You are on page 1of 45

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

TOPIC 3: WASTEWATER SYSTEMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREVIEW ......................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 2 Objectives ................................................................................................................... 2 Readings ..................................................................................................................... 2 3.1 COMPONENTS OF WASTEWATER SYSTEMS .................................................... 3 3.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTEWATER.............................................................. 3 3.2.1 Quantity - Wastewater Flow Determination...................................................... 4 3.2.2 Water Quality ....................................................................................................8 3.2.3 Variations in Wastewater Quantity and Quality................................................ 9 3.3 OUTLINE OF A WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT ....................................11 3.4 PRELIMINARY TREATMENT............................................................................... 13 3.4.1 Screens ............................................................................................................. 13 3.4.2 Grit Chambers .................................................................................................22 3.4.3 Other ................................................................................................................ 35 3.5 PRIMARY TREATMENT ........................................................................................ 35 3.5.1 Primary Sedimentation Tanks .........................................................................35

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

PREVIEW Introduction
This topic introduces the main principles of wastewater systems focusing particularly on technologies of waste water treatment systems.

Objectives
After completing this topic you will be able to: understand functioning of wastewater systems, particularly wastewater treatment plants; conceptually outline several types of wastewater treatment plants: conventional, modern and alternative; design a conventional wastewater treatment plant; and understand interaction between wastewater systems and other UWM systems (e.g. water supply systems and stormwater management systems).

If you are not convinced that you can achieve each objective after studying the materials, you should re-read the relevant parts of the Study Guide and associated reading.

Readings
This summarises the suggested readings for the topic.

SUGGESTED

Tchobanoglous, Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and Reuse, Metcalf & Eddy, 2002 Environmental Engineering, Gerard Kiely, McGrow Hill, 1997 Introduction to Environmental Engineering, Mackenzie Davis & David Cornwell, McGrow Hill, 1991 http://www.pub.gov.sg/research/Pages/default. aspx?

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

3.1 Components of Wastewater Systems


Municipal wastewater is collected from our homes and industrial plants via a sewage collection system. In this context, it is defined as everything from the point of a wastewater discharge in urban areas to the point of its disposal into a receiving water body (e.g. the wastewater system of Melbourne is presented in Figure 3.1 to the left). The system comprises of the following: collection in households municipal sewage pipes and pumps, wastewater treatment plant, disposal of treated water into receiving water bodies, disposal of sewage sludge.

Figure 3.1: Diagram of wastewater system and separate stormwater system in Melbourne. In Australia, stormwater and municipal wastewater are collected in separate systems (Fig. 3.1), while in Europe combined systems are more common (stormwater and wastewater are collected in one pipe).

3.2 Characteristics of Wastewater


Sewerage systems are designed to collect, transport, treat, and discharge sewage. These requirements involve hydraulic processes and treatment processes. Therefore, before we start designing the systems, we have to determine the sewage quantity (flow rate) and its water quality.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

In most cases, the hydraulics is reasonably basic. Nevertheless, a sound understanding of the hydraulic processes is necessary to ensure efficient, economical, and safe operation.

3.2.1 Quantity - Wastewater Flow Determination


The main components of municipal wastewater are: Domestic wastewater - discharged from residences, commercial, institutional, and other facilities. Industrial wastewater discharges from industrial plants. Inflow/infiltration - stormwater runoff which finds its way into the sewer, and steady leakage from groundwater. Average Dry Weather Flow (ADWF) in litres/day, that presents flow in pipes without any infiltration, is calculated as: ADWF=Domestic + Industrial [l/day] (3.1)

Domestic Wastewater Principal sources are residential and commercial districts. Other sources include human waste from institutional and recreational facilities. Domestic discharge is usually expressed as: Domestic = PE (Flow discharged per capita) [l/day] where PE is Population Equivalent. Currently, it is assumed that Flow discharged per capita = 225 l/day/capita General PE values for different establishments are presented in Table 3.1 Industrial Wastewater Industrial use varies widely, according to the nature of the manufacturing process. There is no foolproof procedure for predicting industrial discharges. Consequently, careful measurements are required. Flow rates vary depending on: type of industry, size of industry, degree of water re-use, and on-site wastewater treatment methods. (3.3) (3.2)

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

Table 3.1: Recommended PE values for different establishments.

Wastewater flow projections may be based on water use. However, it is usually estimated according to some of the following assumptions: the typical design value for industrial districts with no wet process industries is 30 m3/ha/day; the same for light industry is 20 m3/ha/day; for industries without internal re-use programmes 85-90% of water used will become wastewater; for large industries with internal water re-use programmes, separate estimates must be made; average domestic wastewater contributed from industrial activities may vary from 30 to 95 l/capita/day; special attention needs to be given to projections of future industrial flows; and industrial flows are particularly troublesome in small sewage treatment plants where there is limited capacity to absorb shock loadings.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

Infiltration Sewers are not watertight. They may be damaged by ground movement, traffic & road construction, tree roots, age, or illegal connections. Therefore, due to infiltration during wet weather, flow rates in sewage pipes are much higher than the Average Dry Weather Flows. As a consequence of the above, infiltration may be present even during dry weather; it occurs mainly through seepage into sewers laid below the water table. It is impossible to entirely avoid faulty joints, cracked sewer pipes, and damaged manhole connections. However, infiltration is greatly reduced by use of proper materials, construction techniques, supervision, and field testing. Inflow/infiltration has a number of components as follows: Surface infiltration rain water entering a sewer system from the ground through defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls; Steady inflow - water discharged from cellar and foundation drains, coolingwater discharges, and drains from springs and swampy areas. It is a steady flow and is identified and measured along with infiltration; Direct inflow - inflows that have a direct stormwater runoff connection to the sewer and cause an almost immediate increase in wastewater flows. Possible sources are: roof leaders, yard drains, manhole covers or cross-connections from storm drains. Figure 3.2 presents different types of flow in sewage pipes. A part of the terms described above flowrate also shows the following: Total inflow - sum of the direct inflow at any point in the system plus any flow discharged from the system upstream through overflows, pumping station bypasses, etc. Delayed inflow - Stormwater runoff which my require several days or more to drain through the sewer system. This can include the discharge of sump pumps from cellar drainage as well as the slowed entry of surface water through manholes in ponded areas. Infiltration may vary during the year in response to groundwater levels. Normally, it is estimated during the early morning hours when water use is at a minimum and the flow consists essentially only of infiltration. This is particularly suitable for small systems where travel times through the system are short, however not so suitable for large systems where travel times may be long. Inflow rates are determined by using a network of continuous flow meters operating before and during a significant storm event. It is determined from the flow hydrograph by subtracting the normal dry-weather domestic and industrial flow and the infiltration from the measured flow rate. For design purposes, the maximum infiltration rate for well constructed sewers is Infiltration = 50 l/mm/km/day D L [l/day] (3.4)

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

Figure 3.2: Components of wastewater flow where D is the pipe diameter, and L is the pipe length. Although design values are given in the standards, there are many factors which can affect infiltration: length of sewers, area served, soil and topographic conditions, population density (which affects the number and total length of house connections). Sewers first built in a district usually followed water courses in the bottom of valleys. They are often close to (or even below) the bed of the stream. As a result, these old sewers can receive large infiltration flows. Newer sewers are often built at higher elevations and receive comparatively less infiltration It is usually found that: only a small part of the collection system contributes most of the inflow/infiltration; typically about 75% of the inflow comes from 20 - 30% of the system; and typically about 75% of the infiltration comes from 40% of the area. There is an attempt to produce watertight sewer systems. They are sometimes known as Smart sewers. The benefits of a leak-free or tight system include: no overloaded or surcharged sewers and the associated problems of wastewater backups and overflows, more efficient operation of wastewater treatment facilities, and use of sewer hydraulic capacity for wastewater instead of inflow/infiltration.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

3.2.2 Water Quality


NOTE: Water quality depends on the source! Domestic Wastewater Typical data on the individual constituents found in domestic water are reported in Table 3.2. Main water quality characteristics of domestic waters are: BOD5 (biochemical oxygen demand) and SS (suspended solids). Some other constituents that are important for biological treatment should be also determined (Ca, Cu, Fe, Mg, Zn, Mn, Sulphates). If the inflow from industrial wastewater is high the characteristics of municipal waters (collected by the drainage system) could be different from those presented in Table 3.2. Table 3.2: Main water quality characteristics of domestic wastewater Concentration Medium Weak 720 350 500 250 300 145 200 105 220 100 55 20 165 80 10 5 220 110 160 80 500 250 40 20 15 8 25 12 0 0 0 0 8 4 3 1 5 3 50 30 100 50 100 50

Constituent Solids, total : Dissolved, total Fixed Volatile Suspended, total Fixed Volatile Settleable solids, mL/L Biochemical oxygen demand, 5-day, 20C (BOD5, 20C) Total organic carbon (TOC) Chemical oxygen demand (COD) Nitrogen (total as N) : Organic Free ammonia Nitrites Nitrates Phosphorus (total as P) : Organic Inorganic Chloridesb Alkalinity (as CaCO3)b
a b

Strong 1200 850 525 325 350 75 275 20 400 290 1000 85 35 50 0 0 15 5 10 100 200 150

mg/L = g/m3 Values should be increased by amount in domestic water supply

Industrial Wastewater Numerous materials can be found in industrial waste that can cause pollution. The most common are: anorganic salts, acids or alkalis, organic matters, suspended solids,
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

floating solids and liquids, colour, heated water, toxic chemicals, radioactive materials, foam-producing matter, and microorganisms. Quality of industrial wastewater varies widely with the type of industry and it usually includes: process waste from manufacturing, water from heating and cooling, wash water, and employees sanitary waste products. Typical quantities for process wastewater from four different manufacturing industries are presented in Table 3.3. The wastewater is more specific for each industry and can range from wastewaters with high BOD5 (meat, food industry) to inorganic and toxic waste (textile, chemical and plating industry). Table 3.3: Industrial process wastewater quality
Parameter Volume (L) /capita/day /tonne prod. % runoff MPN (10 6 /100mL) BOD 5 COD TOC Susp Solids Diss Solids Total N Total P pH Copper Cadmium Chromium Nickel Lead Zinc Food 10,000 0 1,200 700 0 0 0.29 0.006 0.15 0.11 1.08 Meat 12,000 640 300 200 3 7.0 0.09 0.011 0.15 0.07 0.43 Plating 0 0 0 0 0 4 or 10 6 1 11 12 9 Textile 100,000 0 400 100 1,900 0 0 10 0.31 0.03 0.82 0.25 0.47

Food: canning factory (pickles, beets tomatoes, pears); Meat: meat processing (poultry plant with no manure or blood recovery); Plating: wastes are acidic with chromate baths, alkaline with cyanide baths; Textile: textile mill (spun cotton yarn processed into cotton goods)

3.2.3 Variations in Wastewater Quantity and Quality


The principle factors for loading variations are the following: (i) established daily people habits (short-term variations); (ii) seasonal activities (longer-term variations); and (iii) industrial activities (both short and long term, plus shock loads).
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

10

Daily variations due to established people habits are presented in Figure 3.3. A doublepeaked diurnal pattern is common, depending on the mix of commercial, industrial, and domestic connections. Diurnal patterns are regular because of: the same daily pattern for Monday to Friday flows; the weekend patterns differ from weekdays; and Saturdays and Sundays may be different from each other.

Figure 3.3: Daily diurnal patterns Both quantity and quality of industrial wastewater may vary significantly throughout the day. Problems with short-term loading from one particular part of the manufacturing process can cause problems to treatment plants. Seasonal variations are typical for food industry, as shown in Figure 3.4.

When industrial wastes are to be accommodated in municipal collection and treatment facilities, special attention should be given to developing adequate characterisations and projections.

Figure 3.4: Seasonal variations of flow in a small town with a large peaches cannery plant.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

11

Peak Flows Peak hourly flow must be used in design of sewers, pumping stations, and treatment plant components. It is determined as: Peak Flow = PFF ADWF (3.5)

where ADWF is the Averaged Dry Weather Flow (domestic + industry) and PFF is the Peak Flow Factor. The PFF depends on the size of the development and is generally calculated as:

4.7 P 0.11 PE where P 1000 PFF

(3.6)

where PE is the Population Equivalent (Table 3.1) and P is the population equivalent in units of 1,000. Thus, the PFF for different sizes of a development is: PE = 1,000 PE = 10,000 PE = 300 PFF = 4.7 PFF = 3.6 PFF = 5.4

If commercial, institutional, and/or industrial wastewaters make up > 25% of all flows (excluding infiltration) consideration should be given to estimating PFFs for each flow category. For industrial wastewater the PFF is estimated on the basis of: average water use; number of shifts worked; and pertinent details of plant operation.

3.3 Outline of a Wastewater Treatment Plant


The products of a wastewater treatment plant are: an effluent of accepted quality in relation to a receiving water course, and a sewage sludge that contains all pollutants. There are the following major categories for municipal wastewater treatment: (1) Preliminary (or pre-treatment); (2) Primary treatment; (3) Secondary treatment; (4) Tertiary (or advanced treatment), and (5) Sludge treatment. Efficiencies of the main categories are listed below:

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

12

Primary treatment: Removal of 60% of TSS and 35% of BOD5. It removes the pollutants that either settle or float by screening and sedimentation methods. Secondary treatment: Removal of 85% of BOD5 and more than 85% of TSS. It removes BOD5 and SS by biological processes. Tertiary treatment: 99% of BOD5 and phosphorus, all TSS, and bacteria, 95% of nitrogen are now removed. The pollutants are removed by chemical treatment and filtration, or by land infiltration treatment. Traditional treatment plants have no tertiary treatment as shown in the case of the Melbourne Eastern Treatment Plant in Figure 3.5. They treat wastewater usually to TSS=30 mg/l and BOD5 = 20 mg/l. However, modern treatment plants have a tertiary treatment for further removal of pollutants as shown in Figure 3.6.

Figure 3.5: Diagram of a typical secondary treatment plant (Melbourne).

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

13

Figure 3.6: Diagram of a tertiary treatment plant.

3.4 Preliminary treatment


Preliminary or pre-treatment is aimed to provide protection to the wastewater treatment plant, but it has little effect on the reduction of BOD5 and nutrients. The main devices used in the preliminary treatment are discussed below. However, be aware that some of these devises could also be used at other stages of the treatment process chain. The most common devices used in preliminary treatment are screens and grit chambers.

3.4.1 Screens
Screening of sewage is one of the oldest treatment processes. Although used mostly in the preliminary treatment they are also used in other stages of treatment. Therefore, screens are classified as: primary screens, secondary screens, and microstrainers. In this section, primary and secondary screens are discussed, while microstainers are discussed later (they are used in the secondary treatment stage).

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

14

Primary Screens Primary screens (Fig. 3.7) are typically located at the inlet to sewage treatment plants and also at the inlet to pumping stations. They are designed to remove coarse debris such as rags, solids, and sticks which could cause damage by damaging pump impellers or interfering with the downstream performance in sewage treatment plants. They have to be cleaned either manually or mechanically. Primary screens are normally classified as: Coarse with openings of 50-150 mm; Medium with openings 20-50 mm.

Figure 3.7: A primary screen.

The following factors need to be taken into account in screen design: the strength of the screen material and its resistance to corrosion, the clear screen area (this is related to cleaning), the maximum flow velocity through the screen to prevent dislodging of screenings, the minimum velocity in the approach channel to prevent sedimentation of suspended matter, and the head loss through the screen. Secondary Screens Secondary screens have smaller openings than primary screens and are installed after the pumping section and ahead of the grit chamber. Their purpose is to remove material such as paper, plastic, cloth, and other particles which may affect the treatment process downstream; and to minimise blockages in sludge handling and treatment facilities. Secondary screens are analysed and designed in the same way as primary screens. The only difference is in the maximum clear spacing of bars. This is typically around 12 mm, although openings as small as 6 mm have been used in practice. Hydraulics of Screens The analysis of a screen involves the determination of the head loss across it. The head loss is primarily a function of the flow velocity and the screen openings, but may also be dependent on bar size, bar spacing, and the angle of the screen from the vertical. Several equations have been developed, but only those most widely used are considered here.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

15

v1

Figure 3.8:

Schematic of Sloping Bar Screen

Figure 3.8 shows a schematic of a sloping bar screen. Application of Bernoullis equation yields: 2 v12 v2 h1 h2 losses (3.7) 2g 2g where h1 is the upstream depth of flow h2 is the downstream depth of flow g is the acceleration due to gravity v1 is the upstream velocity v2 is the downstream velocity For a clean or partially blocked screen, the losses are usually incorporated into a coefficient and Equation (3.7) is expressed as:
losses 1 2 vsc v12 2 2gCd is the velocity through the screen is a discharge coefficient with a typical value of 0.84. h h1 h2

(3.8)

where

vsc Cd

Alternatively, an orifice equation may be applied in the form:


2 v sc 1 Q h 2 2 gCdo 2 g C do A is the flow rate, is the effective open area of the submerged screen, is a discharge coefficient. 2

(3.9)

where

Q A Cdo

It should be noted that the discharge coefficient in Equation (3.9), Cdo is different from that in Equation (3.8). In the latter equation, the value of Cdo is dependent on screen design parameters and is supplied by the screen manufacturer or by experimentation. If the screens are to be manually cleaned, the effective open area should be taken as 50 % of the actual open area, representing the half-clogged condition. The head loss should be estimated under conditions of maximum flow.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

16

If the bar screen is clean, Kirschmers equation may be used for estimating the head loss as follows: 1.33 W (3.10) h hv sin b where is a bar shape factor, as given in Table 3.4 W is the total transverse width of the screen b is the total transverse clear spacing between bars v12 hv is the upstream velocity head 2g is the angle of the bars to the horizontal Table 3.4: Bar Shape Factor for Kirschmers Equation 2.42 1.83 1.79 1.67 0.76

Bar Type Sharp-edged rectangular Rectangular with semicircular upstream face Circular Rectangular with semicircular upstream and downstream face Tear shape

It should be noted that Kirschmers equation is a general form of the standard head loss equation: v2 h K 2g (3.11) where v K is identified as v1
1.33

W sin b It should be noted that the expressions developed above are of use in determining the minimum energy losses through screens, but are of little value in determining the energy loss once material begins to accumulate behind the screen.
is given by K The screen design should take into account the maximum increase in head loss likely to occur under the conditions of maximum flow rate and minimum cleaning frequency. It is especially important with manually raked screens that sufficient freeboard is provided in the upstream channel to avoid the danger of spills at high flows. Example A mechanically cleaned wastewater bar screen is constructed using 6.5 mm wide bars with a clear spacing of 5.0 cm. The wastewater flow velocity in the channel immediately upstream of the screen will vary from 0.4 m/sec to 0.9 m/sec. Determine the design head loss for the screen at the two extremes of flow. Assume that the discharge coefficient Cd has a value of 0.84.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

17

Solution: Energy Equation:


Head Loss 1 2 vsc 2 2gCd v12

If v1 is given, vsc can be calculated, knowing the screen geometry. Continuity Equation: where w1 wsc

v1h1w1

vsc h1wsc(clear )

is channel width in front of the screen, is the total width of clear openings of the screen.
w1 wsc ( clear ) bar spacing + bar width bar spacing

50 65 . = 1.13 50
vsc = 1.13v1

1 2x9.81x 084 .
2

x 113 . 2 v12

v12 = 0.02v12

v1 = 0.4 m/sec v1 = 0.9 m/sec Design of Screens

h = 3.2 mm h = 16.2 mm

The velocity in the approach channel is normally kept between about 0.3 m/sec and 1 m/sec. The lower limit is designed to prevent the settling of coarse matter while the upper limit is designed to prevent the screens being carried away by the flow. Screens may be manually cleaned or mechanically raked. Manually cleaned screens are only fitted in small treatment plants, typically servicing a population equivalent, PE of less than 5,000. Mechanically raked screens are recommended for all plants servicing a PE greater than 2,000. Figure 3.9 shows a schematic of a manually raked screen. The maximum clear spacing between bars is typically set at 25 mm, although American practice permits spacings up to 50 mm. To facilitate cleaning, the bars are normally set at 30 45 from the vertical. The screenings are manually raked on to a perforated plate where they drain, prior to removal. Cleaning must be frequent to avoid clogging. Infrequent cleaning may result in significant upstream backwater caused by the buildup of solids. When cleaning is carried out, the sudden release of the ponded water leads to flow surges.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

18

Figure 3.9:

Schematic of Manually Raked Screen

A schematic of a mechanically raked bar screen is shown in Figure 3.10. Typically, the maximum clear spacing between bars is 25 mm, although American practice permits spacings up to 38 mm. A spacing of 18 mm is considered satisfactory for the protection of any downstream equipment.

Figure 3.10:

Schematic of Mechanically Raked Bar Screen

Mechanically raked screens are normally set at between 0 and 45 from the vertical. The use of such screens leads to reduced labour costs, improved flow conditions, and improved capture of screenings. A large number of proprietary screens with mechanical rakes are available. Manufacturers will normally provide design charts to facilitate selection of the correct screen size for a particular service. Figure 3.11 shows a schematic of another type of screen a drum screen. Screenings naturally fall from the screen as it rotates above the hopper. A water spray assists in removing screenings.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

19

Figure 3.11:

Schematic of Drum Screen

An example illustrating the design technique for a screen and screen chamber is presented in an example below..

Example Design a screen and screen chamber and determine its hydraulic characteristics for a loading of 10,000 PE. All material larger than 12 mm is to be screened out. The screen is a bar screen with rectangular bars of 5 mm transverse dimension. At the peak design flow, the velocity through the screen should be 0.9 m/sec The water level downstream of the screen is controlled by a downstream long-throated flume which gives a depth of 400 mm at the peak design flow and 175 mm at ADWF. In particular, a) b) c) d) Solution: Estimate loads ADWF = 225l/day/PE Peak flow factor (PFF) = 4.7 (PE)-0.11 (PE in thousands) determine the head loss across screen; determine the screen chamber width; check the velocities; and if the screen is 50 % blocked, calculate the head loss across it.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

20

Load = 10,000 PE ADWF = 2.25Ml/day = 4.7 26 = 26l/sec 10-0.11 = 3.65 = 95l/sec

Peak flow factor Peak flow Choose the screen: Bar spacing = 3.65

= 12mm (will screen out all larger material)

Bar thickness = 5mm

If screen velocity is 0.9m/sec for peak flow, calculate v1

v1

vsc

bar spacing bar spacing bar width

0.9

12 = 0.64m/sec 17

a) Determine head loss


h 1 2 v sc 2 2 gCd v12

1 0.9 2 2 9.81 0.84 2

0.64 2

0.029m
h2
2 v2 2g

Depth upstream of screen h1 b)

v12 2g

0.43 m

Determine screen chamber width. From continuity, required clear screen width ( Wsc ( clear ) ) is
Q h1 Wsc ( clear ) v sc

Wsc clear

0.095 = 0.246m 0.429 0.9

Required screen chamber width


Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

21

w 0.246

17 12

0.349m or 350mm

(CHECK against approach velocity)


v1 Q w h1 0.095 =0.64m/sec 0.349 0.429

c)

Check velocities ADWF = 0.026m3/sec Associated h2=175mm

v2

0.026 0.175 0.350

0.426m / sec

Now, because the flow is lower, we would expect a reduced head loss as well. The upstream depth will be less than 0.175 + 0.029 < 0.204m

v1

0.026 0.204 0.349

0.365m / sec

>0.3m/sec

O.K. (we could calculate v1 exactly, but the above argument removes the need to do so)

d)

Head loss with screen half blocked Energy equation:

h1

v12 2g

h2

2 v2 2g

hL

For peak flow Q = 0.095m3/sec Upstream from the screen (Section 1):

v1

Q h1 0.35

0.271 h1

On the screen: Wsc (clear) = * 0.246m = 0123 m


Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

22

v sc

0.095 h1 0.123

0.77 h1

After the screen (Section 2):

h2

0.4m

v2 1 2 9.81

Q h2 w
2 v sc

0.095 0.4 0.35 v12

0.679 m / s

Losses:

hL

0.84

Substitute for v1 , h2 , v2 , vsc in energy equation

h1

0.271 19.6h12
h1

0.4

0.679 19.6
0

1 0.77 2 19.6 0.842 h12

0.2712 h12

0.00375 0.4235 h12

Solve by trial

h1
Head loss

0.539m
= 539 400
139mm

v sc

Q 0124 . h1
0.271 h1

0.095 =1.42m/sec 0124 . 0.539


0.503m / sec

v1

0.271 0.539

3.4.2 Grit Chambers


Within sewage treatment plants, grit comprising sand, egg shells, coffee grounds and other non-putrescible material may cause severe problems in pumps, sludge digestion facilities, and de-watering facilities. In addition, it may settle out in downstream pipes and processes. The grit removal process is carried out in grit chambers (Figure 3.12) at an early stage of treatment because the grit particles cannot be broken down by biological processes and the particles are abrasive and wear down the equipment. Because the grit material is non-putrescible, it requires no further treatment following removal from the sewage treatment process and ultimate disposal.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

23

It should be noted, however, that the location of grit chambers upstream of the sewage pumps at the entrance to the sewage treatment plant would normally involve placing them at a considerable depth involving substantial expense. Therefore, it is usually more economical to pump the sewage, including the grit, to grit chambers located at a convenient position upstream of the treatment plant units. It is recognised that the pumps may require greater maintenance as a result.

Figure 3.12: A grit chamber Grit chambers are designed to remove inorganic solids of sizes greater than about 2 mm. Removal is commonly effected using settlement, separation using a vortex, or settlement in the presence of aeration (in the latter process, aeration keeps the lighter organic particles in suspension). There are important hydraulic principles associated with each of these three processes. In this section, the choice of grit removal process is first discussed. The three main types of grit chamber are then described and the hydraulic aspects of the operation of each are described qualitatively and, where appropriate, quantitatively. Design aspects are also discussed.

Choice of Grit Removal Process The choice of grit removal process depends largely on the size of the sewage treatment plant: For a PE < 5,000 (small treatment plants), a horizontal flow (constant velocity) settling chamber is commonly used. For PE of between 5,000 and 10,000 (medium-sized treatment plants), a vortex type grit chamber is commonly used.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

24

For PE > 10,000 (large treatment plants), an aerated grit chamber is often specified, although the vortex type chamber may also be used. Whichever type is used, it is vital that the unit must operate effectively over the full range of expected flows. Other non-hydraulic considerations include grit removal from the unit, which may be manual or mechanical; handling, storage, and disposal of grit, and the provision of standby or bypass facilities.

Horizontal Flow (or Constant Velocity) Grit Chamber The horizontal flow grit chamber is basically an open channel with a detention time sufficient to allow design particles to settle. Additionally, the velocity must be sufficiently high that organic materials are scoured so that they pass through the grit chamber for subsequent biological treatment. The Camp-Shields equation is commonly used to estimate the scour velocity required to re-suspend settled organic material. This equation is expressed as:

vs
where vs d k f
p

8kgd f

(3.11)

is the velocity of scour is the particle diameter is an empirical constant (typically 0.04 0.06) is the Darcy-Weisbach friction factor (typically 0.02) is the particle density is the fluid density

Typically, this equation yields a required horizontal flow velocity of 0.15 0.3 m/sec. This compares well with the Malaysian design standard of 0.2 m/sec. The primary hydraulic design issue for the horizontal flow grit chamber is the maintenance of the constant velocity in the channel, despite large variations in the flow rate, based on a typical diurnal flow pattern. The problem is illustrated in the following. Consider a rectangular chamber with the flow passing over a low rectangular weir placed at its end (Figure 3.13). The discharge relationship for the weir is:
Q Cd B 2 gH

Figure 3.13: A chamber with a weir


3 2

(3.12)

where
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

25

Cd B H

is a discharge coefficient, is the channel width, is approx = the channel depth (if the weir height is very small).

(The derivation of Equation 3.12 is presented in the Study Guide of CIV2262). Now, the horizontal velocity, vh, is related to the flow rate, Q, and channel geometry by:
Q BH Cd B 2 g H BH
3 2 1

vh

Cd 2 g H

(3.13)

Substituting for H

from Equation (3.12) yields:


1

vh

Cd
vh max vh min

Q 2g Cd 2 gB
1

(3.14)

Qmax Qmin

(3.15)

Now, a typical value for the ratio of maximum to minimum flow rates (Qmax/Qmin) is about 5. Substitution of this ratio into Equation (3.15) yields a corresponding value for the ratio of maximum to minimum velocities (vh(max)/vh(min))of:
vh max vh min 51 / 3 1.71

If 0.2 m/sec is chosen for the value of vh(min), the corresponding value for vh(max) would be 0.342 m/sec, which would be unacceptably large. Therefore, the shape of either the channel or the weir must be modified to maintain a constant and satisfactory horizontal velocity.

Modification of Channel Shape The issue to be resolved is whether or not it is possible to develop a channel shape such that the horizontal velocity remains constant for all flow rates. It is assumed that the channel discharges into a rectangular control section, such as a long-throated or Parshall flume. Such a device acts as a water level control and a flow measurement device (see CIV2262 Study Guide; a flume is shown in Figure 3.14 to the right). The analysis that follows is generally applicable to any rectangular cross-section. The analysis specifically makes use of the properties of a long-throated flume because it is widely used in practice. The flow through a long-throated flume may be expressed in the form:
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

26

where

bc H1

3 2 2 g bc H1 2 3 3 is the throat width, is the upstream head.

(3.16)

Differentiation of Equation (3.16) yields:


dQ
1 2 gbc H1 2 dH1 3

(3.17)

Now, within the channel, the horizontal velocity, vh, is given by: Q vh wH1 or: Q vh wH1 where w is the channel width.

(3.18) (3.19)

Differentiation of Equation (3.19) yields the flow through an elemental horizontal strip of width w in the channel in the form:

dQ

vh wdH1

(3.20)

Equating the right hand sides of Equations (3.17) and (3.20) yields:
1 2 gbc H1 2 dH1 3

vh wdH1

(3.21)

Solving Equation (3.21) for w yields:


w 2 bc 1 2 g H1 3 vh

(3.22)

If we want vh to be constant for any depth in the channel (i.e. any flow rate), the channel should have the width determined as a function of its height:
w constant x H1 2
1

(3.23)

Equation (3.23) describes a parabola, indicating that a parabolic shape for the channel cross-section will ensure a constant value of velocity, vh, regardless of flow rate. To reduce construction costs, the parabolic shape is normally approximated with a trapezoid.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

27

Design Aspects Figure 3.14 presents a layout of a typical design grit chamber with a flume for depth control at its downstream end. The individual chambers have a trapezoidal shape with a grit storage channel at their bottom for collection of deposited grit.

Figure 3.14: Schematic of Channel-modified Horizontal Constant Velocity Grit Chamber As a minimum, one channel and a bypass should be installed. However, usually at least two are designed for operational reasons (maintenance, etc). When the number of channels is determined, the maximum, average, and minimum flows in an individual channel can be determined (i.e. Qemergency, Qmaximum, Qaverage, and Qminimum, are used to design the shape and length of the grit channel). The system should be designed such that, when one channel is out of service, its flow is diverted to the other channels. The resulting emergency flow for each channel is based on the maximum flow into the set of grit chambers with one out of service. Other practical aspects are associated with the turbulence which occurs in the inlet and outlet zones of the chamber. These zones are similar as in any sedimentation tank, and are illustrated schematically in Figure 3.15. Turbulence occurs in the inlet zone as the flow is established. A similar phenomenon occurs in the outlet zone as the flow streamlines turn upwards. To allow for this disturbance, a 25 50 % increase in the calculated settling length is applied. Typical design criteria for a channel-modified horizontal grit chamber are presented in Table 3.5.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

28

In the case of a flume being used for flow regulation in the chamber, the cross-section area of the chamber is defined according the following procedure. Equation 3.16 for the flume is:

2 3

g bc H 1

Figure 3.15:

Schematic of Settling Process in Grit Chamber the water depth.

where bc is the considered width, and H1

Table 3.5: Design Parameter Water depth (m) Length (m)

Typical design criteria for Channel-Modified Grit Chambers Typical Values Comments 0.6 1.5 Dependent on channel area and flow rate 3 25 Function of channel depth and grit settling velocity 25 50 % Based on theoretical length 15 90 Function of velocity and channel length 0.15 0.3 0.2 m/sec is Malaysian Standard

Extra for inlet and outlet Detention time at peak flow (seconds) Horizontal velocity (m/sec.)

Equation 3.22 expresses the chamber width at the surface, w, as:


w
1 2 bc g H1 2 3 vh

or

bc

wv h
1 2 g H1 2 3

Combining Eqs. 3.16 and 3.22 the flow can be expressed as:

2 wH 1vh 3

Since Q=Avh, the cross-sectional area of the chamber, A is:

2 wH 1 3

(3.24)

The design procedure for a channel-modified grit chamber is illustrated in the following Example.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

29

Example: Design a horizontal/constant velocity grit chamber for a hydraulic load of 2,000 PE. Consider only the ADWF and the peak flow. The water level within the chamber is controlled by a downstream long-throated flume which gives a depth of 205 mm at the peak design flow and 80 mm at ADWF. The following should apply: Maximum horizontal velocity is v=0.2 m/sec Channel length > 18 times maximum water depth Grit quantity is estimated as 0.03 m3/ML of wastewater Grit collection channel to be cleaned out twice per week Solution Average dry weather flow ADWF = 225 2,000 = 0.45 ML/day

ADWF = 5.2l/sec

Peak flow factor

PFF

4.7 2

0.11

= 4.35

Peak flow

PF= 4.35

5.2

PF= 23 l/sec

The long-throated flume gives depth of 205 mm at peak flow and 80 mm at ADWF

Therefore, cross-sectional areas of the trapezoidal cross-section should be: ADWF :

Area =

ADWF v

0.0052 0.2
0115 . m2

0.026m 2

Peak:

Area =

0.023 0.2

Surface widths at each flow are now calculated.


Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

30

At average dry weather flow Surface width


A 3 2H1

0.026 3 2 0.08

0.49m
At Peak Flow Surface width

0115 . 3 2 0.205
=0.84m

Length of chamber: > 18 > 18 max. depth 0.205

Use 3.7m

Grit quantity is based on ADWF Grit quantity = 0.45 0.03 = 0.014m3/day

At twice weekly cleanout, grit accumulation


0.014 ~ 4

0.056m 3

Required cross-sectional area of grit collection channel

0.056 37 .

0.015m 2

Use grit collection channel 150mm wide

110mm deep

(gives some margin). Allow for freeboard (say, 200mm) Parabolic section to be approximated by trapezoid.

Modification of Downstream Control Weir The chamber can have a rectangular cross-section, only if the flow is controlled by a special device at the downstream end.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

31

For a rectangular grit chamber, the flow rate is given by:


Q v h Bh

(3.25)

where

B h

is the chamber width is the flow depth in the chamber

The form of Equation (3.25) indicates that for vh to be constant, regardless of flow rate, the flow rate should be linearly proportional to the depth, h. This may be assured by using a downstream control weir characterised by a linear relationship between flow rate and head on the weir crest. Such a weir is the Sutro weir which is described and analysed in CIV2262 (see CIV2262 Study Guide).

Sutro weir

Vortex Grit Chamber A schematic of a typical vortex grit chamber is shown in Figure 3.16. With reference to this figure, grit-laden flow enters the unit tangentially at the top. The resulting spiral flow pattern tends to lift the lighter organic particles while the mechanically induced vortex captures grit at the centre. The grit is then removed by airlift or through a hopper. It should be noted that the grit sump has a tendency to become compacted and will potentially clog. Sometimes provision is made for the use of highpressure agitation water or air to clear the sump. The adjustable rotating paddles maintain the proper circulation within the unit for all flows. Attention should be paid to the tendency for these paddles to collect rags.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

32

Figure 3.16:

Schematic of Typical Vortex Grit Chambers (a) PISTA Unit (b) Teacup Unit

Vortex grit chambers are highly energy-efficient. The head loss across the unit is minimal when operating correctly and unclogged. American practice indicates a value of 6 mm, although an allowance of 100 mm is recommended. Vortex grit chambers have the great advantage that they are very compact. Their design is usually proprietary so that manufacturers will usually produce a suitable unit to accommodate stated performance specifications. Manufacturers specifications will provide information on the maximum water depth within the chamber.

Aerated Grit Chamber Aerated grit chambers are commonly used in medium to large sewage treatment plants. The introduction of air through a diffuser, located on one side of the tank, induces a spiral flow pattern in the sewage as it moves through the tank, as shown in Figure 3.17. Correct positioning of the tank inlet and outlet directs the flow perpendicular to the spiral roll pattern. Inlet and outlet baffles are normally installed to dissipate energy and minimise short-circuiting. Head loss across the chamber is minimal.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

33

Figure 3.17:

Helicoidal Flow Pattern in an Aerated Grit Chamber

The roll velocity is set so that it is sufficient to maintain lighter organic particles in suspension while allowing heavier grit particles to settle. Because conditions change with flow rate, the air supply is adjustable to provide the optimum roll velocity. A further advantage of the introduction of air is that the sewage is freshened, leading to a notable reduction in odour. If desired, the chamber can be used for chemical addition, mixing, and/or flocculation ahead of primary treatment. Grease removal may be achieved with a skimmer. If correctly designed, an aerated grit chamber with a minimum hydraulic detention time of 3 minutes will capture about 95% of grit larger than 0.2 mm when operating at its peak flow. The usual range of design specifications is given in Table 3.6. Table 3.6: Typical Design Specifications for an Aerated Grit Chamber Range of Values 25m 8 20 m 2.5 7 m 1:1 5:1 3:1 5:1 2 5 minutes 0.25 0.75 m3/min/m 0.6 1.0 m 0.6 0.75 m/sec Comments Varies widely

Design Parameter Depth Length Width Width:Depth Ratio Length:Width Ratio Minimum Detention Time Air Supply Diffuser Distance from Bottom Transverse Roll Velocity

2:1 typical 3 minutes typical 0.45 m3/min/m typical

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

34

Example: Design an aerated grit chamber for a hydraulic load of 20,000 PE. The following is chosen: The minimum detention time at peak flow is 3 minutes, The width to depth ratio is 2:1, The length to width ratio is 2:1, Grit quantity is estimated as 0.03 m3/ML of wastewater, The aeration requirement is 10 litres/sec/m length of tank. Solution ADWF = 20,000 =52l/sec PFF= 4.7 Peak flow Grit chamber volume: Minimum detention time at peak flow = 3minutes = 3 60 = 180seconds Required volume = 0.176 180 = 31.7 = 32m3 225l/day= 4,500m3/day

20-0.11= 3.38 = 52 3.38 = 176 l/sec

W D

2,

L W

2
W L = 32

Volume = D W = 2D, D 2D Dimensions

L = 2W = 4D 4D = 32 D = 1.6m W = 3.2m L = 6.4m

Aeration requirement 10l/sec/m length = 10 6.4 = 64 l/sec Means should be provided to vary the air flow rate to control grit removal rate and grit cleanliness Grit quantity Based on average flow rate, = 4.5ML/day 0.03m3/ML

= 135 l/day

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

35

3.4.3 Other
Comminutors Comminutors mince wastewater solids (rags, paper, plastic, etc) by revolving cutting bars. They are used instead of fine bar racks (after grit chambers). Equalization The purpose of equalization is to dampen flow variations so that wastewater can be treated at a nearly constant flow rate. It is achieved by constructing large basins.

3.5 Primary Treatment


After preliminary treatment, the wastewater contains light organic solids, some of which can be removed by gravity or screening.

3.5.1 Primary Sedimentation Tanks


Sedimentation tanks (also known as clarifiers) are used as a part of both primary treatment and secondary treatment processes. Here only preliminary sedimentation tanks will be discussed. Sedimentation tanks may be rectangular, square, or circular in shape. A schematic of a typical rectangular clarifier is shown in Figure 3.18, of a circular clarifier in Figure 3.19, and a square one in Figure 3.20. Rectangular tanks (Fig. 31.18) are commonly used for primary sedimentation. They occupy less space than circular tanks and can be economically built side by side with common walls.

Figure 3.18:

Schematic of Rectangular Sedimentation Tank

In the case of a circular, the flow enters at the centre and settlement takes place as the flow moves outwards and rises. The effluent is collected in a channel or launder, which
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

36

then conveys the flow to an exit channel or pipe. Circular tanks require a careful design of the inlet stilling well to achieve a stable radial flow pattern without causing excessive turbulence in the vicinity of the central sludge hopper. Inlet design is considered in subsequent paragraphs.

Figure 3.19:

Schematic of Circular Clarifier

Square or upflow tanks (Fig. 3.20) typically have deep hopper bottoms and are common in small treatment plants. Their primary advantage is that sludge removal is carried out entirely by gravity. The steeply sloping sides typically 60 concentrate the sludge at the bottom of the hopper. A significant disadvantage is that hydraulic overloading may cause major problems because any particles with a settling velocity less than the surface loading rate will not be removed, but will escape with the effluent. This section emphasises the hydraulic aspects of the design of clarifiers. The basic design procedure is reviewed and design guidelines are presented. The important procedure for the design of the launder is then discussed. Finally, a design example is presented to aid understanding.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

37

Figure 3.20: General Design Principles

Schematic of Squer or Upflow Clarifier

Clarifiers are designed to remove the maximum amount of settleable solids quickly and economically. The design objective is to provide sufficient time under quiescent conditions for maximum settling. If all solids were discrete particles of uniform size, density, and shape the removal efficiency of the tank would be dependent on the surface loading rate. However, the solids are not of a regular character and the conditions under which they are present range from total dispersion to complete flocculation. In practice, the bulk of the finely divided solids reaching primary sedimentation tanks is incompletely flocculated and is susceptible to further flocculation. Flocculation is aided by the eddying motion of the fluid within the clarifier. It proceeds through the coalescence of fine particles at a rate that is a function of their concentration and of their natural ability to coalesce upon collision. Thus, the longer the process continues, the more complete the coalescence becomes. For this reason, the detention time within the clarifier is a consideration in the design process. The primary design parameters are the detention time, the surface loading rate, forward velocity, and weir overflow rate. They are normally specified in the local design criteria.

Surface loading rate This is defined as flow applied per surface area of the tank: Q SLR A
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

38

where

Q A

is inflow; is surface area;

Detention Time The detention time is given by the equation:

where

Volume H Q SLR is depth of the tank. t

(3.25)

Following the specification of these parameters, the dimensioning of the tank then proceeds as follows: Q (3.26) Tank Surface Area, A SLR

Tank Length or Diameter, L or D


where

(3.27)

L 4 4

for rectangular tanks

for circular tanks

Clarifiers are normally designed to provide a detention time of between 1.5 and 2.5 hours, based on the peak flow rate. It is noted that the design criteria for Malaysian systems incorporate a time of 2 hours based on the peak flow rate.

The Forward Velocity The forward velocity is also an important aspect of the design of rectangular tanks. If this is excessive, scouring and re-suspension of the sludge will result. The forward velocity is given by:

vh

Q WH

(3.28)

Incorporating Equation (3.26) for the detention time,

vh

L t

(3.29)

It is evident from Equations (3.28) and (3.29) that the forward velocity influences the choice of length to width ratio. The maximum forward velocity to avoid the risk of scouring settled sludge is 10 to 15 mm/sec, indicating that the ratio of length to width should preferably be about 3:1.

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

39

Values of L/W in practice range between 3 and 6. The Malaysian Draft Guidelines specify a value of 3.

Weir Loading Rate The weir loading rate is defined as WLR = Q/Lw where Lw is the length of the outlet weir. If this value is too high, the approach current generated by the weir will extend upstream into the settling zone, creating a potential disruption of the flow pattern. A weir loading rate of between 100 and 200 m3/m/day is typically specified. Achieving this value is a particular problem for rectangular tanks which is usually overcome by utilising multiple suspended weir troughs. In circular tanks, the weir loading rate associated with a perimeter weir is normally satisfactory at high flows. At low flows, however, difficulties may arise from a weir loading rate which is too small because the consequent very small flow depths over the weir make the tank flow pattern very sensitive to errors in weir levelling. This problem may be overcome by constructing the perimeter weir as a saw-tooth weir or multiple V-notch to increase the flow depth. (3.30)

Design Guidelines Design guidelines for clarifiers vary significantly from country to country. Typical guidelines from American practice are presented in Table 3.7. Table 3.7: Typical Design Guidelines for Circular Primary Clarifiers Value 1.5 and 2.5 hours 32 - 49 m3/m2/day 49 - 122 m3/m2/day 2.1 5 m 125 500 m3/m/day

Parameter Detention time For average weather flow Surface loading rate = Q/Surface area For average dry weather flow For peak flow conditions Sidewater depth Weir loading rate = Q/Weir length

Primary clarifiers are designed more conservatively if sedimentation is the only treatment and if activated sludge is being returned to the primary clarifier. Rectangular clarifiers are generally designed under the same criteria as circular clarifiers. Typical length to width ratios for rectangular primary clarifiers range from 3:1 to 5:1, although many existing tanks are characterised by ratios of between 1.5:1 and 15:1. A well-designed and operated primary clarifier should be capable of removing between 50 and 65% of the total influent suspended solids.
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

40

The issues of surface loading rate, detention time, and weir loading rate are illustrated by the example below. Example Two primary clarifiers are 26 m in diameter with a 2.1 m side water depth. Single effluent weirs are located on the peripheries of the tanks. For a wastewater flow of 26,000 m3/day, calculate: a) the surface loading rate, b) the detention time, and c) the weir loading rate. Solution Surface area of each clarifier Total surface area

D2 4
= 530 2.1 2

262 4

530m 2

= 1,060m2 = 2,230m3

Total volume = 1,060 a) Surface loading rate

Q A

26,000 1,060 2,230 26,000 24


26,000 2 D

24.5m 3 / m 2 / day

b)

Detention time

Volume Flow rate

2.06 hours

c)

Weir loading rate

flow rate weir length

26,000 2 26

159m 3 / m / day

Tank Inlets Sedimentation tank inlets must be designed to distribute the flow as uniformly as possible so that the best possible flow pattern is maintained. The influent jet has a high amount of kinetic energy that must be dissipated. For rectangular tanks, various baffled inlet arrangements have been used which are effective for energy dissipation and flow distribution. Typical arrangements are shown schematically in Figure 3.21. With circular tanks, the radial flow from the inlet is inherently less stable than the horizontal flow in a rectangular basin. Careful design is needed to achieve a stable radial flow pattern. Typical arrangements are shown in Figure 3.22 for (a) side feed, (b)
Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

41

vertical pipe feed, and (c) slotted vertical pipe feed. In all cases, the primary design principles are that energy must be dissipated and the flow distribution must be uniform.

Figure 3.21:

Schematics of Typical Rectangular Sedimentation Tank Inlets

Figure 3.22:

Centre-feed Inlets for Circular Clarifiers: (a) Side Feed, (b) Vertical Pipe Feed, (c) Slotted Vertical Pipe Feed

Effluent Launder Design Rising wastewater in a clarifier flows over a weir into a channel or launder which, in turn, conveys the collected effluent to the exit channel. Flow in the launder is classified as spatially varied because the flow rate increases with distance along the launder. This

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

42

characteristic requires the use of the momentum equation for its analysis, rather than the energy equation. The basic flow condition is illustrated schematically in Figure 3.23 which shows the flow spilling over the multiple V-notch weir into the launder. A full momentum analysis, including the effects of friction are needed. A simplified approach is usually adequate and is presented herein.

Figure 3.23:

Definition Sketch for Flow in a Launder and image of a completed design.

The first issue is the size of V-notch weir required. The individual V-notches are typically set out with a centre-to-centre spacing of between 150 and 300 mm. With the number of V-notches consequently established, the flow through each notch can be determined from:

QperV

notch

Q N

(3.31)

where N is the number of V-notches. The maximum height, h, over the weir is then determined from the standard V-notch weir equation (see Study Guide CIV2262): 5 8 (3.32) Q perV notch C d 2 g tan h 2 15 2 The discharge coefficient, Cd, is a function of the notch angle, . For value of 0.58. = 900, Cd has a

The head over the weir, calculated from Equation (3.32), should be increased by a safety factor of 15%. The next stage in the hydraulic design is to determine the maximum depth in the launder. First, the critical depth at the discharge point of the launder is calculated from:

yc

qL 4b 2 g

(3.33)

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

43

where q Q / Lw Lw L b

is discharge per unit weir length, is the length of weir, is the length of the launder (circumference of the tank), is the width of the launder.

The depth at the upstream end of the launder is then calculated from:
H y
2 c

2q 2 x 2 gb 2 yc

(3.34)

where x=L/2 for a circular basin. The depth, H, calculated from Equation (3.34) should be increased by a factor of safety of 50% to allow for friction loss, freeboard, and a free fall allowance. The design of a launder is illustrated by the example below. Example Design the overflow weirs and launders (collection channels) for two identical circular clarifiers that treat a design flow of 20,000 m3/day, and a peak hourly flow of 32,000 m3/day. They are 18 m in diameter each. The critical condition is when the peak flow occurs with one clarifier out of service. The launder must be able to cope with the corresponding flow. Solution Weir design One clarifier must handle peak flow. Peak weir loading rate

32,000m 3 / day 2 18m

where: 2 represents the inflow on both sides 18 represents the diameter WOR 283 m 3 /m/day Assume that weir comprises V-notches with spacing of 25cm centre to centre (this may need adjusting). Total number of V-notches

D 0.25

Take D as 18m, even though it will be less for the inner ring and more for the outer. Total number of V-notches

18 = 452 0.25
04-2012

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater

44

Flow per notch

32,000 1 3,600 24 452

0.00082 m 3 /s

Now, for each V-notch, notch angle is =900 and Cd=0.58.

5 8 C d 2 g tan h 2 15 2
2

15 0.00082 8 0.58 19.6

0.051 m

A safety factor of 15% is normally appropriate. Allow for water depth over notch of 1.15 = 60mm Width of V-notch at the top = 60mm 2 = 120mm. Weir design as follows: 0.051= 0.059m

Launder design q is discharge/unit weir length = weir loading rate (because launder is fed from both sides) 2

283 3,600 24

2m 3 / m / sec

0.0066m 3 / m / sec

Assume a launder width Try 500mm Calculate depth at launder discharge point

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y

Unit CIV3264: Urban Water and Wastewater Systems Topic 3 Wastewater


1 1

45

yc

qL 4b 2 g

0.0066 18 2 4 0.5 9.81

0.243 m

Calculate maximum depth in launder at upstream end

2q 2 x 2 gb 2 y

0.5

(Note: x
1

D ) 2

2 0.0066 H 0.243
2

9.81 0.5 2

18 2 0.243

0.419 m

Increase this depth by 50% to allow for friction loss in the launder, freeboard, and freefall allowance. Total depth to be provided in launder = 0.419 1.5

= 0.629, say 0.65m Launder depth below vertex of V-notch weirs = 0.65m Launder width = 0.50m

Department of Civil Engineering, Monash University 04-2012

MONASH U N I V E R S I T Y