of the Statistical
Organization of Iran, this province has a population of
3,283,582 and has a common border with the Caspian Sea.
The average annual rainfall in this province is 977 mm. re-
garding the temperature parameter, due to the high relative
humidity and a large number of cloudy days, the air temper-
ature is moderate and, the temperature range is limited. This
situation leads to hot and humid summers and mild winters
with occasional frosts [15]. Due to the high groundwater level
in this province, the tendency to extract water from wells and
use it for drinking is high. Out of 42 water supply systems in
Mazandaran province, 19 systems were selected that had al-
most identical modules to reduce the amount of manganese,
iron, and turbidity and supplied water to ten cities out of 3
cities in this region. The first, second, and third cities in this
study had 11, 5, and 3 water supply systems, respectively,
which were sampled from their treated water. On average,
the centers of these cities have 15 km distant from each other.
These WTPs used groundwater wells to supply drinking
water to 10 cities and ~ 760,000 people through 4 modules
of treating and, the water treatment method is conventional in
the studied WTPs.
After water extraction from the well, groundwater enters
the reservoir, and depending on the layout, pre-chlorination,
aeration, filtration with sand filters (Rapid Sand Gravity Filter)
and, final disinfection can be used.
The main lever to reduce the amount of iron and manga-
nese in raw water in these WTPs are the use of oxidation and
filtration (pressurized sand filter). The sand substrate used in
these filters had three layers and its specifications are shown in
Table 1.
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013 1007

Table 1 Specifications of sand

filter layers in WTP Parameter First layer Second layer Third layer

D10 (mm) 0.8 1.08 2.8

D60 (mm) 2 2.08 4.5
D90(mm) 2.28 2.6 4.9
UC* 2.5 1.93 1.6
Specific gravity [g cm-3] 2.3 2.3 2.3
Height of filtration medium (mm) 250 250 250

*UC is uniformity coefficient which is calculated from the ratio of D60/D10

Module of facilities
There are four modules for the removal of iron and manganese
from raw water in Mazandaran’s WTP:
First module; steps of this module include; extracting
water from the well, storing it in the reservoir. This layout
has both open aeration and pre-chlorination. In the next
stage, to reduce the concentration of iron and manganese
ions, water enters the sand filters and in the last step, final
disinfection is performed. For regulating the necessary
pressure in the distribution network, water enters the el-
evated tanks and is transferred to the distribution net-
work. It is also noted that in this modules, chlorine is
injected into the water as the final disinfectant.
In the second module; after being extracted water from
the well, it enters multi-story platter aerators. In the next
step, water is stored in the reservoir. After the residence
time, the water enters the sand filter, and finally, the post
chlorination is done. Pre chlorination is removed in this
method.
The third module; the only difference between this meth-
od and the first module is putting aside the aeration step.
Fourth module; this module includes; extracting water
from the well, storage in the reservoir tank, and after the
residence period, (depending on the volume of the reser-
voir), water enters the sand filter and, post disinfection is
performed. The only source of oxygen in this is in contact
with the air in the water reservoir. Pre-chlorination is not
performed in this module either.
It is important to note that galvanized coatings are used to
protect the treatment plant equipment from moisture. Sand
filters are also placed inside uncovered concrete containers.
Figure 1 shows an illustration of the four modules de-
scribed. All available modules have the backwashing effluent.
Sampling and analysis
Water quality was assessed by sampling raw groundwater at
the entrance to the treatment plant and output flow from sand
filters at a different season in 2016–2017. The number of
samples taken before treatment was 258 samples and after
treatment was 258 samples. The samples were transported in
polyethylene bottles with a volume of 250 ml and maintained
by the appropriate temperature conditions (0–4 °C) by the
cold box to the reference laboratory. The method of atomic
absorption spectrophotometry for manganese and iron detec-
tion was used. The model of the device was Hitachi U3900-
3900 H. The nephelometric method and the turbidity meter
model PCE - TUM 20 were used for turbidity measurement
[15, 16].
Water pollution index (WPI)
When a (or some) contaminant exists in drinking water, we
should examine its pollution status. There are many perfor-
mances to indicate water quality [17] but one of them is a
flexible approach that can use for measuring physical, chem-
ical, and biological parameters. This approach is recognized as
the WPI. Also, this method is most useful for water with
domestic and drinking aims. For calculating this approach
for treated water in this study, the concentration of parameters
(Ci) has been estimated. The standard or highest permissible
limit (Si) of manganese and iron are available (0.4 and 0.3 mg
L− 1) and, the number of samples (n) after treatment was 258
cases. Finally, Eq. 1 and Eq. 2 was used.
1 X1
WPI ¼ PLi ð1Þ
n n
Where pollution load (PLi) is;
 
Ci  Si
PLi ¼ 1 þ ð2Þ
Si
Groundwater quality analysis based on the water pollution
index is done by classifying sampling results into four differ-
ent classes;
The water is excellent when WPI is ˂ 0.5; the quality of
water is good if 0.5˂ WPI ≤ 0.75; when index value varied
from 0.75 ˂WPI ≤ 1, water is moderately polluted and it is
extremely polluted when WPI is greater than 1. The functions
and instructions in this research extracted from study by
Hossain et al. [18].
1008
Water quality based on sand filters efficiency
In this study, to investigate the effect of temperature on the
sand filter efficiency, the principle of identically distributed
samples in different seasons was considered. In the warm
seasons (20th Mar. − 21th Sep.), 129 samples of raw water
and 129 samples of treated water were taken. This cycle was
repeated for the cold seasons of the year (22th Sep. − 19th
Mar.) [15].
Also, the effect of the backwash on sand filters in reducing
turbidity was investigated by the sampling of sand filter
effluent after backwashing at three speeds of 3.5, 9.2, and
15.3 m h− 1 .
Statistical analysis
First, the data of this study were examined for kurtosis and
skewness, and in the next stage, the normality of the data was
Fig. 1 Overview of the four layouts in Mazandaran ‘s WTP
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
examined by Smirnov-Kolmogorov statistical test, and finally,
the correlation of the data before and after treatment was an-
alyzed. Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS –
IBM version 20) and Excel 2016 software was used to calcu-
late the descriptive statistics and for extracting the necessary
tables or graphs.
Result
Lab results & efficiency of modules
According to the latest guidelines of the World Health
Organization (WHO) and the standards of Iran, the permissible
limit of iron in water is 0.3 mg L− 1, the maximum permissible
limit and, the maximum contaminant level of manganese are
0.4, 0.1 mg L− 1, respectively and, the turbidity in drinking
water should be 1 NTU (Nephelometric Turbidity Unit).
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
Fig. 1 (continued)
Table 2 summarized the comparison of water samples, before
and after treatment (regardless of modules layout). According to
this table, 250 (96.89 %), 211 (81.78 %) and, 257 (99.61 %)
samples related to raw water, in compare with standards, had
higher amounts of manganese, iron, and turbidity.
The highest concentrations of manganese and iron ions in
raw water were 0.744, 6.70 mg L− 1, and turbidity was 41.8
NTU, respectively. Also, in raw water samples, the mean con-
centration of iron ion (0.93 ± 0.91 mg L− 1) was higher than
the standard range and, the mean concentration of manganese
ion (0.24 ± 0.1 mg L− 1) at these samples was higher than the
maximum contaminant level. The mean of turbidity in raw
water and treated water samples 5.92 ± 8.07 and 1.25 ± 0.82,
respectively.
While the results of treated water samples show that the
highest amount of manganese and iron ions after treatment were
1009
0.67 and 1.09 mg L− 1, respectively, and the turbidity was 5.58
NTU. It is also important to note that none of the layouts were
able to reduce the turbidity of all samples to the standard range,
and 135 samples of treated water had turbidity above 1 NTU.
Different layouts of water supply systems showed; module
#1 which used both open-aeration and chlorine oxidations
were most effective in removing iron and manganese. The
removal efficiencies of this method were 62.5 and 77.7 %
for manganese and iron ions, respectively.
The second rank of the removal percentage belonged to
module #3. In this method, chlorine, as the only oxidizing
agent, reduces manganese and iron ions by 58 and 67.7 %
and as a result, turbidity is reduced by decreasing the amount
of these ions.
The module #2 has no chemical oxidants and, only tray
aerators (Physical oxidation) have been used to reduce
1010 J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013

Table 2 The comparison between understudy parameters in raw and treated water, 2016–2017

Parameter Raw water Treated water

Manganese Iron Turbidity Manganese Iron Turbidity

Min. 0.036 0.12 0.94 0.01 0.01 0.31

Max. 0.74 6.70 41.8 0.67 1.09 5.58
Mean±SD 0.24±0.1 0.93±0.91 5.92±8.07 0.105±0.06 0.18±0.14 1.25±0.82
Higher than standard level (%) 97.67* 81.78 99.61 12.79 12.01 49.22

* The maximum contaminant level is considered for manganese

manganese and iron ions. However, a relatively good removal
percentage was obtained for iron ions (57 %). This method
had 48.7 % efficiency for manganese removal.
In the fourth module, neither air is used as an oxidizer nor
chemical substances such as chlorine. In this method, water
enters the sand filters after entering the storage tank and stays
for a specific time. The removal efficiency of manganese and
iron ions by this method was 38.9 and 42.6 %, respectively.
The status of WPI
The result of groundwater WPI in Mazandaran province
showed that more than 53.87 and 95.73 % of samples had
WPI ≤ 0.5 for manganese and iron elements. But some sam-
ples had the pollution index above 1. This index varied from
0.04 to 1.67 and 0.03–3.63 for manganese and iron respec-
tively. On the next (Table 3), the number of samples catego-
rized based on WPI.
Graph 1 also shows the effect of backwashing of sand
filters at three speeds of 3.5, 9.2, and 15.3 m h− 1 on the
turbidity of the water outlet.
According to this figure, with increasing backwashing
speed, the time to reach the proper turbidity in the effluent is
reduced and the maximum turbidity point is considerably
higher at the backwashing rate of 15.3 m h− 1 than turbidity
at the same point in the velocity of 3.5 m h− 1.
There was no significant difference in the turbidity of
the effluent at 3.5 and 9.2 m h− 1. Only at the beginning of
the flow at the rate of 3.5 m h− 1, the turbidity increased to
4000 NTU, which gradually decreases over time. But at
9.2 m h− 1 compared to other speeds, the current calm
down sooner and, after 270 s, the turbidity decreases to
less than 10 NTU.
Evaluation of WTP efficiency with statistical tests

The amount of kurtosis and skewness of the data showed that

Filters performance monitoring
the amount of data scatter was outside the range of -2 to + 2.
Smirnov-Kolmogorov test was used for more detailed exam-
The effect of temperature in the sand filter efficiency showed
ination and the significance of the recent test was < 0.05. As a
that the removal of manganese and iron ions in the warm
result, non-parametric tests such as Spearman correlation were
seasons was higher than in cold seasons. Turbidity has also
used to evaluate the efficiency of the filters and the reduction
benefited from a concentration reduction of these ions and on
of the studied parameters.
average, the efficiency of filters in removing manganese and
The results of the Spearman correlation study for raw water
iron parameters in thermal seasons was higher than 50 %. In
and treated water parameters showed that manganese, iron,
these seasons, the efficiency of filters to remove turbidity was
and turbidity were significantly reduced after treatment and
56.9 % and as result was better than the cold seasons of the
Sig. (2-tailed) in this correlation for each parameters were
year. Table 4 shows the effect of temperature on sand filters
0.0001.
and the removal efficiency of the examined parameters.

Table 3 The status of WPI of manganese and iron in treated water

WPI Number of samples Percent (%) Table 4 The effect of temperature on the sand filters efficiency 2016–
2017
Category Status Mn Fe Mn Fe
Sampling period Efficiency of sand filters (%)
≤0.5 Excellent 247 139 95.74 53.88
Manganese Iron Turbidity
0.5–0.75 Good 6 60 2.33 23.26
0.75-1 Moderately polluted 2 28 0.77 10.85 20th Mar. −21th Sep. 56.8 69.7 56.9
˃1 Extremely Polluted 3 31 1.16 12.01 22th Sep. −19th Mar. 48.2 61.7 50.8
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
Graph 1 Comparing the turbidity
of the backwashing outlet in
different flow rates
Discussion
Iron and manganese are common contaminants in drinking
water sources but are more likely to be present in groundwater
aquifers. These elements are normally found in water sources
up to a concentration of 1 mg L− 1. However, in some regions
such as Mazandaran, iron has been observed in concentrations
greater than 6 mg L− 1 [19, 20, 21].
Consumption of water that contains high concentrations of
these elements causes a wide range of problems. These prob-
lems start with the malfunction of the facilities, such as clog-
ging of the filters and decreasing pipes diameter in the WTP,
and continue until the clothes become stained and create an
unpleasant taste at the point of use. It is also important to
emphasize that long-term exposure to these elements with
high doses can also pose health risks [22, 23].
The spectrophotometric atomic absorption experiments re-
sults showed that the raw groundwater samples had higher
mean concentrations of iron and manganese than standards
of drinking water. The highest levels of iron and manganese
in Mazandaran groundwater were 6.7 and 0.744 mg L− 1.
After treatment, the amount of manganese in 225 and 136
samples was higher than the maximum permissible limit
(0.4 mg L− 1) and maximum contaminant level (0.1 mg L−
1
). Also, turbidity in 135 samples couldn’t pass the provisions.
Because the water treatment method in this region was con-
ventional and just had units such as; screening, aeration, sed-
imentation, filtration, disinfection. In these WTPs defined
chemical material was not used for manganese/iron coagulat-
ing and removing and, the principal is open aeration or pre
chlorination. Therefore, WTPs were not efficient in reducing
iron, manganese, and turbidity [9, 25]. The existing layouts
can utilize other useful methods such as zeolite Y to soften
groundwater from manganese and iron [19].
The comparison between the types of layouts in diminishing
iron and manganese elements is shown in Graph 2. According
to this graph, when a disinfectant is used as an oxidizer at the
beginning of the flow and aeration is performed at the same
time in module #1, the removal efficiency is higher than other
1011
modules. This module can be one of the best choices to reduce
the concentration of manganese and iron and, by its nature, the
turbidity of drinking water.
As mentioned, WTP uses physical methods to reduce inor-
ganic elements in the study area. While to increase the remov-
al efficiency, more acceptable means, such as biological oxi-
dation and efficiency of bacteria, activated carbon powder,
and granules, oxidation with ozone can be used [24]. For
example, the mean concentration of manganese and iron in
groundwater in some parts of China was 1.58 and 1.12 mg L-
1, and the use of inactivated filters containing penicillin and
sodium chloride (NaCl) had a removal efficiency of 98 %.
Also, in other region, the chemical oxidation had 81 % remov-
al efficiency [25]. Another study showed that the biological
bed of filters plays a significant role in reducing manganese
and iron. In other words, the formation of a suitable substrate
in the filters to remove these elements can depend on the
quality of the raw water. So identifying effective microorgan-
isms is a significant step in the removal process [26–28].
In this study, to find one or more basic solutions that are
cost-effective and can have acceptable results to reduce the
amount of manganese and iron in drinking water and reduce
the side effects of their additional presence in the distribution
network, the water pollution index (WPI) was used [29]. The
WPI is based on the maximum permissible limit and its ben-
eficial approach suggested by WHO. In this study the water
quality categorized by concentrations of manganese and iron
in treated water. The water pollution listed as excellent, good,
moderately polluted and extremely polluted. In this study, this
index proved that the quality of drinking water in most of the
samples was acceptable. However, 11.62 % of total samples
were moderately polluted and about 12.01 % of samples were
extremely polluted, chiefly in iron samples. These results
reflected that the quality of drinking water, especially outlet
of module #2 and #4, request to extra or advanced treatment.
The result of one WPI study in Indonesia for river site samples
was consistent with our research. Its study expressed the WPI
range was from 0.72 to 0.89 and, the quality of water was
good [30]. Another study in India revealed that 63 % of total
1012
Graph 2 The efficiency
comparison between different
modules in WTP
samples was drinkable and other samples needed to treatment
processes [31].
Iron and manganese are minerals found in the soil in the
form of oxides. Ferric (Fe3+) and manganese (Mn4+) oxides
are very insoluble, but when water contains carbon dioxide or
acidic conditions, these ions reduce to their lower capacities.
As a result, divalent iron and manganese are dissolved in
water. The levels of these ions in surface water are usually
negligible, but in groundwater sources, they can cause prob-
lems for industries, distribution networks, and ultimately con-
sumers. Due to the high amount of these ions in the drinking
water samples of the study area, the maximum values of 0.74
and 6.7 mg / l for manganese and iron, from various removal
methods such as (1) oxidation, (2) leaching and filtration (3)
Ion exchange (4) Stabilization with separating agents and (5)
Softening with lime used [32, 33].
The effect of temperature on the removal efficiency of the
desired metals in this study showed that air temperature and
warm seasons have contributed to the efficiency of sand fil-
ters. Most likely, the bacteriological colony was formed in the
filter bed. The study of Kwakye-Awuah et al. [19] also
showed that the efficiency of the sand filter column in summer
was higher than the control column, which was in line with
our results.
On the other hand, the viscosity of the flow in hot air is
lower than in the cold seasons of the year, which leads to
better fluid flow through the filter bed.
This study showed outlet water from filters that are cleaned by
slow backwash can be of higher quality than other cleaning
methods. Also, if the biological tissue is formed randomly, slow
backwashing does not destroy the biological mass-produced.
This study showed that backwashing of WTPs filters in two
flow rates, at 3.5 and 9.2 m h− 1, there was less turbulence and
turbidity than 15.3 m h− 1 flow rate. But in the first flow at a
speed of 3.5 m h− 1, in the first 60 s of backwashing, turbidity
increased to 4000 NTU. Proper washing of the filters seems to
require a specific surface velocity, which was seen at a flow
rate with a 9.2 m h− 1 speed [27].
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
Numerous studies have shown that slow sand filtration
reduces a wide range of pollutants, especially turbidity. As
these filters are an acceptable option for wastewater treatment,
they are suitable for treating groundwater has less pollution
variability [34, 35].
Conclusion
About a third of the world’s population uses groundwater
for various purposes. Due to the high water level in
groundwater aquifers in Mazandaran province, one of
the ablest choices is to extract groundwater for drinking.
In summary, the results of this study in Mazandaran prov-
ince showed that the concentrations of manganese and
iron in groundwater are higher than national and interna-
tional standards. The use of different WTP modules indi-
cated that Module #1, which uses aeration and chemicals
for pre-disinfection, was more efficient than other layouts
and it was the best suitable module for diminishing man-
ganese and iron from groundwater. The WPI for manga-
nese and iron contaminants in drinkable water for 95.74
and 53.88 % of samples were excellent but in 1.16 %
(Mn2+) and 12.02 % (Fe2+) of samples, WPI was extreme-
ly polluted. The index shows that existing modules only
cannot lead to a significant reduction in pollutants and
should to use other chemicals and equipment to reach
the standard limits and requirements for drinking water.
Also, the air temperature affected these modules and, in
the warm season, the removal of manganese and iron has
been higher than in the cold season. Backwashing of sand
filters showed that the use of a constant surface velocity
(in this research; 9.2 m h−1) can reduce turbidity in the
output stream.
In this study, distorting inputs such as sampling on days of
prolonged and disturbing rains, the service life of the filters,
and their off-line time were eliminated, which is suggested to
be considered as effective variables in future studies.
J Environ Health Sci Engineer (2021) 19:1005–1013
Acknowledgements This research is the result of a master’s degree the-
sis. The authors of this study sincerely appreciate the consideration of
Tehran University of Medical Sciences and the Water and Wastewater
Engineering Organization of Mazandaran Province.
Declarations
Conflict of interest The authors of this study explain that there is no
conflict of interest with each other.
References
1. Abolli S, et al. Comparing groundwater fluoride level with WHO
guidelines and classifying at-risk age groups; based on health risk
assessment. Int J Environ Anal Chem. 2020. https://doi.org/10.
1080/03067319.2020.1863389.
2. Postawa A, et al. Best practice guide on the control of iron and
manganese in water supply. London: IWA Publishing; 2013.
3. Singh KP, et al. Chemometric analysis of groundwater quality data
of alluvial aquifer of Gangetic plain, North India. Anal Chim Acta.
2005;550(1–2):82–91.
4. Abolli S, et al. Survey of drinking water quality of household water
treatment and public distribution network in Garmsar city, under the
control of water safety plan. Iran J Health Environ. 2019;12(3):
477–88.
5. Abolli S, et al. Water safety plan: A novel approach to evaluate the
efficiency of the water supply system in Garmsar. Desalin Water
Treat. 2021;211:210–20.
6. Fathabad AE, et al. Determination of heavy metal content of proc-
essed fruit products from Tehran’s market using ICP-OES: a risk
assessment study. Food Chem Toxicol. 2018;115:436–46.
7. Gage B. Biological iron and manganese removal, pilot and full
scale applications. in 2001 Ontario Water Works Association
Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; 2001.
8. Yavuz H, Say R, Denizli A. Iron removal from human plasma
based on molecular recognition using imprinted beads. Mater Sci
Eng C. 2005;25(4):521–8.
9. Namdeo M, Bajpai S. Chitosan–magnetite nanocomposites
(CMNs) as magnetic carrier particles for removal of Fe (III) from
aqueous solutions. Colloids Surf A. 2008;320(1–3):161–8.
10. Marsidi N, Hasan HA, Abdullah SRS. A review of biological aer-
ated filters for iron and manganese ions removal in water treatment.
J Water Process Eng. 2018;23:1–12.
11. Radfard M, et al. Drinking water quality and arsenic health risk
assessment in Sistan and Baluchestan, Southeastern Province,
Iran. Hum Ecol Risk Assess Int J. 2019;25(4):949–65.
12. Zakeri HR, et al. Chemical coagulation-electro fenton as a superior
combination process for treatment of dairy wastewater: perfor-
mance and modelling. Int J Environ Sci Technol. 2021. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s13762-021-03149-w.
13. Yousefi M, et al. Data on corrosion and scaling potential of drinking
water resources using stability indices in Jolfa, East Azerbaijan,
Iran. Data in brief. 2018;16:724–31.
14. Diaz-Alarcón J, et al. Removal of iron and manganese in ground-
water through magnetotactic bacteria. J Environ Manag. 2019;249:
109381.
15. Casalini LC, et al. Manganese removal efficiencies and bacterial
community profiles in non-bioaugmented and in bioaugmented
sand filters exposed to different temperatures. J Water Process
Eng. 2020;36:101261.
16. Agency USEP, Method 180.1: Determination of turbidity by
nephelometry. Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
1013
office of Research and Development U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Cincinnati, Ohio 45268; 1993.
17. Suriadikusumah A, et al. Analysis of the water quality at Cipeusing
river, Indonesia using the pollution index method. Acta Ecol Sin.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chnaes.2020.08.001
18. Hossain M, Patra PK. Water pollution index–A new integrated
approach to rank water quality. Ecol Ind. 2020;117:106668.
19. Kwakye-Awuah B, et al. Adsorptive removal of iron and manga-
nese from groundwater samples in ghana by zeolite Y synthesized
from bauxite and kaolin. Water. 2019;11(9):1912.
20. Aziz HA, Smith PG. Removal of manganese from water using
crushed dolomite filtration technique. Water Res. 1996;30(2):
489–92.
21. Jensen DL, et al. Speciation of dissolved iron (II) and manganese
( I I ) i n a g r o u nd w a t e r po l l ut i o n pl um e . En v i r o n Sc i
Technol. 1998;32(18):2657–64.
22. Sarin P, et al. Iron release from corroded iron pipes in drinking
water distribution systems: effect of dissolved oxygen. Water Res.
2004;38(5):1259–69.
23. Aschner M, et al. Manganese and its role in Parkinson’s disease:
from transport to neuropathology. Neuromol Med. 2009;11(4):
252–66.
24. Barloková D, Ilavský J. Removal of iron and manganese from
water using filtration by natural materials. Pol J Environ Stud.
2010;19(6):1117–22.
25. Yang H, et al. Removal of manganese from groundwater in the
ripened sand filtration: Biological oxidation versus chemical auto-
catalytic oxidation. Chem Eng J. 2020;382:123033.
26. Štembal T, et al. Removal of ammonia, iron and manganese from
groundwaters of northern Croatia—pilot plant studies. Process
Biochem. 2005;40(1):327–35.
27. de Souza ÁHC, et al. Backwash process in a sand filter prototype
used in irrigation. Agric Eng Int CIGRJ. 2019;21(1):109–14.
28. Wołowiec M, et al. The properties of sludge formed as a result of
coagulation of backwash water from filters removing iron and man-
ganese from groundwater. SN Appl Sci. 2019;1(6):639.
29. Milanović A, et al. Assessment of polluting effects and surface
water quality using water pollution index: a case study of Hydro-
system Danube-Tisa-Danube. Serbia Carpathian J Earth Environ
Sci. 2011;6(2):269–77.
30. Effendi H. River water quality preliminary rapid assessment using
pollution index. Procedia Environ Sci. 2016;33(1):562–7.
31. Adimalla N. Application of the Entropy Weighted Water Quality
Index (EWQI) and the Pollution Index of Groundwater (PIG) to
assess groundwater quality for drinking purposes: a case study in
a rural area of Telangana State, India. Arch Environ Contam
Toxicol. 2021;80:31–40
32. Saleh HN, et al. Carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment
of heavy metals in groundwater wells in Neyshabur Plain, Iran. Biol
Trace Elem Res. 2019;190(1):251–61.
33. Yousefi M, et al. Data on water quality index for the groundwater in
rural area Neyshabur County, Razavi province, Iran. Data Brief.
2017;15:901–7.
34. Drechsel P, et al. Reducing health risks from wastewater use in
urban and peri-urban sub-Saharan Africa: applying the 2006
WHO guidelines. Water Sci Technol. 2008;57(9):1461–6.
35. Sobsey MD, et al. Point of use household drinking water filtration: a
practical, effective solution for providing sustained access to safe
drinking water in the developing world. Environ Sci Technol.
2008;42(12):4261–67.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic-
tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.