See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/287325862

Performance evaluation of sand filter for tertiary treatment of secondary

effluent of wastewater: Effect of hydraulic loading

Article in Physical and Chemical News · January 2013

CITATIONS READS

6 5,096

5 authors, including:

Imane Kader Yettefti Aboussabiq Fatima Ezzahra

Université Chouaib Doukkali Université Chouaib Doukkali
6 PUBLICATIONS 31 CITATIONS 9 PUBLICATIONS 28 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Samira Etahiri M.mohammed Mountadar

Université Chouaib Doukkali Université Chouaib Doukkali
59 PUBLICATIONS 429 CITATIONS 97 PUBLICATIONS 1,442 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

traitement des déchets solides View project

Moroccan lagoons reserach View project

All content following this page was uploaded by M.mohammed Mountadar on 09 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 April 2013

Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113 PCN

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF SAND FILTER FOR TERTIARY

TREATMENT OF SECONDARY EFFLUENT OF WASTEWATER: EFFECT
OF HYDRAULIC LOADING

EVALUATION DES PERFORMANCES DES FILTRES A SABLE POUR LE

TRAITEMENT TERTIAIRE DE L'EFFLUENT SECONDAIRE DES EAUX
USEES: EFFET DE LA CHARGE HYDRAULIQUE

I. Kader Yettefti1, F. Aboussabiq1, S. Etahiri1, M. Mountadar2*, O. Assobhei1

1
Laboratoire de Biotechnologies marine et de l’environnement, Faculté des Sciences,
Université Chouaib Doukkali, BP. 20, El Jadida, Morocco.
2
Unité de chimie analytique et sciences de l’environnement, Faculté des Sciences,
Université Chouaib Doukkali, BP.20, El Jadida, Morocco.
* Corresponding author. E-mail: mounta_dar@yahoo.fr
Received: 11 September 2012; revised version accepted: 16 March 2013

Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of slow sand filtration as a technique for tertiary
treatment of secondary effluent from the anaerobic denitrifying reactor (ADR). The treatment efficiency
depends on several parameters like the sand media used, wastewater characteristics and hydraulic loads.
One of the most important parameters in relation to treatment efficiency is the hydraulic loading rate. The
experimental pilot consisted of a three columns of opaque PVC supplied with three hydraulic loading
rates: 0.16m/h, 0.22 m/h and 0.28 m/h. It was found out that 0.16m/h is the hydraulic loading the most
effective. It is capable of removing 86% of chemical oxygen demand (COD), 86% of total suspended
solids (TSS), 72% of total Kjeldahl nitrogen (TKN), 75% of ammonium nitrogen (NH4-N), 65% of total
phosphorus (TP). Therefore, due to excellent effluent quality, it can be reused for irrigation, and for safe
discharge.

Keywords: Wastewater; Slow sand filtration; Tertiary treatment; Hydraulic loading rate; Water reuse.

1. Introduction particle and pathogen filter that combines

In Morocco and among other developing
countries, the growing urbanization in many areas
resulted in a significant increase of generated
amounts of urban wastewater [1]. It has been
reported that wastewater has an environmental
impact [2-3] and public health [4-5]. In order to
solve the problem, different methods of treatment
are used to purify wastewater before it is reused
[6-7-8].
The use of treated wastewater for irrigation of
plants and crops, for example, is gradually
becoming a common practice worldwide [9]. In
view of the stringent water quality requirements
imposed upon water for reuse, more recent
attention has focused on the use of sand filters
systems for tertiary wastewater treatment [10-7].
This filtration removes substantial amounts of
wastewater particles and thus promotes effective
disinfection as well as esthetic acceptance of
reclaimed water for beneficial uses. Sand filters
systems have been widely used around the world
for on-site and small community’s wastewater
treatment [11]. It is a simple technology that has
been successfully used for over 200 years in
drinking water purification. It has been used as a
biological, physical and chemical processes [7].
Main advantages of the sand filters are its simple
and economical construction, operation, and
maintenance using local materials and skills. It
does not require chemicals or energy and needs
less land compared to other natural technologies
for pathogen removal because of high hydraulic
loading rates of up to 9.6 m/d. In sand filtration,
the depth of the sand layer may impact the
treatment because sand particles provide the
surface for biofilm formation and biological
activity [12]. Sand filtration systems are biofilm-
driven processes that create conditions suitable for
the biodegradation and mineralization of organic
matter and the assimilation of nutrients by diverse
microbial populations [12]. Various researchers
investigated the effectiveness of slow sand filters
for tertiary treatment of wastewater at laboratory
and pilot scale, and suggest that slow sand filters
are capable of removing and TSS, turbidity and
total coliforms up to 68%, 88% and over 99%,
respectively [13]. Farooq and Al-Yousef [14]
conducted a pilot study using slow sand filtration
with effective sand sizes of 0.31 and 0.56 mm for
the treatment of secondary chlorinated effluents,

106
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113
and achieved 50-67% COD removal as well as
90% reduction of total bacterial counts. The sand
filters have multiple variables and have been
conventionally designed on hydraulic loadings as
well as on organic loading rates.
At the present time, the sand is implemented
without interesting at sand composition in removal
of pollutant, only the sand size is controlled.
Therefore, the objective of the present work were
to quantify the effect of hydraulic loading on the
removal of COD, TSS, TKN, NH4-N and TP as
well as their feasibility in satisfying water reuse
standards.
2. Materiel and method
2.1. Experimental device
The experimental pilot consists of three opaque
PVC columns with a surface area of 0.3 m2, 9 cm
in internal diameter and 150 cm height. The PVC
columns are filled with 75 cm of sand and 10 cm
of gravel in the top and the bottom of the filter in
order to enhance the uniformity of flow. The
schematic of the pilot-scale is given in Fig.1.
a
b Morocco.) with monochromated CuKα radiation
Figure 1: a) Photo of laboratory scale slow sand filter
column
b) Schematic diagram of laboratory scale slow sand
filter column.
Before filling into the columns, the sand was
washed with distilled water before use to remove
107
clay and other mineral contaminants from the sand
particles. The effective size (D10) is of the order of
0.15 mm. The uniformity coefficient
(UC=D60/D10) is 1.33. The pea gravel used had an
effective size of 3.8 mm and uniformity coefficient
of 1.68. Healy et al [15] mentioned that for single-
pass operation with a filter depth of 0.61– 0.91m,
the UC< 3 is recommended. In our case these data
of uniformity coefficient seem to fulfill these
requirements.
All experiments were conducted with single
replication, since experience from published work
of other authors, who used columns similar in size
with the ones used in the present work and filled
with sand and/or gravel, demonstrated small
variations between the results obtained from the
replicated columns [16]. The filter was fed from
the anaerobic denitrifying reactor (ADR) effluent,
collected in a 100 L capacity plastic tank. In order
to maintain all the solids in suspension, ADR
effluent was slowly and continuously stirred.
The wastewater was applied to the surface of
columns with different hydraulic loading rates
(column 1: 0.16 m/h; column 2: 0.22 m/h; column
3: 0.28 m/h).
2.2. Sample collection
The Secondary domestic wastewater was obtained
from the ADR of the wastewater treatment plant of
El Jadida’s faculty (1000 habitant-equivalent).
Grab samples of wastewater were obtained at the
outlet of ADR.
2.3. Analytical methods
The mineralogical features of the sand were
determined by X-ray diffraction (XRD) using
X'pert High Score PANalytical diffractometer (at
Technical Support Units for Scientific Research,
operating at 45kV/40mA. All XRD data were
collected under the same experimental conditions,
in the angular range 3°≤2≤90° with a scan rate of
1°/min at room temperature. The compositions of
the chemical major elements of the sand were
obtained from the chemical analysis determined by
X-ray fluorescence. The determination of loss on
ignition (L.O.I.) was obtained by heating the sand
raw materials at 1000 °C.
Samples were collected from the outlet of filter
column at the intervals of 12h. As a result, two
samples were obtained within 24 h. All the
samples were assayed physico-chemical
parameters (COD, TSS, TKN, NH4-N and TP) as
described in the standard methods for the
examination of water and wastewater [17].
3. Results and discussions
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113

3.1. Sand characterization

The granulometric analysis carried out by dry
sifting, shows that the sand used are average grain
sized sands according to textural classification of
Soltner [18]. The ideal sands for sand bioreactors
are a medium to coarse sand with an effective size
between 0.3 and 1.5 mm. The uniformity
coefficient should be less than 4.0 in order to have
an adequate hydraulic conductivity and to
minimize the risk of clogging [19].
3.2. The Chemical and mineralogical analysis of sand
The results of Xray fluorescence analysis in
Table1 show that major elements correspond to a
very high proportion of SiO2 which is due to the
high content of quartz (58.9 wt %) and, possibly,
free silica that originated from siliceous
microfossil, such as radiolarians and diatoms [20].

% of oxides
SiO2 CaO Al2O3 MgO Fe2O3 K2O Na2O SO3 P2O5 L.O.I.* Total
RS 58.9 11.9 8.25 3.54 2.99 0.954 0.913 0.436 0.243 11.0 99.12
*L.O.I.: loss on ignition at 1000°C.
Table 1: X-ray fluorescence analysis of sand.

The percentage composition of MgO and CaO
were relatively higher that could be explained by
the high contents of dolomite (25.27%). The
interpretation of the diffractogram obtained from
the Xray diffraction (XRD) analysis given in
(fig.2) revealed the mineralogical assemblage of
the sand used for the study. The X-ray powder
diffraction analysis shows that mineralogical
composition of the sand used corresponds to the
quartz, dolomite and calcite, which is
characterized by the reflections given in (fig.2).

Figure 2 : ray Diffractogram of sand used.

3.3. Characterization of effluent
The range and average values of the physico-
chemical and microbiological characteristics of the
ADR effluent used as the influent for slow sand
filter are reported in Table 2.
and 0.28 m/h to assess the sand efficiency
throughout the 7 days of filter operation with
respect to the residual COD, TSS, TKN, NH4-N,
TP, and of the treated effluent as well as their
feasibility in satisfying water reuse standards.

3.4. Functioning and performance efficiency studies
Filtration rate control is the key element in
operation of filters. For treatment of surface water,
generally a filtration rate of 0.1 to 0.32 m/h is
recommended [21]. The filter was operated at
different hydraulic loading of 0.12 m/h, 0.16 m/h,
3.4.1. Organic removal (COD)
COD is an important indicator of organic load
of domestic wastewater. The effects of hydraulic
rate on percentage removal of COD from filtration
of ADR effluent are shown in Fig. 3 which
indicates that hydraulic load had an influence on

108
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113

organic removal: a higher hydraulic rate resulted The hydraulic rate 0.16 m/h was found to be better
in lower COD removal efficiency. Treatment than the others loading rate in term of percentage
efficiencies remained steady and reached peak removal in the range of 86%.
values for each sand filer after the start-up period.

Parameters Values (average)

pH 7.1–7.8 7.73
TSS (mg/L) 73 –92.2 80
COD (mg/L) 190 – 300 250
BOD (mg/L) 76 – 110 90
TKN (mg/L) 59 –73 60
NH4-N (mg/L) 32 – 60 54
TP (mg/L) 2.75 – 7.23 5.2
Fecal coliforms 5 ×103– 4.8 ×104
4
(CFU*/100 mL) 9.3×10
Fecal streptococci 2.5×103- 2.5 ×104
(CFU*/100 mL) 4.3×104
*CFU: Colony-Forming Units
Table 2: Characteristics of ADR effluent.

operation [25], whereas, similar to those (85%)

reported by Prochaska [26].

3.4.2 Total suspended solid removal (TSS)

Figure 3: Effect of hydraulic loading rate on COD
removal in the sand filter over time.
However at the high hydraulic loading 0.28
m/h, the removal of COD is only 78% with
residual effluent concentration 62.5 mg/L at the
start-up period. This percentage removal was
relatively stable with time until 96 h. At the end of
the filter runs, the COD removal decreased until
81, 71 and 67% respectively, for hydraulic loading
rate: 0.16 m/h, 0.22 m/h and 0.28 m/h. The COD
concentration decreases from 250 mg/L to 47.5,
72.5 and 82.5 mg/L, respectively, after 7 day of
treatment. When the hydraulic load was 0.16 m/h,
the residual effluent concentration of COD is in
compliance with the guidelines standards for
Water Reuse [22].
The reduction in COD may be due to the
filtration of suspended solids [23]. This is due also
to the maturation of biological layer in the sand
media. Following the development of this layer,
the purifying bacteria become well established and
play an important part in the treatment process
[24]. The observed removal efficiency of COD is
remarkably superior to the 52% removal of COD
suggested in published results of slow sand filter
Fig. 4 shows the TSS removal in the sand filter
versus time for the three different hydraulic
loadings. The concentration of suspended solids in
the effluent of ADR was significantly high i.e. 73–
92.2 mg/L (Avg. 80 mg/L) and a complementary
polishing was observed in sand column with a
TSS removal of 86, 73 and 69% respectively, for
hydraulic loading: 0.16 m/h, 0.22 m/h and 0.28
m/h. These eliminations were relatively stable
with time until 144 h for the hydraulic loading
0.16 m/h and until 108 h for the hydraulic loading
0.22 and 0.28 m/h. At the end of the filter run, the
TSS removal was 82, 67 and 63% respectively for
the hydraulic loading: 0.16, 0.22 and 0.28 m/h.
According to the U.S. EPA recommendations
[27] for effluent reuse in agriculture effluents
containing between 20 and 30 mg/L suspended
solids can be designated for irrigation of plants
eaten raw authorized. However, the residual
effluent concentration for three filters of TSS is in
compliance with the reuse standard [22]. The
results for residual concentration obtained in this
study respectively, for the hydraulic loading: 0.16,
0.22 and 0.28 m/h were 14.4, 26.4 and 29.6 mg/L.
The effluent concentration of the three filters
meets the effluent TSS limit for irrigation, in
California [22] and Morocco [28].
The observed TSS removals of 82% are
significantly higher to those reported by Al-
Adham [29] i.e. only 68% at the same hydraulic
loading of 0.16 m/h and an effective sand size of
0.23 mm. The observed TSS removal for the three
sand filters is significantly higher to those reported
by Nakhla and Farooq [10] i.e. only 63.9% at a

109
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113
filtration rate of 0.19 m/h. Our observations are in
good agreement with Tyagi [24] as they observed
almost similar (82%) removal of suspended solids.
According to Healy et al. [15] significantly higher
TSS removal (100%) was observed during the
treatment of synthetic effluent resembling high
strength dairy wastewaters. Some of the
interesting physical-chemical characteristics of
sand are the porosity. Prochaska and Zouboulis
[26] have explained that the principal mechanism,
which contributes to the removal of incoming TSS
within the filter media, is straining. Particles larger
than the pore space of the filtering medium are
strained out mechanically. These results can be
explained by the dominant forces that can control
the attachment of particles that are electrical
interactions between charged particles and the
charged media surface [30]. Other mechanisms
may also coexist, even though their effects are
smaller and they are mostly masked by the
straining action. These mechanisms include
interception, impaction and adhesion. The removal
of the smaller particles can be accomplished by
two steps: the transport of particles to the surface
where they will be removed, and the removal of
particles by one or more of the operative removal
mechanisms; these two steps have been identified
as transport and attachment [26]. This explains
that the RS filter removes more than the others:
higher TSS removal efficiency corresponded with
smaller media diameter. The observations suggest
that the use of RS, rather than DS and BS sand in
a tertiary treatment improves the efficiency.
Figure 4: Effect of hydraulic loading rate on TSS
removal in the sand filter over time.
3.4.3 Nitrogen removal
The performance of sand columns was mainly
evaluated on the basis of removal of TKN
concentrations over time (Fig. 5). The percentage
of TKN removed for the three sand filters are
presented in fig.4. The TKN level in the filter
influent ranged from 73 to 59 mg/L (Avg. 60
mg/L).
110
At the operational period, the residual
concentrations of TKN are in the range of 16.8, 21
and 28.2 mg/L for 0.16, 0.22 and 0.28 m/h,
respectively. However, the TKN removal was in
the range of 72%, 65% and 53%, respectively.
This elimination was very stable throughout the
experiment period with a decrease after 84 h (for
0.22 and 0.28 m/h) and 144 h (for 0.16) of filter
operation to 68%, 55% and 49% respectively.
Whereas, the residual effluent concentration was
19.2, 27 and 30.6 mg/L at the end of the filter run.
Elimination of Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN) can
be explained by a denitrification in microcosms
anaerobic when the filters of sand are supplied
with water. The results clearly indicate that the
hydraulic loading rate played an important role in
nitrogen removal: a lower hydraulic rate favored
the removal of nitrogen. Those results could be
accounted for by the fact that for lower value of
flow rate, the contact time is longer, and hence the
interaction between nitrogen and the filter sand is
also greater. The effluent concentration of TKN is
in compliance with the U.S. EPA standards of
water reuse [22] at different hydraulic load
applied. The observed TKN removal for the three
sand filters in our study is significantly higher to
those reported by Liu et al. [31] i.e. only 40% at a
filtration rate less than 0.39 m3/ (m2 h).
Figure 5: Effect of hydraulic loading rate on TKN
removal in the sand filter over time.
Fig. 6 illustrates the variation of ammonia
nitrogen removal in three sand filters versus
operation time was described. The results obtained
shows that the content of ammonia nitrogen of
ADR effluent decreases appreciably after their
passage through the three different sand filters.
Therefore, it is evident that the efficiency of filter
with a hydraulic loading rate of 0.16m/h was
better than the other filters. Our experimental
results indicated that for the three columns, NH4-N
removal was found to decrease with increased
flow rate. In the case of 0.16 m/h hydraulic load
the NH4-N removal was 75%, with residual
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113
effluent concentration in the range of 13.5 mg/L.
But when the hydraulic load was in the range of
0.28 m/h the elimination of NH4-N is only 50%,
whereas, residual effluent concentration was 27
mg/L. However the effluent concentration of NH4-
N is in compliance with the U.S. EPA standards of
water reuse [22].
The amount of NH4-N in effluent from ADR
for the three filters was relatively stable with time.
The residual concentration (mg/l) obtained
decrease to 16.2, 23.2 and 27 mg/L, respectively
for the three filters. However, the NH4-N removal
for the three sand filters was 70%, 57% and 50%
respectively for the hydraulic loading 0.16 m/h,
0.22 m/h and 0.28 m/h at the end of the filter run.
According to Achak et al. [23] the elimination of
ammonium suggests an intense mineralization
followed by a good reduction of ammonium.
Bastviken et al. [32] suggest that the
disappearance of NH4-N possible nitrification.
However, the important effectiveness of removal
of NH4-N seems to support the assumption
existence of a significant nitrification.
Figure 6: Effect of hydraulic loading rate on NH4-N
removal in the sand filter over time.
3.4.4 Total phosphorus removal
Fig. 7 shows the total phosphorus removal
versus time for the three sand filters.
Figure 7: Effect of hydraulic loading rate on TP
removal in the sand filter over time.
111
The phosphorus content of ADR effluent
decreases notably after their passage through the
different filters. TP concentration decreases from
5.2 mg/L to 1.82, 1.98, and 2.28 mg/L
respectively, for 0.16, 0.22 and 0.28 m/h
throughout of 96h of run filtration. With the
percentage removal for the three sand filters was
65%, 62% and 56%, respectively. By the end of
the study, the sand filters have removed 58%, 56%
and 50% of the TP, respectively. The residual
concentration for all hydraulic loading rates is in
compliance with the U.S. EPA standards of water
reuse [22]. There are different processes by which
phosphates compounds may be removed from
wastewater: absorption, ionic exchange [33] and
adsorption [34]. However, in this study, the best
removal efficiencies were obtained with the
hydraulic loading 0.16 m/h. The level of TP in
treated effluent from sand filtration is of prime
concern because high concentration of such
substance is responsible for eutrophication in
surface fresh water resources.
4. Conclusion
The major objective of the study focuses on
the effect of hydraulic loading, on slow sand
filtration efficiency of secondary effluent from
ADR. The following conclusions were obtained.
• The removal efficiency of slow sand filter is
affected by the hydraulic load: increasing
hydraulic load reduced removal efficiencies to
some degree.
• The rate 0.16 m/ h corresponded to the
optimum hydraulic loading,
• The quality of filter effluent in terms of COD,
TSS, TKN, NH4-N and TP could be achieved for
reuse purposes.
• Based on the findings of this study, it can be
concluded that slow sand filtration can be used for
tertiary wastewater treatment for removals of
COD, suspended solid, nitrogen and phosphorus.
Acknowledgements
The authors therefore wish to express their
gratitude to the “Académie Hassan II des Sciences
et Techniques” for financial support (Project
RALBI).
References
[1] F.Z. Lamghari Moubarrad, O. Assobhei,
Desalination. Health risks of raw sewage with
particular reference to Ascaris in the discharge
zone of El Jadida (Morocco), 215 (2007)120–126.
[2] D. Abrid, A. El Hmaidi, A. Abdallaoui,
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113
O. Fassi Fihri, A. Essahlaoui , Phys. Chem. News.
Pollution impact on Boufekrane river water’s
(Meknes – Morocco): Physico-chemical and
bacteriological study, 58 (2011) 98-104.
[3] E.M. Hbaiz, E.M. Ouihman, A. Ouzair, M.
Lebkiri, A. Allam, H. Kassaoui, A. Lebkiri, E.H.
Rifi, M. Fadli, E.M, Phys. Chem. News.
Toxicological impact of heavy metals in pepper
(capsicum annuum) irrigated by waste water, 59
(2011) 82-88.
[4] M. Muchuweti , J.W. Birkett , E. Chinyanga ,
R. Zvauya , M.D. Scrimshaw , J.N. Lester, Agr.
Ecosyst. Environ. Heavy metal content of
vegetables irrigated with mixtures of wastewater
and sewage sludge in Zimbabwe: Implications for
human health, 112 (2006) 41–48.
[5] Y. Wang, M. Qiao, Y. Liu, Y. Zhu, J. Environ.
Eng. Sci. Health risk assessment of heavy metals
in soils and vegetables from wastewater irrigated
area, Beijing-Tianjin city cluster, China., 24(4)
(2012) 690–698.
[6] R. Aba-aaki, K. Agga, M. Raji, S. Et-taleb, M.
Ez-zahery, N. El Alem, Phys. Chem. News.
Comparison of performance of quartz sand and
Titaniferous sand used in the method of
infiltration percolation of wastewater, 58 (2011)
12-16.
[7] K. Langenbach, P.Kuschk, H. Horn, M.
Kastner, Environ. Sci. Technol. Slow Sand
Filtration of Secondary Clarifier Effluent for
Wastewater Reuse, 43 (2009) 5896 –5901.
[8] P. Verlicchi, A. Gallettia, L. Masottia,
Desalination. A promising practice to reclaim
treated wastewater for reuse: Chemical
disinfection followed by natural systems, 247
(2009) 490–508.
[9] C. Lubello, R.Gori, F. P. Nicese, F. Ferrini,
Water Res. Municipal-treated wastewater reuse for
plant nurseries irrigation, 38 (2004) 2939-2947.
[10] G. Nakhla, S. Farooq, J. Hazard. Mater.
Simultaneous nitrification–denitrification in slow
sand filters, B 96 (2003) 291–30.
[11] L. Rolland, P. Molle, A. Liénard, F.
Bouteldja, A. Grasmick, Desalination. Influence
of the physical and mechanical characteristics of
sands on the hydraulic and biological behaviors of
sand filters, 248(2009) 998–1007.
[12] R. S. Gaur, L. Cai, O. H. Tuovinen, K. M.
Mancl, Bioresource Technol. Pretreatment of
turkey fat-containing wastewater in coarse sand
and gravel/coarse sand bioreactors, 101 (2010)
1106-1110.
[13] M. Pell, F. Nyberg, J. Environ. Qual.
Infiltration of wastewater in a newly started pilot
sand-filter system: I. reduction of organic matter
and phosphorous, 18 (1989) 451- 457.
112
[14] S. Farooq, A.K. Al-yousef, J. Environ. Eng-
ASCE. Slow sand filtration of secondary effluent,
119 (1993) 615–630.
[15] M.G. Healy, M. Rodgers, J. Mulqueen,
Bioresource Technol. Treatment of dairy
wastewater using constructed wetlands and
intermittent sand filters, 98 (2007) 2268–2281.
[16] G. L. Palacios, M. B. Timmons, Aquacult.
Eng. Determining design parameters for recovery
of aquaculture wastewater using sand beds,
24(2001) 289–299.
[17] American Public Health Association,
Standard Methods for the Examination of Water
and Wastewater. 19th ed., American Public Health
Association, Washington D.C (1995).
[18] D. Soltner. Les bases de la production
végétale. Tome I: le sol, 18ème ed., Collection
Sciences et Techniques agricoles, (1990),466 p
[19] J. Tao, K. Mancl. Sand Size Analysis for
Onsite Wastewater Treatment System,
Determination of Sand Effective Size and
Uniformity Coefficient. The Ohio State
University, AEX-757-08. Agriculture and Natural
Resources, (2008).
[20] D.M. Moore, R.C. Reynolds, X-Ray
diffraction and the identification and analysis of
clay Minerals. 1st Ed., Oxford University Press,
Oxford New York, 1989, pp: 327-327.
[21] Central Pollution Control Board, Sewage
pollution. Ministry of Environment and Forests,
Delhi (2005).
[22] EPA., USAID., Washington Guidelines for
water reuse, U.S. Agency for International
Development, Washington, DC, (1992).
[23] M. Achak, L. Mandi, N. Ouazzani, J. Env.
Manage. Removal of organic pollutants and
nutrients from olive mill wastewater by a sand
filter, 90 (2009) 2771–2779.
[25] M.M. Amin, H. Hashemi, B. Bina, H.
Movahhedian Attar, H. Farrokhzadeh, M.
Ghasemian, Desalination. Pilot-scale studies of
combined clarification, filtration, and ultraviolet
radiation systems for disinfection of secondary
municipal wastewater effluent, 260 (2010) 70–78.
[26] C. A. Prochaska, A. I. Zouboulis, J Environ
Manage. Performance of intermittently operated
sand filters: a comparable study, treating
wastewaters of different origins, 147 (2003) 367-
388.
[27] EPA., Guidelines for water reuse, U.S.
Agency for International Development,
Washington, DC, (2004).
[28] Secrétariat d'Etat auprès du Ministère de
l'Energie, des Mines, de l'Eau et de
l'Environnement. Normes de qualité eaux
destinées à l’irrigation, Rabat, (2007).
 I. Kader Yettefti et al, Phys. Chem. News 68 (2013) 106-113
[29] S.S. A1-Adham, Tertiary treatment of
municipal sewage via slow sand filtration. MS
thesis, King Fahd University of Petroleum &
Minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia (1989).
[30] J.M. Gálvez , M.A. Gómez, E. Hontoria , J.
González-López, J. Hazard. Mater. Influence of
hydraulic loading and air flowrate on urban
wastewater nitrogen removal with a submerged
fixed-film reactor, B101 (2003) 219–229.
[31] F. Liu, C.C. Zhao, D.F. Zhao, G.H. Liu, J.
Hazard. Mater. Tertiary treatment of textile
wastewater with combined media biological
aerated filter (CMBAF) at different hydraulic
loadings and dissolved oxygen concentrations, 160
(2008) 161–167.
113
View publication stats
[32] S.K. Bastviken, S.E.B. Weisner, G. Thiere,
J.M. Svensson, P.M. Ehde, K.S. Tonderski, Ecol.
Eng. Effects of vegetation and hydraulic load on
seasonal nitrate removal in treatment wetlands, 35
(2009) 946–952.
[33] S.K. Billore, N. Singh, J.K. Sharma, P. Dass,
R.M. Nelson, Water Sci Technol. Horizontal
subsurface flow gravel bed constructed wetland
with Phragmites Karka in central India, 40 (1999)
163–171.
[34] G. Carvalho, P.C. Lemos, A. Oehmen,
M.A.M. Reis, Water Res. Denitrifying phosphorus
removal: linking the process performance with the
microbial community structure, 41 (2007) 4383–
4396.