Design of Water Treatment Plant FC 16111

A Major Project Report
On
DESIGN OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT

Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University for partial fulfilment of the requirements for the
Award of
BACHELOR OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
CIVIL ENGINEERING
By
K. SHIVA KRISHNA (20D35A0112)
G. VISHAL (20D35A0108)
TAHA (19D31A0112)
MD.NABIL (19D31A0106)
Under the guidance

of
MR.MD.BADRODDIN
ASST. PROFESSOR
CIVIL DEPARTMENT
INDUR INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

Recognized by AICTE & Affiliated to JNTU, Hyderabad) PONNALA, SIDDIPET-502277
i
INDUR INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY
(Recognized by AICTE & Affiliated to JNTU, Hyderabad)
PONNALA, SIDDIPET-502277
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that K. SHIVA KRISHNA (20D35A0112), G. VISHAL (20D35A0108),

TAHA (19D31A0112), MD. NABIL (19D31A0106), have successfully completed the project
work entitled DESIGN OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT in partial fulfilment of the award
of the Degree of Bachelor of Technology in Civil Engineering during the academic year 2022-23
MR.MD.BADRODDIN S. SRINIVAS
INTERNAL GUIDE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT
Proof. DR. VP RAJU EXTERNAL EXAMINER
PRINCIPAL
ii
DECLARATION
We declare that the work reported in the present thesis title is
DESIGN OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT a record of work done by us in the
Department of Civil Engineering, Indur Institute of Engineering and Technology, Siddipet.
No part of this thesis is copied from books/journals/internet and wherever the portion has
been taken the same has been duly referred in the text. The reports are based on the project
work done entirely by us and not copied from any other.
PROJECT ASSOCIATE
K. SHIVA KRISHNA (20D35A0112)
G. VISHAL (20D35A0108)
TAHA (19D31A0112)
MD.NABIL (19D31A0106)
iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
To make an effort over this period can be successfully by the advice and support of many
well-wishers. We avail this opportunity to express our gratitude and appreciation of all of them.
We are thankful to our project guide Mr.MD.BADRODDIN ASST. Professor, Civil
Engineering Department for the guidance and valuable support given to us throughout this
project.
We are thankful to Mr. SRINIVAS, ASST. Professor & HOD Civil Engineering
Department for his valuable guidance and useful suggestions during this project.
We would like to express our profound respect to DR.V. P. RAJU, PRINCIPAL, Indur
Institute of Engineering and Technology for his useful suggestions during the course.
We would like to express our gratitude and heartfelt thanks to our parents for them
encouraging support and almighty for his abundant for finishing this project successfully in time.
iv
ABSTRACT
Both inherent natural variability and model parameter uncertainty must be

considered in the development of robust and reliable designs for drinking water
treatment. This study presents an optimization framework for investigating the
effects of five variable influent parameters and three uncertain model parameters
on the least-cost treatment plant configuration _contact, direct, or non-sweep
conventional filtration that reliably satisfies an effluent particulate matter
concentration constraint. Incorporating variability and uncertainty within the
decision-making framework generates information for investigating:
1. impacts on total cost and treatment reliability.
2. shifts on the least-cost treatment configuration for providing reliable treatment
and the importance of the individual variable and uncertain parameter
distributions for reliably satisfying an effluent water quality constraint.
Increasing the magnitude of influent variability and model parameter uncertainty
results in a greater expected design cost due, generally, to increases in process
sizing required to reliably satisfy the effluent concentration constraint. The
inclusion of variability and uncertainty can also produce a shift in the locations of
the least-cost configuration regions, which are dependent on the expected influent
water quality and the magnitude of variability and uncertainty. The additional
information provided by incorporating the variable and uncertain parameters
illustrates that parameter distributions related to the primary removal mechanism
are critical, and that contact and direct filtration are more sensitive to variability
and uncertainty than conventional filtration.
v
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NUMBER NAME OF TABLE PAGE NUMBER
4.1 Population forecasting data 46
3.7 After 3 days B.O.D incubation 22
3.6 D.O initial 22
3.5 Residual chlorine of sample 15
3.4 Chlorine content of sample 14
3.3 Acidity of sample 12
3.2 Alkalinity of sample 11
3.1 Ph of sample 10
ABBREVIATIONS
STP : Sewage Treatment Plant
AWWA : American Water Works Association
D.O : Dissolved Oxygen
B.O. D : Biological Oxygen Demand
C.O. D : Chemical Oxygen Demand
pH : Percentage of hydrogen
MLD : Million Liters perDay
KLD : Kilo Liters per Day
ML : Milliliter
vi
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE NUMBER NAME OF FIGURE PAGE NUMBER
Apparatus and chemicals of

3.8 20
D.O
3.8.1 Determination of D. O 21
3.11 Aeration tank 25
3.12 secondary clarifier 29
3.12.1 Mechanical clarifier 30
3.12.2 Mechanized clarifier 31
3.13 Sludge recirculation tank 34
3.13.1 Lift pumps 35
3.14 38
Filter feed pumps
3.15 Pressure sand filter 39
3.16 Activated Carbon Filter 41
4.2.1 Propeller-type mechanical 51

flash mixer
4.2.2 Propeller-type mechanical 52
flash mixer’s
vii
CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE ............................................................................................................................................ii
DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................................ iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ..........................................................................................................................iv
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................................v
LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................... vi
ABBREVIATIONS .....................................................................................................................................vi
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................2
GENERAL .....................................................................................................................................................4
PREVIOUS RESEARCH WORKS ON TREATMENT ...............................................................................4
NEED FOR THE STUDY ............................................................................................................................. 5
OBJECTIVES OF PRESENTWORK ........................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 2
CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTEWATER .........................................................................................6

2.1 Physical characteristic of wastewater: ..................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Chemical characteristic of wastewater: ................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Biological characteristic of wastewater: .................................................................................................. 7
2.4 Sampling details .......................................................................................................................................8
CHAPTER 3
1
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES ........................................................................................................................9
3.1 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OF pH VALUE (ELECTROMERICMETHODS) ................. 9
Principal ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9
apparatus ....................................................................................................................................................................9
Procedure ..................................................................................................................................................................... 9
3.2 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OFALKALINITY ................................................................. 10
apparatus ..................................................................................................................................................................10
reagents .....................................................................................................................................................................10
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 10
Calculation of alkalinit & Formula ......................................................................................................................... 11

3.3 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OFACIDITY: ............................................................ 11
Principal ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11
apparatus ...................................................................................................................................................................11
Reagents ................................................................................................................................................................... 11
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 12
Calculation of acidity ................................................................................................................................................ 12
Formula ...................................................................................................................................................................... 12
3.4 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OF CHLORIDE .................................................................... 13
Principal ..................................................................................................................................................................... 13
apparatus ....................................................................................................................................................................13
2
reagents ......................................................................................................................................................................13
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Calculation of chlorine content &Formula ............................................................................................................. 14

3.5 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF RESIDUAL CHLORINE .................................... 15
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 15
PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL SOLIDS: ......................................................15
Principal ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................... 16
Apparatus ...................................................................................................................................................................16
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 16
Calculation ................................................................................................................................................................. 17
3.6 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL DISSOLVEDSOLIDS: ..........................18
Principal ..................................................................................................................................................................... 18
The apparatus used are .............................................................................................................................................18
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 18
Calculation ................................................................................................................................................................. 18
3.7 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL SUSPENDEDSOLIDS: .........................19
Principal ..................................................................................................................................................................... 19
apparatus ...................................................................................................................................................................19
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 19
3
Calculation ................................................................................................................................................................. 19
3.8 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN .....................................20
Apparatus. ..................................................................................................................................................................20
Reagents ..................................................................................................................................................................... 20
Procedure ................................................................................................................................................................... 21
3.9 PROCEDURE FOR NITROGEN REMOVAL .....................................................................................22
3.10 PROCEDURE FOR REMOVAL OFPHOSPHOROUS ..................................................................... 23
Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 24

3.11 Aeration Tank ...................................................................................................................................... 25
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................25
Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................25
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................26
Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 27

3.12 Secondary Clarifier/ Settling Tank ...................................................................................................... 27
Function ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
How It Works .............................................................................................................................................................28
Compressed airpipe ...................................................................................................................................................28
Mechanized Clarifier Tank ...................................................................................................................................... 29
Functions .................................................................................................................................................................... 29
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................32
4
3.13 Sludge Recirculation ............................................................................................................................34
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................34
Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................34

3.14 Filter Feed Pumps (FFP) ......................................................................................................................37
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................37
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................37

3.15 Pressure Sand Filter (PSF) ................................................................................................................... 38
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................38
Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................38
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................39

3.16 Activated Carbon Filter (ACF) ............................................................................................................ 41
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................41
Methodology ...............................................................................................................................................................41
5
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................42

3.17 Disinfection of Treated Water(CHLORINATION) .............................................................................42
Function ......................................................................................................................................................................42
Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................43
CHAPTER 4 ............................................................................................................................................... 44
Design of Water Treatment Plant ............................................................................................................ 44

4.1 Plant Siting Analysis ..............................................................................................................................45
Design Development .................................................................................................................................................. 45
Design of Diffused Air Equipment ...........................................................................................................................47
Basin Design ...............................................................................................................................................................47
Diffusers ..................................................................................................................................................................... 47
Design of Spray Aerators ..........................................................................................................................................48

4.2 COAGULATION AND MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY .................................................................... 49
Mixing Intensity .........................................................................................................................................................49
Temperature Effects on Mixing ............................................................................................................................... 50
6
Mechanical Mixers: ................................................................................................................................................... 51
Acceptable Level of Hardness .................................................................................................................................. 53
Benefits of Softening ..................................................................................................................................................53
CHAPTER-4
RESULTS & CONCLUSION ...................................................................................................................57

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................ 58
7
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Decision making related to drinking water treatment is, in general, a complex process
that must satisfy multiple treatment objectives through the design of integrated treatment
and processes while constraining costs. Additionally, there is inherent variability that
must be considered, yet cannot be controlled at least not easily, such as flow rate, influent
water quality concentrations, and temperature. The effects of these variations must be
considered to ensure that the effluent water quality reliably satisfies the appropriate
regulatory statutes. More formalized approaches that utilize mathematical models to assist
in the design process add additional complexities. Most process models require some of
the model parameters to be estimated using experimental or field data, or gathered from
expert elicitation, which introduce model uncertainty into the design process. Finally,
uncertainty in the structure of the model representing the integrated treatment process can
introduce additional complexity, although this is more difficult to incorporate into the
decision-making process.
The use of formalized decision-making tools for the investigation of integrated drinking
water treatment plant design has been relatively rare, with most studies focusing on the
removal of particulate matter from the raw water stream. Wiesner et al. 1987investigated
the regions of least-cost configurations of rapid mix, flocculation, sedimentation, and
filtration for seven different influent conditions for particulate removal, which were
shown to be relatively consistent with existing treatment plant configurations Wiesner and
Mamounia 1989. Wu and Chu 1991utilizedsimplified empirical treatment process models
and data from an existing treatment plant and developed treatment plant designs. Like the
existing plant. Mahilika 1993 solved the design problem using dynamic programming and
simplified process models for flocculation and sedimentation with monodisperse particle
suspensions. Dharmapala et al. 1994_ performed a study like that of Wiesner et al.
_1987_ that included handling options for three different particle size distributions.
Boccelli et al 2004 extended the study of Wiesner et al. 1987 to include a wider range of
influent conditions and examined the changes in least-cost configuration regions under
different flowrate and particle density conditions.
All of these studies assumed that the influent water quality conditions, flow rate, and
model parameters were fixed and known—that is, there was no variability or uncertainty
included in the decision-making process. While studies that explore a wide range of
influent conditions and model parameter values of changing an individual parameter value
2
on process design and configuration, these deterministic studies are inadequate for
assessing the overall impact of variability and uncertainty on these designs and
configurations. Mahilika et al. _1993_ provided some insight into the potential effects of
variability and uncertainty by performing a series of sensitivity analyses on the optimal
deterministic solutions that showed the designs to be relatively insensitive to changes in
flow rate, influent particle concentration, and cost equation parameters. Their study also
discussed the importance of including flow and influent water quality variability and
uncertainty in the decision-making process for providing reliable treatment.
This study presents a framework for incorporating influent variability and model
parameter uncertainty in the design process, which is illustrated using an integrated
treatment model for particulate removal based on a rectilinear application. Model
structure uncertainty, which certainly exists in this application, is not explored in this
study. However, the frameworks are sufficiently general to allow model structure
uncertainty or the inclusion of additional process models to be evaluated.
The impact of variability and uncertainty is evaluated with respect to the expected design
cost, distribution of effluent particulate concentrations, and value of the stochastic
solution. More importantly, the inclusion of variable and uncertain parameters isused to
explore the potential shift in the least-cost regions of three different treatment
configurations _contact, direct, and non-sweep conventional filtration. The solution
framework also generates information that allows the determination of the important
variable and uncertain parameter distributions with respect to reliably satisfying the
effluent particulate concentration constraint. The explicit inclusion of variability and
uncertainty in the design framework is important for understanding the potential effects
on treatment plant design and selection and for identifying important parameters that may
require additional characterization or improved estimation.
3
GENERAL
This literature review on s from water treatment plants discusses previous literature
reviews on the subject, sources and types of waste, characteristics of each type of waste, and
waste management. The discussion of management of sludge () covers minimizing sludge
production, methods of sludge treatment, and ultimate sludge disposal.
PREVIOUS RESEARCH WORKS ON TREATMENT
During the period 1969 to 1981 the American Water Works Association (AWWA)
Research Foundation and the AWWA Sludge Disposal Committee prepared a series of
reports with a comprehensive literature review on the nature and solutions of water treatment
plant disposal problems. The first report, prepared by the AWWA Research Foundation, was
divided into four parts (AWWA Research Foundation, 1969a, 1969b, 1969c, 1970) and was
entitled "Disposal of s from Water Treatment Plants."
The first part of this report (AWWA, 1969a) covered the status of research and
engineering practices for treating various wastes from water treatment plants. The second
part (AWWA, 1969b) reviewed plant operations for the disposal of various types of , and the
regulatory aspects of disposal. The third part (AWWA, 1969c) described various treatment
processes employed and their efficiency and degree of success and presented cost analyses.
The last part (AWWA, 1970) summarized research needs, engineering needs, plant operation
needs, and regulatory needs. Concurrently with the initial preparation of the report by the
AWWA Research Foundation, the Water Resources Quality Control Committee of the
Illinois Section of the AWWA conducted a survey of the handling of wastes from water
treatment plants in Illinois (Evans et al., 1970). This effort was made to determine the type
and quantities of waste produced, the characteristics of the wastes, and the existing methods
of waste disposal in Illinois.
In 1972, the AWWA Disposal of Water Treatment Plant Waste Committee published
an updated report (AWWA, 1972). It dealt with processing and re-processing in sludge
production, i.e., selection and modification of treatment processes, reclamation of lime and
alum, recovery of filter backwash water, processing of wastes to recover useful by-products,
processing of wastes for disposal, ultimate disposal, and future research needs. In 1978, the
4
AWWA Sludge Disposal Committee prepared a 2-part article (AWWA Sludge Disposal
Committee, 1978a, 1978b) entitled "Water Treatment Plant Sludge an Update of the State of
the Art." Part 1 dealt with regulatory requirements, sludge production and characteristics,
minimizing of waste production, and European and Japanese practices. Part 2 detailed non-
mechanical and mechanical methods of dewatering water plant sludges, ultimate solids
disposal, and research and development needs.
NEED FOR THE STUDY

The principal objective of wastewater treatment is generally to allow human and industrial
effluents to be disposed of without danger to human health or unacceptable damage to the
natural environment. An environmentally safe fluid waste stream is produced. No danger to
human health or unacceptable damage to the natural environment is expected. Water
includes household waste liquid from toilets, baths, showers, kitchens, sinks and so forth that
is disposed of via sewers. Water also includes liquid waste from industry and commerce.
OBJECTIVES OF PRESENTWORK
This research is aimed at finding the various characteristics of effluent from a prescribed
location and further designing a water treatment plant. The following are the main
objectives of the study:
1. Physical, chemical and biological characterization of the wastewater canteen pit of college.
2. Comparison with the general treatment units and domestic treatment units.
3. Design of the water treatment plant.
5
CHAPTER 2
CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTEWATER
2.1 Physical characteristic of wastewater:

a) Odour: It depends on the substances which arouse human receptor cells
encountering them. Pure water doesn’t produce odour or taste sensations. Thus,
wastewater which contains toxic substances has pungent.
Smell which makes it easy to distinguish. Odour is recognized as a quality.
Factor affecting acceptability of drinking water. Organic and inorganic substance contributes
to taste or odour. The ultimate odour tasting device is the human nose. The odour intensity is
done by threshold odour test.
b) Taste: The sense of taste results mainly from chemical stimulation of sensory nerve
endings in tongue. Fundamental sensations of taste are, by convention more than by
research evidence, salt, sweet, bitter, and sour. The rating involves the following steps.
a) dilution series including random blanks is prepared b) initial tasting of about half the
sample by taking water into mouth and holding it for several seconds and discharging it.
without swallowing. c) Forming an initial judgment on the rating scale
d) a final rating made for the sample e) rinsing mouth with taste and
odour free water free) testing.
c) Colour: Color in water results from the presence of natural metallic ions
such as Fe or Mg, humus and peat materials, planktons and weeds. It is
removed to make water suitable for general and industrial applications.
After turbidity is removed the apparent color and that due to suspended
matter is found out. Tristimulus, Spectroscopic and Platinum cobalt method is used.
d) Total solids: It refers to matters suspended or dissolved in water and wastewater.

Solids affect the water or effluent quality adversely in several ways. Water with highly
dissolved solids is not palatable and may cause physiological reactions in transient consumer.
A limit of 500 mg dissolved solids/L is desirable for drinking waters. Evaporation method is
used to separate total solids and their weight is found out.
6
e) Floatable: One important criterion for evaluating the possible effect of waste disposal
into surface water is the amount of floatable material in the waste. Two general types of
floating matter are found (i) Particulate matters like 'grease balls' (ii) Liquid component
capable of spreading as thin visible film over large areas. It is important because it
accumulates on the surface and may contain pathogenic bacteria and viruses.
f) Turbidity: Clarity of water is important in producing products destined for human

consumption and in many manufacturing uses. It is caused by suspended matter such as clay,
silt, finely divided organic and inorganic matter, soluble colored organic compounds.
Turbidity is an expression of the optical property that causes light to be scattered and
absorbed rather than transmitted in straight lines through the sample. The standard method
for determination of turbidity has been based on the Jackson candle turbidity meter and
Nephelometers.
2.2 Chemical characteristic of wastewater:

Chemical characteristics of water state the presence of metals in their treatment, the
determination of inorganic non-metallic constituents and the determination of organic
constituents. Here goes a brief description of all the experiments we have performed.
2.3 Biological characteristic of wastewater:

Water quality has a key role in deciding the abundance, species composition, stability,
productivity, and physiological condition of indigenous populations of aquatic communities.
Their existence is an expression of the quality of the water. Biological methods used for
evaluating water quality include the collection, counting and identification of aquatic
organisms. Most microorganisms known to microbiologists can be found in domestic
wastewater like Bacteria, Protozoa, Viruses, and Algae. Planktons, Periphyton, Macro-
phyton, Macro-invertebrates, Fish, Amphibians and Aquatic reptiles are the biotic group of
interdependent organisms. Wastewater contains vast quantities of bacteria and other
organisms. Aerobic bacteria break down organic matter in the presence of available oxygen.
Anaerobic bacteria disintegrate organic matter which is shut off from free oxygen, such as in
the interior of a mass of feces or a dead body. The products of anaerobic decomposition have
7
an extremely nauseating odor. The matter in which this condition exists is said to be septic.
A multitude of the bacteria in wastewater are coliform bacteria: those found in the digestive
tract of normal humans. It is these comparatively few pathogenic organisms that pose the
greatest public health hazard. Wastewater which is not properly treated may eventually find
its way into a community water source and spread waterborne diseases.
2.4 SAMPLING DETAILS

Wastewater samples have been collected in contamination free sampling bottles of 1000 ml
from the kitchen or canteen effluent and the pit water of pit in college.
Collection of water from the pit is done 1 meter from ground level. canteen is waste is
collected from the outlet of the canteen. These samples are preserved to do analysis like
physical and chemical.
8
CHAPTER 3
ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES
3.1 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OF pH VALUE
(ELECTROMERICMETHODS)
The negative logarithm of concentration of hydrogen ion gives the pH of a sample. pH varies
from 6-8 in wastewater sample, due to hydrolysis of salts of bases and acids. Carbon dioxide,
Hydrogen Sulphide and Ammonia which are dissolved affect pH value of water. pH value
may be more than 9 in alkaline springs and the pH may be 4 or even less than 4 for acidic
ones.
Principal:
The pH value is found by measurement of the electromotive force generated in a cell. It is
made up of an indicator electrode which is reactive to hydrogen ions such as a glass
electrode. When it is immersed in the test solution the contact between reference electrode
(usually mercury/calomel electrode), and the test solution the electromotive force is
measured. A pH meter, that is, a high impedance voltmeter is marked in terms of pH. A
variety of electrodes have been suggested for the determination of pH. The hydrogen gas
electrode is the primary standard. Glass electrode in coordination with calomel electrode is
generally used with reference potential provided by saturated calomel electrode. The glass
electrode
system is based on the theory that a change of 1 pH unit produces an
electrical change of 59.1 mV at 25°C. The membrane of the glass forms a
partition between two liquids of differing hydrogen ion concentration thus potential is
produced between the two sides of the membrane which is proportional to the difference in
pH between the liquids.
The apparatus used are:
 pH meter - With glass and reference electrode (saturated calomel),
 Thermometer - With the least Count of0.5°C.
Procedure:
The instrument is standardized after required warm-tip period. A buffer solution of pH near
to that of the sample is used. The electrode is checked against at least one additional buffer of
different pH value. The temperature of the water is found and if temperature compensation is
available in the instruments it is adjusted. The electrodes are rinsed and gently wiped with
9
solution. If necessary, the electrodes are immersed into the sample beaker or sample stream
and stirred at a constant rate to provide homogeneity and suspension of solids. Rate of
stirring is minimized and the air transfer rate at the air-water interface of the sample is noted.
The sample pH and temperature is noted.
Table No.3.1 pH of sample:
Source pH
Canteen wastewater 7.89
Tap water 7.36
Bathroom wastewater 8.01
3.2 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OFALKALINITY

The sample liquid for analysis should be either free from turbidity or should be allowed to
settle before analyzing it.
 pH Meter
 Burette - 50-mlcapacity.
 Magnetic Stirrer Assembly
The reagents used are:
- pH must be greater than 6.0.
In case the pH falls below 6.0, it shall be boiled for 15 minutes and cooled to room
temperature.
- 5.6 ml of concentrated sulfuric acid is diluted with
one liter with distilled water.
Sulfuric Acid - 0.02 N.
- 0.5 g of phenolphthalein in 100 ml is
mixed, 1: 1 (v/v) alcohol water mixture is taken.
ator Solution - Dissolve 0.02 g methyl red and 0.01 g
bromocresol green in 100 ml, 35 %, ethyl or isopropyl alcohol.
Procedure:
20 ml of sample is pipetted into a 100-ml beaker. 2 to 3 drops of phenolphthalein indicator is
added to the sample if the pH of the sample is above 8.3. It is then titrated with standard
H2SO4 solution till the pink color observed by indicator just disappears (equivalence of pH
10
8.3). The volume of standard H2SO4 solution used is recorded. 2 to 3 drops of mixed
indicator are put to the solution in which the phenolphthalein alkalinity has been
determined. The solution is titrated with standard acid to light pink color (equivalence of
pH 3-7). The volume of standard acid used after phenolphthalein alkalinity is recorded.
Calculation of alkalinity:
Formula:
V1X.02X50X1000ppm
20
Where v1 = volumeofH2so4= 11.00X.02X50X100

20
=14.9 ppm
Table No.3.2 Alkalinity of sample:
Source Concentration in ppm
Canteen waste 75
Tap water 15
Pit water 80
3.3 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OFACIDITY:

Principal:
Acidity of water is the numerically expressible capacity to react with a strong base to a
designated pH. It may be defined as an equivalent concentration of hydrogen ions in mg/l.
The equation in its simplest form is as follows:
H+ + NaOH =H2O+ Na+
- 50-ml capacity.
The Reagents used are:

 Distilled Water
 Potassium Acid Phthalate
 Sodium Hydroxide Solution - 15 N.
11
Sodium hydroxide solution - 1 N 67 ml of 15 N NaOH solution is diluted to one liter with
distilled water.
Sodium hydroxide solution - 0.02 N 20 ml of 1 N NaOH solution is diluted to one liter and
is standardized using standard potassium acid phthalate.
Phenolphthalein Indicator - 0.5 g of phenolphthalein is dissolved in 100 ml 1: 1 (v/v)
alcohol water mixture and 0.02 N NaOH solution is added drop.
by drop till slight pink color is observed.
Methyl Orange Indicator – 0.5 g of methyl orange is dissolved in distilled water and made
up to 100 ml in a volumetric flask.
Procedure:
A) Indicator Method - 20 ml of a suitable amount of sample is pipetted into a 100 ml
beaker. Less than 20 ml of titrant shall be required for the titration that should be the volume
of sample. The pH of water is determined. If PH is less than 3.7, two drops of methyl orange
indicator is added into the first sample beaker. It is titrated with standard 0.02 N NaOH
solution until the color converts to a faint orange. The volume of NaOH used is recorded. 2
to 3 drops of phenolphthalein indicator is added to the second sample beaker. It is again
titrated with 0.02 N NaOH solution till the color of solution changes to faint pink color. The
volume used is recorded.
Calculation of acidity:
Formula:
V1X.02X50X1000ppm
20
Where v1 = volumeof NAOH = 6.83X.02X50X100

20
= 6.83ppm
Table 3.3 Acidity of sample:
Canteen waste 4.5
Tap water 2.3
12
3.4 PROCEDURE FOR MEASUREMENT OF CHLORIDE
Principal:
Soluble and slightly dissociated mercuric chloride is formed whenChloride
is titrated with mercuric nitrate. Diphenyl Carbazone within the pH range
of 2.3 to 2.8 signals the end point by the formation of a purple complex
with extra mercuric ions.
- 250 ml capacity.
burette - 5 ml with 0.01 ml graduation intervals.
The reagents used are:
- 0. I N
Sodium hydroxide - 0.1N
-acidifier reagent - Nitric acid concentration of this reagent decides the success of
the determination and it can be varied as indicated in (a) or (b) to befit the alkalinity range of
the sample. Reagent (a) contains sufficient nitric acid to counteract a total alkalinity of 150
mg as CaCO3/l to the proper pH in a 100 ml sample. a) 250 mg s-diphenyl carbazone, 4-O
ml. concentration nitric acid and 30 mg xylene cyanole FF in 100 ml 95 percent ethyl
alcohol or isopropyl alcohol. The sample is stored in a dark bottle in a refrigerator. This
reagent is not stable indefinitely. Deterioration causes a slow end point and high results.
Standard mercuric nitrate titrant - 2.3 g mercuric nitrate [Hg (NO3)2 or 2.5 g Hg
(NO3).12H2O] is dissolved in 100 ml distilled water containing 0.25 ml concentrated nitric
acid. It is diluted to just less than 1 liter. Replicates are used containing 5.00 ml standard
sodium chloride solution and 10 mg sodium bicarbonate (NaHCO3) diluted to 100 ml with
distilled water. It is adjusted to 0.0141 N and a final standardization of 1.00 ml = 500 mg.
Cl- is made. It is stored away from light in a dark bottle. Mixed indicator reagent - 0.50 g
diphenyl carbazone powder and 0.05 g bromophenol blue powder is dissolved in 75 ml 95
percent ethyl or isopropyl alcohol and dilute to 100 ml with the same alcohol.0.141 N
standard mercuric nitrate is used as titrant.
13
Procedure:
100 ml sample is taken such that the chloride content is less than 10 mg. 1.0 ml indicator
acidifier reagents are put. pH is conformed to about 8 for highly alkaline or acid waters
before adding indicator-acidifier reagent. 0.411 N Mercuric Nitrate is titrated with the
solution to a definite purple end point. The solution turns from reen blue to blue a few drops
before the end point. The blank is determined by titrating 100 ml distilled water containing
10 mg of sodium bicarbonate.
Calculation of chlorine content:
Formula:
Chloride, mg/l = (V1 – V2) x N x35450

V3
Where,
V1 = volume in ml of silver nitrate used by the sample,
V2 = volume in ml of silver nitrate used in the blank titration,
V3 = volume in ml of sample taken for titration and
N = normality of silver nitrate solution.
Chloride = (5-0) X.02X35450

2
=3.5ppm
Table 3.4 Chlorine content of sample:

Canteen waste 113
Tap water 3.5
14
3.5 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF RESIDUAL CHLORINE
It is measured as the chlorine left in the water after the required contact period which will
ensure complete killing of bacteria and oxidation of the organic matter usually a free chlorine
residue is sufficient.
The reagents used are.
- Toluidine - 4 drops
Procedure:
O- Toluidine is added to the sample and mixed thoroughly. After 15 to 20 minutes the colour
is developed. The comparator was placed to match the colour of the sample. The volume of
indicator used was noted down. Generally, the concentration of residual chlorine must be 1 -
2 mg/l.
Table 3.5 Residual chlorine of sample:

Canteen waste 2
Tap water 1
Bathroom wastewater 2
PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTALSOLIDS:

Principal:
The sample is evaporated in a weighed dish on a steam-bath and is dried to a constant mass
in an oven either at 103-105°C or 179-181°C. Total residue is calculated from increase in
mass.
Note - In general, by evaporating and drying water samples at 179-181°Cvalues are obtained
which conform more closely to those obtained by summation of individually determined
mineral salts.
15
Introduction:
The term “solids” is generally used when referring of any material suspended or dissolved
in water or wastewater that can be physically isolated either through filtration or through
evaporation. Solids can be classified as either filterable or non-filterable. Filterable solids
may either be settleable or non-settleable. Solids can also be classified as organic or
inorganic. Total Solids is the term applied to the material residue left in the vessel after
evaporation of a sample and its subsequent drying in an oven at a defined temperature.
Measurement of Solids can be made in different water samples (industrial, domestic and
drinking water) and it is defined as residue upon evaporation of free water.
Thus, Total solids are nothing but summation of total dissolved solids and total suspended solids.
Apparatus:
1. Crucible
2. Oven
3. Desiccators
4. Analytical Balance
5. Dish Tongs
6. Magnetic Stirrer
7. Wash Bottle
Procedure:
 To measure total solids, take a clean porcelain dish which has been washed and dried ina
hot air oven at 1050C for one hour.
 Now weigh the empty evaporating dish in analytical balance. Let’s denote the weight!
measured as (W1).
 Now we should have to decide what should be the volume of sample to be taken for
analysis.
 Volume may be estimated either from values of specific conductance or general thumb
rule.
16
 In general, select a sample volume that will yield residue between 2.5 and 200 mg
after drying.
 Using pipette transfer unfiltered sample in the porcelain dish.
 Switch on the oven and allow it to reach 105°C. Check and regulate oven and furnace
temperatures frequently to maintain the desired temperature range.
 Place it in the hot air oven and care should be taken to prevent splattering of sample
during evaporation or boiling.
 Dry the sample to get constant mass. Drying for long duration, usually 1 to 2 hours
is done to eliminate necessity of checking for constant mass.
 Cool the container in a desiccator. Desiccators are designed to provide an environment of
standard dryness. This is maintained by the desiccant found inside. Don't leave the lid off
for prolonged periods or the desiccant will soon be exhausted.
 Keep the desiccator cover greased with the appropriate type of lubricant in order to seal
the desiccator and prevent moisture from entering the desiccator as the test glassware
cools.
 We should weigh the dish as soon as it has cooled to avoid absorption of moisture due to
its hygroscopic nature.
 Samples need to be measured accurately, weighed carefully, and dried and
cooled completely.
 Note the weight with residue as(W2)
Calculation:
- The total residue is calculated using the following
equation:
Total solids =w3-w1

V
Where,
w1=weight of empty beaker
W2=weight of beaker +sample before oven drying
W3=weight of beaker +sample after oven drying
17
Total solids =48.800-48.74
20
= 23g/l
3.6 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL

DISSOLVEDSOLIDS:
Principal:
The sample is evaporated in a weighed dish on a steam-bath and is dried to a constant mass
in an oven either at 103-105°C or 179-181°C. Total residue is calculated from increase in
mass.
 100MLBeakers
 Drying Oven
 Analytical Balance
Procedure:
1. Weigh the empty beaker and note the weigh asW1.
2. Take 20ml of the sample into the beaker by passing it through a Whatman filter paper.
3. Now measure the weight of the beaker and note the weight asW2.
4. Now place the beaker into the oven and maintain temperature of 103 c and wait until the
complete water from the beaker is dissolved.
5. Now turn off the oven and remove the beaker from the oven and weigh the beaker. And the
note weight asW3
Calculation:
- The total dissolved solids is calculated using the following
equation:
Total dissolved solids = w3-w1

V
=28g/l.
18
3.7 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF TOTAL
SUSPENDEDSOLIDS:
Principal:
The sample is evaporated in a Whatman filter paper and is dried to a constant mass in an
oven either at 103-105°C or 179-181°C. Total residue is calculated from increase in mass.
.100ML Beakers
Procedure:
1. Weigh the Whatman filter paper and note the weigh asW1.
2. Take 20ml the sample into the beaker by passing it through a Whatman filter paper.
3. Now place the Whatman filter paper into the oven and maintain temperature of 103 c and
wait until the complete water from the Whatman filter paper is evaporated
4. Now turn off the oven and remove the b Whatman filter paper from the oven and weigh the
Whatman filter paper r . And the note weight asW3.
Calculation:
- The total dissolved solids is calculated using the following equation:
Total Suspended Solids= w3-w1

V
Where,
w1=weight of empty beaker
W2=weight of Whatman filter paper before oven drying
W3=weight of Whatman filter paper after oven drying
TOTAL SUSPENDEDSOLIDS = 1.620-1550
20
=3.5g/l
19
3.8 PROCEDURE FOR THE DETERMINATION OF DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Aim: To determine the Dissolved Oxygen content present in the given wastewater sample.
Apparatus: BOD bottles, burette, pipette, conical flask, measuring jar.
Reagents:
1. Manganous sulphate solution
2. Alkali Oxidized
3. Concentrated Sulfuric acid.
4. Starch solution
5.0.1N Stock Sodium-thiol-sulphate solution
6.0.025 N Sodium-thiol-sulphate (Na2S203)
Fig 3.8 Apparatus and chemicals of D.O
20
Procedure:
1. Fill up the BOD bottle with the given water sample up to the neck.
2. Add 2ml of MnSO4 and 2ml of alkali iodide aside solution to the BOD bottle.
Exclude the air bubbles and mix the contents of the bottle by inverting the bottle a
few times.
3. After the precipitate has settled to about 1/3rd the volume of the BOD bottle from the
bottom, add 2 ml of concentrated sulfuric acid. Once again mix the contents gently till
the suspension is completely dissolved and a uniform yellow colored solution is
obtained.
4. Take 203 ml of this solution in a conical flask and titrate with 0.025 N Na2S2O3 to a
pale straw color.
5. Add 1 ml of starch, which turns the solution blue in color. Continue the titration till
the blue color disappears. Note down the volume of Na2S203 consumed, which gives
the DO directly.
Hence the endpoint changes color’s from Yellow to pale straw to blue to colorless.
Note: 1 ml of 0.025 N Na2S203 is equivalent to 0.2 mg of oxygen.
Fig 3.8.1 Determination of D.O
21
Table 3.6 D. O INTIAL: -
Burette Reading
Sl.no. Sample Initial Final
1 200 ml 0 7.5 ml
2 40 ml 0 12 ml
BOD INCUBATOR = 19.7◦C
Room temperature = 29◦c.
Table 3.7 After 3days BOD INCUBATION:
Burette Reading
Sl.no. Sample Initial Final
1 32 ml 28.5 29.8
2 25 ml 29.8 34.4ml
3.9 PROCEDURE FOR NITROGEN REMOVAL
The removal of nitrogen is affected through the biological oxidation of nitrogen from
ammonia to nitrate (nitrification), followed by de-nitrification, the reduction of nitrate to
nitrogen gas. Nitrogen gas is released to the atmosphere and thus removed from the water.
Nitrification itself is a two-step aerobic process, each step facilitated by a different type of
bacteria. The oxidation of ammonia (NH3) to nitrite (NO2−) is most often facilitated by
Nitrosomonas spp. ("nitroso" referring to the formation of a nitroso functional group). Nitrite
oxidation to nitrate (NO3−), though traditionally believed to be facilitated by Nitrobacter spp.
(nitro referring the formation of a nitro functional group), is now known to be facilitated in
the environment almost exclusively by nitro Sophia.
22
Denitrification requires anoxic conditions to encourage the appropriate biological
communities to form. It is facilitated by a wide diversity of bacteria. Sand filters, lagoon Ing
and reed beds can all be used to reduce nitrogen, but the activated sludge process (if designed
well) can do the job the most easily.
3.10 PROCEDURE FOR REMOVAL OFPHOSPHOROUS
Each person excretes between 200 and 1000 grams of phosphorus annually. Studies of
United States water in the late 1960s estimated mean per capita contributions of 500 grams in
urine and feces, 1000 grams in synthetic detergents, and lesser variable amounts used as
corrosion and scale control chemicals in water supplies. Source control via alternative
detergent formulations has subsequently reduced the largest contribution, but the content of
urine and feces will remain unchanged. Phosphorus removal is important as it is a limiting
nutrient for algae growth in many freshwater systems. (For a description of the negative
effects of algae, see Nutrient removal). It is also particularly important for water reuse
systems where high phosphorus concentrations may lead to fouling of downstream
equipment such as reverse osmosis.
Phosphorus can be removed biologically in a process called enhanced biological phosphorus

removal. In this process, specific bacteria, called polyphosphate accumulating organisms
(PAOs), are selectively enriched and accumulate large quantities of phosphorus within their
cells (up to 20 percent of their mass). When the biomass enriched in these bacteria is
separated from the treated water, these bio solids have a high fertilizer value.
Phosphorus removal can also be achieved by chemical precipitation, usually with salts of iron
(e.g., ferric chloride), aluminum (e.g., alum), or lime. This may lead to excessive sludge
production as hydroxides precipitates and the added chemicals can be expensive. Chemical
phosphorus removal requires significantly smaller equipment footprint than biological
removal, is easier to operate and is often more reliable than biological phosphorus removal.
Another method for phosphorus removal is to use granular laterite. Once removed,
phosphorus, in the form of a phosphate-rich sludge, may be stored in a land fill or resold for
use in fertilizer.
23
Operation And Maintenance Considerations
• Switch between the main and standby pump every 4 hours(approximately).
• Check oil in the pump every day; top up if necessary.
• Check motor-to-pump alignment after every dismantling operation.
• Check the condition of coupling and replace damaged parts immediately.
• Check for vibrations and tighten the anchor bolts and other fasteners.
• Check the condition of bearings, oil seals, mechanical seal and replace it if
necessary.
24
3.11 Aeration Tank
Function
The Aeration tank (together with the settling tank/ clarifier that follows) is at the heart of
the treatment system. The bulk of the treatment is provided here, employing
microbes/bacteria for the process.
The main function of the Aeration tank is to maintain a high population level of microbes.
This mixture is called MLSS (Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids). The mixed liquor is passed
on to the clarifier tank, where the microbes are made to settle at the bottom. The settled
microbes are recycled back to the aeration tank. Thus, they are retained for a long period
within the system.
Methodology
A typical Aeration tank is shown below.
Fig 3.11 Aeration Tank
25
1) The inlet pipe brings water from the raw water lift pump (water from the equalization tank).
The pipe is bent downward, so that the water does not get propelled toward the outlet pipe
(6).
2) The baffle wall does not let the incoming water and sludge go across the tank toward the
outlet pipe (6). The wall forces the mix toward the bottom of the tank; thus, ensuring
maximum retention.
3) The tank is always filled till this level (which is set by the top of the launder (4). So the
remaining height of the tank serves as freeboard (height margin to ensure that the tank
does not overflow immediately under moderate emergencies.)
4) The Outlet Launder collects the water and delivers it to the outlet pipe (6). Note that the
outlet launder is located farthest from the inlet pipe (1) to minimize short circuiting of flow
from the inlet to the outlet of the tank.
5) The net prevents entry of debris in the outlet pipe (6). The operator should remove debris
collected in the launder (4) periodically, otherwise eventually the mesh will be blocked with
accumulated debris, resulting in a rise of water-level in the aeration tank. In the extreme case,
this will cause overflow from the tank.
Design Criteria
When designing an STP, the following factors are already known:
• The quantity of water to be handled per day.
•The pollution potential of Indian domestic water, in terms of commonly understood
parameters such as BOD (Biochemical Oxygen demand), COD (Chemical Oxygen
Demand), TSS (Total Suspended Solids), O&G (Oil & Grease), etc.
Thus, we know the amount of food available every day for the microbes to eat away.
 The next step is to calculate the amount of air to be pumped into the aeration tank, to keep
the microbes alive and in continuous suspension (they must mix well with the food, and not
settle at the bottom of the tank).
 In fact, the amount of air required for respiration of the microbes is always more than
the amount of air required to keep the tank contents completely mixed. Therefore, we can
simply calculate the air required for microbes; and it will serve the other purpose well.
 The thumb rule is 50-60 m3/hr. of air for every kg of BOD removed (i.e., the
difference between BOD readings of the incoming water and treated water).
26
 That concludes the design of the Aeration tank: the size (volume), concentration of microbes
to be maintained, and the quantity of air to be supplied per hour.
Construction And Engineering
 The Aeration tank is generally of waterproof RCC construction (as are most other tanks in
the STP), designed as water-retaining structures as specified in relevant Indian codes as
adequate floor coverage and uniform mixing can be achieved by proper placement of
diffusers on the tank floor.
 Operating platforms must be provided next to the tank, such that all the diffusers installed in
the tank are easily accessible, and amenable to easy maintenance.
 In theory, the desired volume can be achieved with multiple combinations of tank
dimensions. However, in practice, the following factors limit the depth of the tank:
 The water depth may be between 2.5 - 4.0. The greater the water depth, the higher the
efficiency of transfer of Oxygen to the tank contents. However, there isa
 Energy savings
 Less number of rotating machineries to be operated and maintained.
 Turndown option.
 Standby facility.
 Gentle aeration (less breakage of the biomass floc) Performance unaffected by foaming in
tank Substantial reduction in aerosol formation (Safe working conditions Design can
consider the following factors: pressure, temperature, altitude, viscosity, fouling, aging, etc.
Non-interruptive maintenance/ replacement is possible the diffusers must be retrievable, for
regular cleaning and maintenance without having to empty the aeration tank. (Regular
cleaning extends the life of the diffusers).
 In the aeration tank affecting STP performance are far less compared to the settling
tank (secondary clarifier-- the next tank in the chain).
3.12 Secondary Clarifier/ Settling Tank
Function
The purpose and function of the secondary clarifier is threefold:
 Allow settling of biomass solids in the Mixed Liquor (biomass slurry) coming out of
the aeration tank, to the bottom of the clarifier.
27
 To thicken the settled biomass, to produce a thick underflow.
 To produce clear supernatant water, in the overflow from the clarifier.
The clarifier tank is only a passive device: All the above actions occur due to gravity.
The thick biomass is re-circulated back to the aeration.
How It Works
The clarifier tanks can be classified in two groups: mechanized and unmechanized.
In an unmechanized clarifier, the bottom of the tank is shaped like a funnel, with a steep
slope. The sludge slowly settles towards bottom and slides down the slope to collect at the
lowest point of the funnel-shaped bottom.
 In a mechanical clarifier, the bottom of the tank has only a gentle slope toward the center.
The sludge settles uniformly across the floor of the tank. A set of slowly rotating rubber
blades sweep the sludge into a hopper at the center of the tank.
1. The water inlet pipe brings water from the aeration tank.
The center-feed well (also called “influent well”) takes this incoming water and gently
releases it in the settling tank, without causing any disturbance or turbulence. Note that
the well is always filled with water because of its position. So, the incoming water does not
drop from a height and disturbs the sludge that is already settling toward the bottom of the
tank. Also note that the top of the well is positioned above the water surface, so that the
incoming water cannot find a path of least resistance, straightway rise to the top and exit to
the launder. (If that is allowed to happen, then the solids will never be able to settle.)
2. The sludge is only slightly heavier than water; so, it takes time to sink. It slides down the
steeply sloped walls of the tank toward the center of the bottom.
3. The bacterial flocs collect here in high concentration. Even when the flocs settle at bottom,
they remain suspended in water, rather than forming a solid sediment.
Note: This figure shows it as semitransparent only to show the suction pump mechanism. In real
life, the mix would be a dense opaque mass. The upper part of the tank, till the surface, holds
clear water (the figure shows only its surface).
4. Compressed airpipe
5. Inverted funnel
28
6. Delivery pipe
7. Clearwater
8. Launders
9. Clarified waterpipe.
Fig 3.12 Secondary clarifier

Mechanized Clarifier Tank
Functions
The three types of clarifier tanks described so far were not mechanized: In hose tanks, the
sludge settles and moves to the deepest part of the tank due to gravity, from where a pump
takes it to the aeration tank.
In a mechanized clarifier tank, the sludge settles at the bottom over a wide area, and a few
rubber wiper blades (called “squeegees”) sweep it to a pit at the center of the tank, from
where a pump takes it to the aeration tank.
This design is used for large STPs only. An atypical tank is shown below slope.
The figure does not show the clarified water and sludge, so that the submerged parts can
be shown clearly.
29
Fig 3.12.1 Mechanical clarifier
The water inlet pipe (1) brings water from the aeration tank.
The center-feed well (also known as “influent well”) (2) takes this coming water and gently
releases it in the settling tank, without causing any disturbance or turbulence. Note that the
well is always filled with water because of its position. So, the incoming water does not drop
from a height and disturbs the sludge that is already settling toward the bottom of the tank.
Also note that the top of the well is positioned above the water surface, so that the incoming
water cannot find a path of least resistance, straightway rise to the top and exit to the launder.
Since the bottom (3) has very little slope, the flocs do not move from their settling spot. The
clear water rises to the top. Most of the tank is filled with clear water (not shown here), As
we go down, we find the sludge in progressively higher concentration. The tank has a launder
(5) around its periphery. The clear water flows over its top edge (4) (called “weir”) into the
launder and is collected by the outlet pipe (6) and taken to the filter units (pressure sand filter
and activated carbon filter).
Note that the position of the launder determines the depth of water in the tank: Under normal
running conditions, the water level never rises beyond the weir. It rises only when the outlet
pipe is blocked for some reason.
30
So, the remaining height of the tank above the weir serves as freeboard (height margin to
ensure that the tank does not overflow immediately under moderate emergencies.)
The bacterial flocs settled at the bottom must be quickly collected and sent back to aeration
tank, otherwise they would die because of lack of oxygen and food.
This is done with a set of rubber blades (called “squeegees”) (7): The squeegees sweep the
floor in circular movement and propel toward a collection-pit (8) at the center of the tank.
From here, a pump takes the sludge to an aeration tank. The squeegees work just like how a
windshield wiper works in your car.
A motor (9) drives a speed-reduction gear box (10), The gear box drives a shaft (11). The
shaft is attached to the frame (12) that carries all the squeegees (7).
Thus, when the motor rotates at its normal speed, the frame rotates at a very slow speed in
the tank. This slow speed ensures that the sludge settled at the bottom of the tank is not
stirred up.
The platform (13) (also called “bridge”, because it spans across the tank in most designs)18
allows mounting of the driver motor and allows the STP operator to observe the tank from
above.
It always has safety handrails (not shown in the figure to reduce complexity.)
Some critical details of the sludge-collection pit are shown below:
Fig 3.12.2 Mechanized clarifier
31
The figure shows only some parts of the tank floor (1). A bucket-shaped sludge-collection pit
(2) collects the sludge that is swept by the squeegees.
it rotates in the thick slurry; it meets uneven resistance and currents;
and starts swinging.
As a result, the squeegees cannot remain in touch with the floor, and their sweeping action is
not uniform. That leaves a lot of sludge unwept on the floor. A second major problem is the
rubber.
squeegees strike the floor violently and get damaged. Such torn squeegees cannot sweep the
sludge properly. Again, this leaves a lot of sludge unwept on the floor. Bacteria that cannot
be collected within one hour from the clarifier tank die and turn septic.
Thus, the bottom bush plays a vital role.
The concentrator is like a large screw. It rotates with the rake, and pushes/squeezes the flocs
down the pit. At the bottom of the pit, the floc concentration is the highest. This increases the
density of the slurry that is returned to the aeration tank.
Design Criteria
The fundamental design criterion for clarification of the mixed liquor coming into the
clarifier is the cross-sectional area of the clarifier. In the strictest theoretical sense, the depth
of the clarifier has no role to play in the “clarification” function: Increasing depth of the
clarifier only helps in the “thickening” function.
Clarifier cross-sectional area is typically computed at between 12 – 18 m3/hr./m2 of

throughput flow of water, depending on various other factors. For small domestic STPs, a
figure of 16 may be taken as the golden mean.
It is customary to specify the depth of clarifier between2.5 to 3.0 m.
To restrict localized high up flow velocities, clarifiers must be provided with sufficient
length of “weir” over which overflow occurs. In small clarifiers, the “Weir Overflow Rate”
does not assume critical significance, and in a square tank, a weir on a single side of the tank
will be sufficient.
Circular clarifiers in most cases are built with an all-round weir, which again is adequate.
32
Proper construction and engineering of a clarifier/ settling tank is of utmost importance, and
several factors need to be considered and executed with great precision. Any deficiency in
even one of these aspects can make or mar an STP. Some of the more critical factors are
listed below:
Steep slope in the hopper-bottom settling tank (> 450)
 Weir at uniform level

 Influent feed well to kill turbulence of incoming mixed liquor from the aeration tank
 Radial entry of mixed liquor into the feed well
 Minimum difference in water level in aeration
 tank and clarifier (not more than 0.2m)
 Minimum footprint of the central sludge- collection hopper
 If a square tank is fitted with a mechanical rake, its corners (which are not swept by the
blades) must have a steep slope.
 Uniform slope in floor, without major undulations
 Rubber squeegees of the mechanical rake to sweep the floor.
 Number, angle and length of rake blades on the rake arm
 Speed of the rake arm
 Bottom “steady bush” for the vertical shaft of rake arm in large clarifiers to prevent
oscillation of the rake arms.
 If the sludge-withdrawal pipe is buried beneath the floor in a mechanical clarifier, it shall be
minimum 4” diameter.
If properly designed, engineered and constructed, clarifiers call for very little attention in
terms of operation and maintenance. Indeed, the unmechanized (hopper-bottom) settling
tanks may be said to be zero- maintenance units. Some parts of the mechanical rake (such as
the motor, gearbox etc.) call for only routine maintenance. The sacrificial rubber squeegees
sweeping the floor of the clarifier need to be checked and replaced, possibly once in two
years.
33
3.13 Sludge Recirculation
Fig 3.13 Sludge recirculation tank
Function
The indivisible combination of the aeration tank, settling tank and sludge recirculation
constitutes an “activated sludge biological treatment system”. All three must be fine-tuned to
act in unison to produce the desired high level of treatment.
The optimum desired age of the microbes is between 25 to 30 days. At the same time, an STP
needs to maintain a high level of microbes in the aeration tank. Both these objectives are
achieved by recirculating the sludge from the settling tank, and also bleeding out of excess
microbes from the system at regular intervals.
To illustrate by a simple example: if the total biomass inventory in the system is 100 kg, and
daily bleed/ wasting rate is 4 kg, then the average age of biomass in the system is 25 days.
Methodology
A typical pair of pumps (working and standby) is shown below
1. There are two identical pumps. Controls ensure that only one pump can run at a time. The
sludge from the sludge hopper of the clarifier is taken by gravity into a sludge sump, from
where the pumps return the sludge to the aeration tank.
2. Both pumps have independent suction pipes
• It is not desirable to have a common suction pipeline, because if it fouls up, both pumps
will have to be shut down.
34
Fig 3.13.1 Lift pumps
• The pipes must not have foot-valves, because the foot-valves would get jammed
frequently.
• The inlet pipes extend almost to the bottom of the tank.
3.The delivery pipes from both pumps are combined in a! -shaped header.
A delivery pipe takes sludge from this header to the aeration tank.
4.The bypass pipeline returns some sludge back to the sludge-holding tank.
5.Valves fitted on all three pipelines serve different purposes:
•The valve on the bypass line is adjusted to “waste” the excess capacity of the working
pump. (The delivery pipeline (3) always carries sludge at the designed flow rate, to
achieve the desired MLSS in the aeration tank.)
•The valve on the delivery pipe is closed off when the corresponding pump is removed
for repairs. This prevents sludge coming from the other pump from coming-out.
35
• 50 % to 100 % of the throughput rate of water in the STP. Hence, in most cases, the
capacity and specifications of the raw water lift pumps are replicated for this duty as
well.
The engineering principles prescribed for the raw water lift pumps apply to the sludge
recirculation pumps as well.
Providing an intermediate sludge sump (between the clarifier and the recirculation pumps) to
collect sludge from the bottom of the clarifier tank is preferable to directly connecting the
pump to the sludge pipe of the clarifier: This strategy enables control of the recirculation
sludge rate, without having to throttle the pump, thereby reducing pump-maintenance costs
and extending life of the pumps.
Typically, in small plants (say up to 150 m3/day)
5-10 m3/hr. of air is sufficient to lift sludge in a 2”-3” diameter of sludge pipe and deliver it
back to the aeration tank. Note that air-lift pumps work well only when the submergence is
high (i.e., when the mouth of the airlift pump is deep inside the water) and the delivery head
is small (i.e., when the Aeration tank’s top is not much above the top level of the settling
tank). In other words, the water level difference between the Aeration Tank and Settling
Tank must not be excessive; otherwise, the pump will not be able to lift the sludge, and thus
the recirculation will stop.
Considerations here are identical to those specified for the raw water lift pumps.
The manufacturer’s O&M manual must be followed with diligence.
Ensure discharge of sludge recirculation into the aeration tank is visible and can be
monitored.
In addition, if an intermediate sludge sump is provided, it is advisable to force-flush the

sludge line of the clarifier at frequent intervals, so that the pipe always remains clear, and
incidence of choking is minimized.
36
3.14 Filter Feed Pumps (FFP)
Function
Filter feed pumps are used to take the water from the clarified water sump and pass it through
the pressure sand filter and activated carbon filter installed in series.
Design Criteria
The capacity of the filter feed pumps may be chosen keeping in view the desired number of
hours of operation of filters (if not the standard 20-22 hours of operation). In this case, the
capacity of the intermediate clarified water sump also needs to be enhanced accordingly.
The discharge head of the filters may be specified at 1.5 - 2 kg/cm2, to overcome the
pressure differential across the two filters under the worst condition (which is just before
backwashing or back flushing the filters).
The filter feed pumps may be selected either to be of the open impeller type (more
efficient) or, we may fall back upon the trusted non-clog, solids-handling (NC-SH) type of
pump selected for raw water lifting.
The option is left entirely to the designer/ engineer, provided the rest of the STP has been
designed and engineered to the satisfaction of a purist.
 Switch between the main and standby pump every 4 hours(approximately)

 Check oil in the pump every day; top up if necessary.
 Check motor-to-pump alignment after every dismantling operation.
 Check the condition of coupling and replace damaged parts immediately.
 Check for vibrations and tighten the anchor bolts and other fasteners.
 Check the condition of bearings, oil seals, mechanical seal and replace if necessary.
 Completely drain out oil and replace afresh as per manufacturer’s recommendation.
 Always keep safety guard in its proper position
 Follow the safetyprinciples20 while performing maintenance activities.
37
 Ensure discharge of raw water into the aeration tank is visible and can be monitored.
 Maintain the flow rate at designed level (no tampering with the bypass valve)
 Follow the manufacturer’s O&M manual diligently.
Fig 3.14 Filter feed pumps
3.15 Pressure Sand Filter (PSF)
Function
The pressure sand filter (PSF) is used as a tertiary treatment unit to trap the trace amounts
of solids which escape the clarifier, and can typically handle up to 50 mg/l of solids in an
economical manner.
This unit is essentially a pressure vessel that is filled with graded media (sand and gravel).
The water filtered with PSF is passed on to the next stage in the STP chain: the Activated
Carbon Filter.
Methodology
The upper layers of the sand perform the actual filtration function. The gravel layers merely
provide physical support to the upper sand layers.
The sand used in the PSF is not ordinary construction sand: It has particle size in a specific
range and is specially sieved for this purpose.
38
Think of a sand filter as a 3D (“in depth”) filter, as compared to planar filters like a tea bag or
tea strainer. Here, filtration occurs along the entire depth of the sand layer. The solid particles
in the water get entrapped and enmeshed in the
spaces between the sand particles. Gradually, the space between sand particles
gets filled with incoming solids. This blocks the passage of water through the sand layer. As
a result, the pressure at the outlet drops rapidly21 and wastes the pumping power and
reduces the throughput of the filter.
When the pressure drops beyond a limit, the sand is cleaned by backwashing of the filter
(back flushing) with water, in which water is passed in the reverse direction (from outlet to
inlet). This process agitates, fluidizes, and expands the sand bed. The backwash water carries
away the lighter pollutant solid particles as backwash waste.
Fig 3.15 Pressure sand filter
Design Criteria
A good average design filtration rate is 12 m3/ m2/hr. of filter cross-sectional area, and
most filters used in STP applications are designed on this basis.
39
The Filter vessel is designed as a pressure vessel (it consists of a straight cylindrical shell,
with convex dish-shaped ends welded to the top and bottom). A typical vessel is designed to
withstand a pressure of 5 kg/cm2.
In small diameter vessels, it is customary to provide a bolted dish at the top for ease of
maintenance. In large filters, a manhole of > 0.6 m diameter is provided at the top. A hand-
hole of
> 200 mm diameter is provided at the bottom of the cylinder, to facilitate removal of media
from the vessel at the time of servicing. A set of pipes, valves, bypass line, backwash waste
line etc. are also provided to facilitate operations such as filtration, bypass (during
servicing), backwash etc. Pressure gauges are provided at the inlet and outlet, to monitor the
pressure drop across the filter. The shell height typically varies between 1.2 m to 1.5 m in
small plants. Graded pebbles ranging from 0.5” to 1” are filled as bottom layers in the filter,
up to a depth of nearly 0.5 -0.6 m. The top layers consist of the filtering sand media (Coarse
and fine sand) to a depth of 0.6 – 0.7 m. A freeboard of nearly 0.3 m above the level of sand
may be provided (to allow for expansion of sand during backwash).
A great majority of filters operate in the down flow mode (water flowing in top-to-bottom
direction). Necessary appurtenances are provided at the top for distributing the inflow
uniformly across the cross-sectional area of the filter: similarly, a pipe manifold with laterals
is fitted at the bottom as the under-drain system.
The operations essentially consist of a long filtration run, followed by a short backwash
sequence. The filter needs backwash when the pressure drop across the filter exceeds 0.5
kg/cm2.However, it is a good practice to backwash once in a shift, irrespective of the actual
amount of pressure loss. A five-to-ten-minute backwash will typically rid the filter of all
accumulated muck.
40
3.16 Activated Carbon Filter (ACF)
Function
An activated carbon filter, like the Pressure Sand Filter, is a tertiary treatment unit. It
receives the water that is already filtered by the Pressure Sand Filter and improves multiple
quality parameters of the water: BOD, COD, clarity (turbidity), color and odor.
Methodology
This filter uses the adsorption action of activated carbon.
Activated carbon is typically manufactured from coconut shell or charcoal, the “activation”
process creating a highly porous material with a very large surface area. Organic pollutant
molecules are physically adsorbed and held fast within the catacomb-like porous structure of
the activated carbon. Granular activated carbon is typically used for this purpose.
The water filtered by the Pressure Sand Filter enters the Activated Carbon Filter.
Unlike in the case of the sand filter, trapped molecules in the carbon cannot be backwashed
and got rid of. Hence, activated carbon in the filter has a finite capacity to adsorb and hold
the pollutants, after which the carbon is said to be exhausted. The exhausted material is
removed from the filter and disposed of: Fresh activated carbon is charged in the filter.
Fig 3.16 Activated Carbon Filter
41
Design Criteria
Very precise design criteria are available for design of activated carbon columns (adsorption
isotherms, kinetics of mass transfer between the liquid and solid phase, breakthrough curves
etc.). For everyday applications, however, the simplified rules used for the sand filter have
been found to be adequate.
However, we recommend that the diameter of the activated carbon filter be selected to be
25% larger than the sand filter (SPF) to reduce the frequency of servicing.
Construction and engineering of the Activated Carbon Filter is similar to the PSF. In
addition, on the inside of the filter, epoxy paint coating is recommended due to both the
abrasive and corrosive nature of Activated Carbon
Just as the PSF, the ACF also needs to be backwashed, albeit at a lesser frequency to
dislodge any solid particles trapped by simple filtration action.
When the carbon gets exhausted (indicated by no improvement in water quality across the
ACF), fresh carbon needs to be filled into the filter.
3.17 Disinfection of Treated Water(CHLORINATION)
Function
The treated water is disinfected to destroy and render harmless disease-causing organisms,
such as bacteria, viruses, etc.
The most common methods of disinfection include Chlorination, Ozonation and UV

radiation.
Of these, Chlorine finds widespread application. The primary action of the chemical involves
damaging the cell wall, resulting in cell lyses and death.
42
In most STPs, the common form of Chlorine used is Sodium Hypochlorite (Hypo)
available commercially at 10-12 % strength, being safe, easy to handle and having a
reasonable shelf life.
Design Criteria
Efficiency of disinfection is dependent both on the residual concentration of the chemical

used, as well as the contact time, a factor measured as R x T. Generally, a contact time of 20-
30 minutes is recommended to achieve over 99 % germicidal efficiencies.
The Chlorine disinfection system consists of a Hypo-holding tank (its size depends on the
flow rate of the STP) and an electronically metered dosing pump. Hypo solution of desired
concentration is prepared in the tank. The dosing rate is set in the metering pump as per the
desired Chlorine dose rate, typically 3-5 PPM. Hypo solution is dosed at the outlet of the
ACF, online, so that adequate mixing of Hypo with the treated water is achieved.
 Prepare fresh Hypo solutions every day in the day tank Shelf life of over 2 months is
not recommended, especially during summer.
 Store Hypo in a cool place
 Study Material Safety Data Sheets of Hypo and follow instructions.
 Periodically check available Chlorine strength of Hypo
 Check and record Residual Chlorine concentration every day.
43
CHAPTER 4
Design of Water Treatment Plant
Completion of the master planning and process selection phases establish the design
concepts for the water treatment improvement project, forming the basis for preliminary
design. The preliminary design phase must address a variety of design issues, concluding
with concise recommendations for the principal components of the water treatment plant
facilities. During preliminary design, the primary treatment processes and waste handling
systems design parameters will be established to allow the design team to initiate
development of the design concepts for all the other disciplines. Close coordination with the
design team members, owner, and regulatory agencies is essential during this phase of the
project.
Regulatory Agency Coordination Regulatory agencies having approval authority over
construction of a water treatment plant project may include local building departments,
zoning commissions, and environmental commissions. In addition, there will be state and
federal authorities having jurisdiction over water supply, public health and environmental
issues. Close coordination and communication with these agencies during the preliminary
design phase is essential, as the plant design will eventually be reviewed and approved by
these agencies. Most regulatory agencies have design standards or guidelines that should be
reviewed to identify any potential impacts to the project. As part of this review, agency
permits required for the project should be identified. Permits may be required for a number
of plant design issues that could affect project implementation, such as site approval,
stormwater management, plant discharges to receiving streams, construction in waterways,
environmental impacts, and water rights. Although it may not be required, it is often
beneficial to submit copies of preliminary engineering documents to regulatory agencies for
review and comment, to avoid major changes during final design.
44
4.1 Plant Siting Analysis
Selection of potential sites for a new water treatment plant must take into consideration.
several factors. Some of the principal ones are.
• Proximity of plant site to the source water and to customers being served
• Consideration of water transmission requirements to interconnect the plant to the source
water and the water distribution system
• Proximity of plant site to ultimate treatment waste disposal location
• Environmental and land use concerns
• Subsurface and geotechnical considerations
• Land availability, cost, and zoning
• Storage requirements at plant site for raw water supply
• Compatibility with surrounding existing and planned developments
• Potential for flooding and stormwater handling requirements
• Availability of utilities (power, natural gas, sewer, telephone)
• Site topography and accessibility
• Vulnerability to security risks and natural disasters
Source water supply, treatment, and finished water transmission facilities must function as a
complete system to provide a safe, reliable source of drinking water to the water distribution
system. The water treatment improvements design must take all three types of facilities into
consideration to ensure a proper transition between systems.
Design Development
As part of the preliminary design phase, several key design parameters must be
developed:
 Plant flow schematics indicate all treatment units and equipment for both the primary
treatment processes and waste handling systems.
 Conceptual plant layouts showing the arrangement of treatment process units and other
related facilities with respect to site topography.
 Plant hydraulic profile establishing operating water elevations through the plant at normal
and peak flow rates, for both the primary treatment process and waste handling System.
 Design criteria establishing treatment unit sizes and specific design factors for minimum,
average, and maximum flow conditions of the major treatment processes and waste
handling systems.
 Requirements for ancillary facilities including space needs for plant administration,
45
laboratory, maintenance, chemical handling and storage, low and high service pumping,
and water storage
 Plant control concepts including plant control logic, control system architecture, and
communications with off-site facilities
 Treatment waste handling and ultimate disposal scheme, including off-site waste transport.
requirements
 Architectural and structural concepts for the plant buildings and structures, including.
weather protection provisions for the treatment facilities
 Provisions for future expansions of the plant facilities, allowing for addition of equipment.
and treatment process units, with plant infrastructure oversized where appropriate
 Security measures required to provide the necessary protection of the plant facilities.
and ensure plant reliability.
TABLE 4.1 POULATION FORECASTING
S.NO YEAR NO. OF TEACHING NON- TOTAL INCREMENT
STUDENTS STAFF TEACHING
STAFF
1 2007- 881 55 30 906

2008
2 2008- 1096 70 35 1146 240
2009
3 2009- 1294 83 40 1372 226
2010
4 2010- 1543 100 50 1657 285
2011
5 2011- 1579 121 60 2002 345
2012
6 2012- 1067 123 60 2025 23
2013
7 2013- 1607 135 70 2227 202
2014
8 2014- 2351 156 80 2583 356
2015
9 2015- 2353 157 85 2605 22
2016
10 2016- 2495 167 90 2768 163
2017
11 2017- 2569 173 95 2858 90
46
2018
12 2018- 2281 175 100 2585 -273
2019
Design of Diffused Air Equipment

When diffused aeration is employed, air stripping is accomplished by injecting bubbles?
of air into the water. Ideally, diffused aeration is conducted counter to the flow of water.
Untreated water should be entering at the top and treated water exiting at the bottom while.
fresh air enters at the bottom and exhausted air exits at the water surface. Gas transfer
can be improved by increasing the basin depth, producing smaller bubbles, improving the
contact basin geometry and incorporating a turbine to produce smaller bubbles and increase.
bubble holdup. Diffused air aerators usually provide a longer aeration time than waterfall
aerators, generally an advantage, but other factors influencing performance are the
turbulence provided, air-volume ratio, and gas-transfer resistance. Because of these factors,
comparison between the two types of equipment cannot be made solely on the basis of
aeration contact time.
Basin Design
Tanks used for the diffused air process are usually made of concrete and are commonly 9 to
15 ft (3 to 5 m) deep and 10 to 30 ft (3 to 9 m) wide. The ratio of width to depth should not
exceed 2, to achieve optimum mixing. Tank length is governed by the desired detention
time, which usually varies from 10 to 30 min. Air diffusers are generally mounted along one
side of the tank to impart a spiral flow to the water. A spiral flow pattern produces higher
water surface velocities, which in turn promotes better gas transfer. In addition, with a spiral
flow, a substantial number of bubbles do not escape immediately, but are carried across the
basin where they are held in a more or less fixed position by the descending water.
Diffusers
Common types of diffusers are perforated pipes, porous plates or tubes, and various
patented impingement or sparger devices. Compressed air is generally furnished by a rotary
compressor sized to produce the correct volume and pressure. Diffusers produce small
bubbles that rise through the water and cause turbulence and the opportunity for the
exchange of volatile materials. Diffusers are generally located near mi depth in the tank,
usually about the optimum efficiency point. The deeper location of the diffusers requires
greater pressure head, which increases compressor power costs. The amount of air required
ranges from 0.01 to 0.15ft3/gal (0.0008 to 0.012 m3/L) of water treated. Sufficient diffuser
capacity must be provided to supply air at the required rate without excessive pressure loss.
47
Some installations include lateral baffles to prevent short-circuiting.
Design of Spray Aerators

Exposure time for each drop from a spray aerator depends on its initial velocity and
trajectory. Drop size, and the resulting area-volume ratio, is a function of the dispersing
action of the nozzle. The initial velocity V of a drop emerging from an orifice or nozzle
appears in the formula.
V = Cv ~/2gh
O = " gg
where h = total head on nozzles, ft
g = acceleration from gravity, ft/s 2
A = area of opening, ft 2
Cv = coefficient of velocity
Cd = coefficient of discharge (Ca = Cv Cc, where Cc is coefficient of
contraction)
Coefficients of velocity, contraction, and discharge vary with the shape and other
characteristics of the orifice or nozzle.
The trajectory of the spray used in an aerator may be vertical or inclined. If the angle
between the initial velocity vector and horizontal is zero, theoretical exposure time t of the
water drops is given by the formula.
t = 2Cv sin 0 k/2 h
The sine of an angle of less than 90 ° is less than 1.0, so a vertical jet gives the longest
exposure time for a given value of h. But an inclined jet has the advantage of a longer path
and less interference between falling drops. Wind also influences the path of the rising and
falling drops, so an allowance must be made for its action. Nozzle design is important in
achieving optimum dispersion of water. Among special designs used are rifled nozzles,
centrifugal (West Palm Beach) nozzles, Sacramento floating cones, impinging devices, and
rotating reaction nozzles.
The size, number, and spacing of spray nozzles depend on the head of water being used,
space available for aeration facilities, and interference between adjacent sprays.
Theoretically, numerous small nozzles capable of producing atomized water would be the
most efficient design. However, from a practical standpoint, very small nozzles should be
avoided because of clogging and high maintenance requirements. Nozzles used in most pray
aerators are 1.0 to 1.5 in. (2.5 to 3.8 cm) in diameter and have discharge ratings of75 to 150
48
gpm (4.73 to 9.46 L/s) at about 10 psi (69 kPa). Nozzle spacing in most installations is
between every 2 and 12 ft (0.6 and 3.7 m). The area allocated to spray aeration varies from
50 to 150 ft2/mgd [ 106 to 318 m2/(m3/s)] capacity, although much larger areas have been
used at some treatment facilities.
4.2 COAGULATION AND MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY
Low-pressure membrane technology (micro- and ultrafiltration) is becoming significantly
more prevalent in the drinking water industry (see Chapter 13). Low-pressure membranes
are purely size-exclusionary devices. As a result, anything smaller than membrane pore
sizes (approximately 0.01 to 0.1/xm) will pass through the membrane, Therefore, membrane.
Feedwaters with dissolved materials, such as organics and metals, require some form of
additional treatment. Often, in these cases, the most economical pretreatment process is
simple coagulation. Potential coagulants for membrane pretreatment include those also used
for conventional water treatment. Additionally, organic adsorption media such as PAC and
MIEX, or oxidants such as potassium permanganate, chlorine, or chlorine dioxide can be
applied upstream of a low-pressure membrane (assuming appropriate membrane
compatibility) for enhanced dissolved material removal. Similar to a direct filtration mode
of operation for conventional technology, the goal of coagulation for membrane
pretreatment is to produce a pinpoint floc that is capable of adsorbing dissolved matter but
minimizes solids loading onto the membrane filtration process. As noted briefly above, it is
important to quantify membrane compatibility and performance with the coagulant of
choice. Each commercially available membrane utilizes different membrane materials. As a
result, the compatibility and performance of a coagulant for membrane filtration
pretreatment will likely vary between membrane system and raw water supplies. As such,
there are no specific guidelines for membrane system propagulation except the general
guidelines that are associated with conventional treatment.
Chemical mixing can be accomplished by several different types of equipment designed to
mix the applied chemicals with the source water as quickly as possible.
Mixing Intensity
The intensity of agitation required for optimum rapid mixing and flocculation is measured.
by the G value. The G value concept, developed by Camp and Stein in 1943, is widely.
used in designing rapid mixing and flocculation processes and is defined by the equation.
a= (-p-~f/ 2)
where G = root-mean-square velocity gradient, or rate of change of velocity,
(ft/s)ft
P = power input, ft • lb./s
49
/. ~ = dynamic viscosity, lb. • sift 2
V = volume, ft 3
Equations are also available to calculate G for various types of mixing arrangements, and
manufacturers of mixing and flocculation equipment provide information on G values for
their equipment. Another parameter used in designing mixing systems is Gt, which is the
dimensionless product of G and detention time t in seconds.
Temperature Effects on Mixing
Rapid mix and flocculation systems design is temperature-dependent because water
viscosity varies with temperature, as shown in Table 6.1. Guidelines for adjusting detention.
times in both rapid mix and flocculation basins are shown in Table.
Types of Rapid Mixing Systems
Coagulant chemicals can be mixed by several methods, including.
• Mechanical devices in a dedicated basin
• In-line blenders
• Hydraulic methods
• Air mixing
• Induction mixing
50
Mechanical Mixers:
Propeller- or paddle-type mechanical mixers in a dedicated basin are the most used rapid
mix system in water treatment plants. A typical arrangement for this type of rapid mixer is
illustrated in Figure 6.1. Another mixer arrangement without stators and with a turbine-type
blade is illustrated in Figure 6.2.
Fig 4.2.1 Propeller-type mechanical flash mixer.
51
Fig 4.2.2 mechanical flash mixer
52
Acceptable Level of Hardness
Sawyer (1994) classified the degree of hardness as follows:
Hardness mg/L as CaCO 3
Soft 0-75
Moderate 75-150
Hard 150-300
Very hard 300 +
The degree of hardness acceptable for finished water varies with the consumer or industry
served. In 1968, the American Water Works Association (AWWA) established a water
quality goal for total hardness of 80 to 100 mg/L expressed as calcium carbonate, but
current AWWA water quality goals do not include hardness.
Magnesium hardness of not more than 40 mg/L is also often proposed as a goal to minimize
scaling at elevated temperatures in water heaters. The magnesium concentration present
before precipitation of magnesium salt is a function of pH and temperature of the finished
water. In recent years, many utilities using a softening process have allowed total hardness
in finished water to approach 120 to 150 mg/L to reduce chemical costs and residuals
production and, in some cases, to produce a less corrosive water by increasing alkalinity.
Desired hardness is often stated as a policy by a utility that softens water. If a policy exists,
the designer must provide a treatment plant design meeting that policy. If no policy exists
but softening is desired, it is up to the designer to arrive at a reasonable hardness for design
purpose. At present, total hardness of 120 mg/L or less and magnesium hardness of 40 mg/L
or less appear to be acceptable design criteria for softening facilities for most applications.
In practice, total hardness produced, and the pH of the treated water may be adjusted during
operation by varying chemical feed to meet other treatment goals, including modification of
hardness goals, stability and corrosivity requirements, and turbidity removal under varying
source water quality conditions. Treated water pH of different softening facilities typically
varies between 8.5 and 10.0, depending on all these factors.
Benefits of Softening
Potential benefits of softening water at a central treatment plant include the following:
• Reducing dissolved minerals and scale-forming tendencies
• Reducing consumption of household cleaning agents
• Removing radium 226 and 228
• Removing heavy metals, including arsenic
• Removing certain organic compounds and reducing total organic carbon (TOC)
• Removing silica and fluoride
53
• Removing iron and manganese
• Reducing turbidity of surface waters in conjunction with the hardness precipitation process
The degree of removal of constituents usually depends on the treatment process used.
Benefits to the consumer depend on source water quality and user requirements.
Water softening involves several complex and dynamic chemical interactions. The
chemical reactions involved and calculation of chemical feed requirements are discussed.
in detail in AWWA's Water Quality and Treatment. The discussion that follows in this
text simplifies the chemistry involved, highlighting only the predominant reactions.
Lime, the primary chemical used for water softening, reacts with carbon dioxide and
carbonate hardness to precipitate calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide. Quicklime,
CaO, is first slaked to produce calcium hydroxide:
CaO + H20 = Ca(OH)2 (11.1)
Chemical Reactions. Reactions between calcium hydroxide and carbon dioxide and
bicarbonate alkalinity are shown in Equations (11.2) and (11.3). The reactions convert the
bicarbonate alkalinities present to carbonate alkalinity, which precipitates as insoluble
calcium carbonate.
CO2 + Ca(OH)2 = CaCO 3 + H20 (11.2)
Ca(HCO3)2 + Ca(OH)2 = 2CACO3 + 2H20 (11.3)
The optimum pH to produce minimum soluble calcium carbonate is about 10.3, depending.
on water temperature, total dissolved solids, and other factors affecting the solubility.
of calcium carbonate. In precipitating the calcium ion, 2 mol of calcium carbonate
is formed for every 1 tool of calcium ion removed from the water, as shown in Equation.
(11.3).
Magnesium hardness, present as magnesium bicarbonate, is removed in a stepwise
fashion, as shown in Equations (11.4) and (11.5).
Mg(HCO3)2 + Ca(OH)2 = CaCO3 + MgCO3 + 2H20(11.4)
MgCO3 + Ca(OH)2 = CaCO 3 + Mg(OH) 2 (11.5)
Magnesium hydroxide does not precipitate quantitatively, as suggested by Equation.
(11.5), because the solubility of magnesium hydroxide depends on pH. Generally, a pH of
11.0 to 11.3 is necessary to reduce the magnesium ion concentration to low values. Excess
lime must be added to raise the pH for precipitation of magnesium hydroxide. The resulting
excess hydroxide alkalinity must be converted later to carbonate alkalinity to produce a
water of minimum calcium hardness. This process, generally termed decarbonation, requires
carbon dioxide: Ca(OH)2 + CO2 = CaCO~ + H20 (11.6)
54
Once calcium carbonate is formed, its properties are such that solubilization takes place
only at a very low rate. To remove noncarbonate hardness---calcium or magnesium
hardness present more than the alkalinity--requires soda ash. Equations (11.7) and (11.8)
illustrate noncarbonate hardness removal.
MgSO4 + Ca(OH)2 = MgfOH)_2 + CaSO4 (11.7)
CaSO4 + Na2CO3 = CaCO3 + Na2SO4 (11.8)
No softening occurs in Equation (11.7), as magnesium hardness is only exchanged for
calcium hardness. Soda ash is used in Equation (11.8) to remove the calcium noncarbonated
hardness either originally present or formed as a result of the reactions in Equation (11.7).
Chemical Requirements. These equations allow reasonably good approximations of the
amounts of lime and soda ash required to soften water. The lime required to remove
carbonate hardness can be calculated as shown in Equation (11.9):
CaO (lb/mil gal) = 10.6[CO2 (mg/L)] + 4.7[alkalinity (mg/L)+ magnesium hardness (mg/L)
+ x] (11.9)
where CaO is 100% pure, CO2 is expressed as CO2, alkalinity, and magnesium hardness
are expressed as CaCO3, and x is the required excess hydroxide alkalinity in milligrams per
liter as CaCO3. The magnesium hardness shown is the amount present in the water to be
treated. Desired excess alkalinity can be determined from the magnesium hydroxide
solubility relationship; it is typically in the range of 30 to 70 mg/L and can be estimated at
65 mg/L, expressed as CaCO3, for minimum magnesium hardness.
Equation (11.10) shows the calculation for the quantity of soda ash required to remove
noncarbonate hardness.
NazCO3 (lb/mil gal) = 8.8[noncarbonate hardness (mg/L) - x] (11.10)
where Na2CO3 is 100% pure, noncarbonate hardness is expressed as CaCO3, and x is the
noncarbonate hardness left in the water.
Because CaO is usually 88% to 95% pure, results from Equation (11.9) must be divided by
actual chemical purity. Soda ash is usually essentially pure, so no adjustment to the
calculation is required. If Ca(OH)2 is used instead of CaO, the required amount of Cao
should be calculated by dividing by 56/74, the ratio of the molecular weights. Use of
Caustic Soda. Caustic soda, NaOH, can be used in place of lime or soda ash. Fewer
residuals are produced, and caustic soda is easier to handle, store, and feed. Caustic soda is
generally purchased as a 25% or 50% aqueous solution. Softening reactions with caustic
soda are shown in Equations (11.11) through (11.15).
CO2 + 2NaOH = Na2CO3 + H20 (11.11)
55
Ca(HCO3)2 + 2NaOH = CaCO 3 + Na2CO3 + 2H20 (11.12)
Mg(HCO3)2 + 2NaOH = Mg(OH) a + 2Na2CO3 + 2H20 (11.13)
MgSO4 + 2NaOH = Mg(OH) 2 + Na2SO4 (11.14)
CaSO4 + Na2CO3 = CaCO a + Na2SO4 (11.15)
The sodium carbonate formed in Equations (11.11) through (11.13) is available to
precipitate calcium noncarbonate hardness, as shown in Equation (11.15). A combination of
lime and caustic soda can be used, the ratio depending on the calcium noncarbonate removal
required. This combination provides some savings in chemical cost compared with the use
of caustic soda alone because caustic soda is more expensive than lime. Using caustic soda
may be a good option for low-alkalinity water, because alkalinity reduction with caustic
soda is one-half that of lime softening. A disadvantage of using caustic soda is the increase
in finished water sodium concentration.
56
CHAPTER-4
RESULTS & CONCLUSION
Ground water collection and treatment are of great importance from the
standpoint of both environmental and public health. While all the parameters have an
effect on the effluent concentration, the information generated in the solution
framework allows the determination of the relative importance of the individual
parameter distributions with respect to reliably satisfying the effluent concentration
constraint. In general, critical parameters follow the primary removal mechanism, and
contact and direct filtration appear more sensitive than conventional filtration to input
variability and uncertainty when reliably satisfying the effluent particulate
concentrations constraint. Surprisingly, influent concentration variability and filter
media removal efficiency uncertainty are found to be relatively unimportant for
conventional treatment.
This additional information can be used to determine future resource

expenditures to better characterize the parameters through additional laboratory or
field studies. Extensive research activity in this field has led to significant
improvement and diversification in the processes and methods used for water
treatment and process management. However, in doing so, one must consider the
potential effects of model uncertainty when interpreting the results. For many
treatment processes, multiple process models may be available e.g., rectilinear,
curvilinear, and fractal approaches for particle size distribution dynamics that may
incorporate different mechanisms and different model parameters.
The framework can also be extended to consider additional constraints that arise
when designing an actual water treatment plant, such as limiting the footprint of
selected processes based on the available area for constructing the plant.
57
REFERENCES
1. Khopkar, S. M. (2004). Environmental Pollution Monitoring And Control. New Delhi:

New Age International. p. 299.ISBN81-224-1507-5.
2. Acevedo, J., and Sotiropoulos, E. N. _1998_. “Stochastic optimization-based
algorithms for process synthesis under uncertainty.” Computer. chem. Eng., 22_4/5_,
647–671.
3. Amirthanayagam, A., and O’Melia, C. R. _1990_. “Coagulation processes:
Destabilization, mixing, and flocculation.” Water quality and treatment, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 269–365.
4. Biegler, L. T., and Cuthrell, J. E. _1985_. “Improved infeasible path optimization for
sequential modular simulators. II: The optimization algorithm. “Computer. Chem.
Eng., 9_3_, 257–267.
5. Boccelli, D. L. _2003_. “A decision support tool for the design of integrated
treatment systems for drinking water utilities.”
6. Ph.D. thesis, Carnegie Mellon Univ., Pittsburgh. Boccelli, D. L., Small, M. J., and
Diwakar, U. M. _2004_. “Treatment plant design for particulate removal: Effects of
flow rate and particle characteristics.” J. Am. Water Works Assoc., 96_11_, 77–90.
7. Chaudhuri, P. D., and Diwakar, U. M. _1996_. “Process synthesis under uncertainty:
A penalty function approach.” AIChE J., 42_3_, 742–752.
8. Clark, R. M. _1982_. “Cost estimating for conventional water treatment. Envi. Engr.
Div., 108_EE5_, 819–834.
9. de Hoop, M. V., and Spencer, C. _1996_. “Quasi-Monte Carlo integration over
S2_S2 for migration inversion.” Inverse Problem., 12, 219–239.
10. DeGroot, M. H., and Shrewish, M. J. _2002_. Probability and statistics,3rd Ed.,
Addison-Wesley, Boston.
58

Design of Water Treatment Plant FC 16111

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Water Treatment Plant FC 16111

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Major Project Report

DESIGN OF WATER TREATMENT PLANT

Under the guidance

INDUR INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY

This is to certify that K. SHIVA KRISHNA (20D35A0112), G. VISHAL (20D35A0108),

INTERNAL GUIDE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT

Proof. DR. VP RAJU EXTERNAL EXAMINER

Both inherent natural variability and model parameter uncertainty must be

STP : Sewage Treatment Plant

AWWA : American Water Works Association

D.O : Dissolved Oxygen

B.O. D : Biological Oxygen Demand

C.O. D : Chemical Oxygen Demand

MLD : Million Liters perDay

KLD : Kilo Liters per Day

FIGURE NUMBER NAME OF FIGURE PAGE NUMBER

Apparatus and chemicals of

3.11 Aeration tank 25

3.12 secondary clarifier 29

3.12.1 Mechanical clarifier 30

3.12.2 Mechanized clarifier 31

3.13 Sludge recirculation tank 34

3.13.1 Lift pumps 35

3.15 Pressure sand filter 39

3.16 Activated Carbon Filter 41

4.2.1 Propeller-type mechanical 51

DECLARATION ........................................................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................................... vi

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................vii

CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTEWATER .........................................................................................6

Calculation of alkalinit & Formula ......................................................................................................................... 11

Calculation of acidity ................................................................................................................................................ 12

Calculation of chlorine content &Formula ............................................................................................................. 14

The apparatus used are .............................................................................................................................................18

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 24

Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................26

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 27

How It Works .............................................................................................................................................................28

Compressed airpipe ...................................................................................................................................................28

Mechanized Clarifier Tank ...................................................................................................................................... 29

Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................32

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 33

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 36

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 36

Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................37

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 37

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 37

Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................39

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 40

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 40

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 42

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 42

Design Criteria ...........................................................................................................................................................43

Construction And Engineering ................................................................................................................................ 43

Operation And Maintenance Considerations ......................................................................................................... 43

Design of Water Treatment Plant ............................................................................................................ 44

Design Development .................................................................................................................................................. 45

Design of Diffused Air Equipment ...........................................................................................................................47

Basin Design ...............................................................................................................................................................47

Design of Spray Aerators ..........................................................................................................................................48

Mixing Intensity .........................................................................................................................................................49

Temperature Effects on Mixing ............................................................................................................................... 50

Acceptable Level of Hardness .................................................................................................................................. 53