2 views

Original Title: Project_F17.pdf

Uploaded by Omar Oubaha

- ExcelExercise.pdf
- STATS 250 Notes
- Stata Step by Step
- Stats
- 1-s2.0-S0022169416307685-main
- AS400Sys
- PARTE 2
- Leadership Competencies and Competitive Advantage
- ACTG 1
- EMT Assignment
- Mean
- Van Der Elst 2006 Concept Shifting
- MPRA Paper 23362
- Assignment 2(LCW) (1)hh
- Resume Mtk Ch 8a
- fm 0000003
- Intel Sales Winters
- Oneway
- Analysis of SAnalysis of surface roughness of machining.urface Roughness for Turning of Aluminium (6061) Using Regression Analysis
- avm 301 - forecas1

You are on page 1of 5

Ashleyvilles municipal wastewater plant (WWTP) is located on the Lazy River between Big

Lake and Cruz Creek (see diagram below). Currently, the plant provides secondary treatment and

the dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations in the Lazy River exceed the minimum DO required by

regulation (4.0 mg/L). Big changes are coming, though. By 2025, the state will complete a water

supply dam on Cruz Creek which will reduce the flow in the creek. Simultaneously, flows from

Leaky Dam (named after Congressman George Leaky) will be slightly smaller also due increased

irrigation withdrawals. Meanwhile in the river, the population of the endangered Golden Hornet

trout has been declining. Biologists suspect that low dissolved oxygen levels are the cause and

the regulatory limit in the future will be raised to 6.0 mg/L.

City officials see a confluence of events that will lead to serious compliance problems in the

future. The DO in the river is only a little above the legal standard now, and that standard will be

higher in the future. Meeting a higher standard will be challenging because in the future there

will be less water in the river and the citys discharge flow is expected to grow by 40% due to

population growth. Consequently, the city expects that when its WWTPs permit is renewed, the

BOD treatment requirements will be much more stringent than they are today.

Your firm has been hired to do a preliminary evaluation of the situation via computer modeling.

City officials want you to evaluate two alternatives. The first alternative is to increase the

efficiency of the treatment plant by upgrading its systems. All of the plant flow would be treated

to a lower BOD. The second alternative involves purchasing an existing wetland adjacent to the

WWTP which could provide additional treatment. The idea is that part of the plant flow would

be treated to the same level as today and part would be sent through the wetland which would

provide a polishing action (i.e. discharge from the wetland would be cleaner than the plant

flow).In this case, the city would discharge part of its flow at the existing WWTP location and the

other part at the downstream end of the wetland (see map).

To irrigation

reservoir

Cruz Creek

Dam

To irrigation

Lazy River

Ashleyville Wetlands

WWTP (future treatment)

Page 1 of 5

Tasks

Complete the Excel-based DOSAG (pronounced dee-oh sag) model. Start with the template

distributed by your instructor. Complete the model by writing four user-defined functions in

VBA. Look for comments in the spreadsheet (cells with red triangles). The BOD and DO results

you will produce when your template is working correctly are included in the template file. In

this project, external BOD values will always be reported as BOD5, even though BODu is used in

the Streeter-Phelps equation. Dont forget to include this adjustment in the appropriate functions.

A first-order decay coefficient for the BOD test (kBOD) has been measured in the lab. The BOD

test coefficient doesnt need to be adjusted because the test is always run at 20C.

The following empirical equation should be used for the reaeration constant.

3.9u 1 / 2

kr =

h3/ 2

where

kr = the reaeration coefficient at 20C (d-1)

u = average stream velocity (m/s)

h = average stream depth (m)

k r = k r , 20 (T 20 )

where = 1.024.

Calibration is the process of matching your model to known environmental data by adjusting

model parameters. Textbook values for constants needed to run a model are often not available

or are not accurate for a specific situation. For this reason, models must be calibrated against

field data to have credibility. In this project, the biodegradation coefficient (kd) of the waste in

the river is not known and must be determined using field data. (It is not the same as kBOD which

applies only to the bottles at 20.)

For calibration, use your DOSAG model to simulate the river under current conditions. Then,

compare your output with dissolved oxygen measurements taken in the creek and river. Try

different kd values in your model until the model output reproduces the current conditions in the

river. Since summer is the critical season (remember why?), this task will only be done on

summer data. The kd value you choose will be the one appropriate for the river temperature so no

temperature adjustment is needed.

How will you know when you have the kd that best fits the field data? A good way is to minimize

the differences between the model output and the data using a least-squared error procedure. As

in linear regression, the best fit line is the one that minimizes the sum of the squared errors (the

differences between the field values and the values predicted by the model). Use this method.

Add a column in which you calculate the differences between the field data and the calculated

Page 2 of 5

values, square each difference, and sum them. The kd that gives the smallest sum is the best

choice. Use Solver to find kd.

Run the model for the flow conditions expected in the future after the new dam is constructed

assuming that the treatment plant will not change its BOD or DO. (Hint: You should see a

minimum DO in the river substantially below current conditions.)

Use your model to determine the maximum BOD5 allowed in the effluent so that the minimum

DO in the river meets the standard. Use Solver for this. You dont want to waste taxpayer funds

by over-treating and you dont want to incur fines by under-treating. In practice, you might

include a safety factor, but in this preliminary analysis youve been told to omit that. (Hint: Your

required BOD5 should be less than half the current value.)

In the wetlands alternative, the WWTP will divert part of its treated flow through the wetlands for

additional treatment. The part of the flow not diverted will have the same BOD and DO as the

current discharge. The diverted flow will exit the wetlands at a location downstream of the

WWTP. The location and the BOD5 and DO of the wetland discharge are shown in the data table

below. Run your model to determine the fraction of treated wastewater that needs to be diverted

through the wetlands. Remember, wastewater not diverted to the wetlands is discharged at the

original location with the original BOD and DO values. (Hint: You should find that more than

half of the flow needs to go through the wetland.)

Task 6 Write-up

Write a memo report addressed to your hypothetical boss (Ms. J. Al-Kazily) describing the

problem, how you modeled it, and what kind of computer model you used and its limitations. The

purpose of describing the model is to give your boss an idea about how accurate your solution

might be. Look at the assumptions behind the model (see Chemistry Supplement and textbook).

State clearly what would happen in the future with no changes in treatment plant operations, and

the results of your evaluation of alternatives. Dont make a recommendation about which

alternative to pursue. That decision would involve things that you are not considering such as

costs. Your document is strictly technical, presenting the results of your modeling.

- Heading format (single spaced):

MEMO

Date:

To: Ms. J. Al-Kazily, Public Works Director

From: your name

Subject: single-space if more than one line

- Double-spaced text except for the heading; 1.25 margins on left, 1 elsewhere

- 12-pt serif font (Times New Roman or similar, not Arial or Calibri)

The main narrative should be 3-4 pages long. Provide computer printouts of the calibration,

worst case, and two alternative runs. Include them as numbered and titled attachments placed

after the main text. Any other tables or figures you use should also be numbered, captioned, and

referenced in the narrative.

Page 3 of 5

Include the following 4 printouts (1 page each; set print area accordingly):

Calibrated model under current conditions. The calibration graph should show the field

data as symbols and the model output as a line without symbols.

Model under future project conditions but without any change in treatment at the plant

(i.e. the worst case). Of course, runs showing future conditions should not show current

field data.

Models for each of the two alternatives showing your recommended level of treatment

and/or diversion. Every alternative should meet the required DO standard.

Due at the last lab meeting or another date specified by your instructor.

A printed copy of your final report text and spreadsheet printouts.

A digital copy of your final report in Word format. Name it: DOSAG-YourLastName

(e.g., DOSAG-Smith).

A single Excel file containing all of your models as different tabs. Name it as specified

above. Be sure to save it as a macro-enabled file.

Conditions of work: This is an individual project. You may collaborate with classmates, but the

final product is to be your individual effort.

Page 4 of 5

Data Sheet

Physical data

Summer

Location Flow BOD5 DO

(km) (m3/s) (mg/L) (mg/L)

Leaky Dam (now) 0 7.5 2.0 8.0

Leaky Dam (future) 0 6.0 2.0 8.0

WWTP (now) 5 3.0 30 4.0

WWTP (future) 5 +40%* ?? 4.0

Wetlands discharge (future) 7.5 ?? 4.0 6.0

Cruz Creek (now) 20 7.0 4.0 8.0

Cruz Creek (future) 20 3.5 4.0 8.0

* Above current flows.

BOD test coefficient: kBOD= 0.25 /d (use this to convert between BOD5 and BODu)

Summer (17C)

Location (km) Velocity (m/s) Depth (m) DO (mg/L)

0 0.08 2.0 8.0

5 (upstream of mixing zone) 8.0

5 (downstream of mixing zone) 0.08 2.0 7.0

7.5 0.08 2.0 6.5

10 0.08 2.0 6.0

12.5 0.08 2.0 5.5

15 0.08 2.0 5.5

20 (upstream of mixing zone) 5.0

20 (downstream of mixing zone) 0.06 3.5 6.0

25 0.06 3.5 5.5

30 0.06 3.5 5.0

35 0.06 3.5 4.5

40 0.06 3.5 4.5

45 0.06 3.5 4.5

50 0.06 3.5 4.5

60 0.06 3.5 5.0

70 0.06 3.5 5.5

75 0.06 3.5 6.0

Page 5 of 5

- ExcelExercise.pdfUploaded byammar303
- STATS 250 NotesUploaded byZelin Wang
- Stata Step by StepUploaded byDaniel Miranda
- StatsUploaded byMarcel Velasco
- 1-s2.0-S0022169416307685-mainUploaded byguidoxl
- AS400SysUploaded bykratosmpl
- PARTE 2Uploaded byNedzon Pinto Catalan
- Leadership Competencies and Competitive AdvantageUploaded byAlexander Decker
- ACTG 1Uploaded byoconn1
- EMT AssignmentUploaded bysherlockms
- MeanUploaded byLyrad Magpantay
- Van Der Elst 2006 Concept ShiftingUploaded byfeergarcia
- MPRA Paper 23362Uploaded bycitrahdyn
- Assignment 2(LCW) (1)hhUploaded byThomas Goh
- Resume Mtk Ch 8aUploaded byNurul Audina
- fm 0000003Uploaded byapi-26524819
- Intel Sales WintersUploaded byAlexandra Benites
- OnewayUploaded byBadlina Fitrianisa Yulianingrum
- Analysis of SAnalysis of surface roughness of machining.urface Roughness for Turning of Aluminium (6061) Using Regression AnalysisUploaded byzainulzas
- avm 301 - forecas1Uploaded byapi-377080697
- Instrumente de Plata Bancare CardulUploaded byDenis Ioniţă
- 6 TUGAS METOPEL.docxUploaded byhasmal
- 2014 CMOST PresentationUploaded byc3781794
- CFA_L2V1_ClassNotes_SS3.pdfUploaded bysinwha321
- MFC-2M-1983Uploaded bysar_tpgit
- RATNA EKAWATI.docxUploaded byRisca Auryn
- Regression Explained SPSSUploaded byMehak Ahuja
- HW 5, 448Uploaded bypdrogos02
- Girish Food Store-case Study-2Uploaded byPuneet Midha
- Multivariate QualityUploaded bychapadany

- Barrages_et_Lac-collinaires.docUploaded byHafsa Alilat
- Note de Calcul Du Ferraillage Sup 3Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Calcul Des TirantsUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Guide Setra Charge RoutiereUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Jacobs emails.docxUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- FOSSE septique.pdfUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- FOSSE septique.pdfUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Biblio Graph i eUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Jacobs emails.docxUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Ex-assainissement.xlsxUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- AutoNejmafinance.pdf.Asset. JwpV4fN23dMzhywxpUZ4sOlnJfGgMs5 1Vgi Sfhb4Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Abaques CES DreuxUploaded bySaad Sekkate
- EJ0003-200101-015244Uploaded byjean miguel oscorima celis
- Calcul HydUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Note de Calcul Radier Et Nervures Du 12062017Uploaded byNZOMO
- 200-CF-004Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Code du travail au MarocUploaded bySAKSIK
- 200-CF-001Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- 5385e87019ab9.pdfUploaded bySidiky Coulibaly
- 5385e87019ab9Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Amortissement 7Uploaded byElijah Ward
- Notes de Calcul Pont BAUploaded byTatbirte N'sousse
- Maroc - Code TravailUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- Pertuis CDUploaded byOmar Oubaha
- 200.CF.002Uploaded byOmar Oubaha
- 04-Coût Du MatérielUploaded byMADBAH
- Td Drex GorisseUploaded bymaino
- Ecrassement de BetonUploaded bySimo Elflouli
- 200-QAnsUploaded byshahed555
- Plannififcation-liste Temps UnitaireUploaded byAchraf Abdelmaksoud

- Trilon® B PowderUploaded byazeem1236
- Atom and MoleculesUploaded byMaridjan Wiwaha
- 7. Descrierea Principalelor Caracteristici Fizico-chimice Ale StrugurilorUploaded byOana Gidinceanu
- Fyp_report_Guideline.pdfUploaded byKevin Chaa
- Fisiologi Musculoskeletal.pptUploaded bySuardimanAcho
- Cellular RespirationUploaded byRavi Toteja
- Advantages and Disadvantages of Various Voltaic CellUploaded byOyiekiki Glorie
- Chapter 7.pdfUploaded byAlec McIntosh
- Catalogo 2017 ENGUploaded byhond02
- 150.62-nm1.1Uploaded byiwan
- FlowLabEOC2e_CH06Uploaded bytomekzawistowski
- ffp-945 NazarskiUploaded bysplyc12
- GEAS QuestionsUploaded byrachelle rivadulla
- Determination of P in SerumUploaded byRicardoDennisMezaNifla
- APAT-0116enUploaded byU.s. Ezhil Arivudainambi
- SAE AMS 5122j-2008Uploaded byraul
- Mechanics of Wood MachiningUploaded byPeter Nomikos
- 2.4.18.3Uploaded byamr_scorpion_eng
- 1763Uploaded bySharat Chandra
- Wavistrong Engineering Guide-2007Uploaded byani_dat
- Quantum annealing algorithm descriptionUploaded byAlfonso
- Estimating Snow Accumulation From Insar Correlation ObservationsUploaded byYaseen Muhammad
- 10.1016j.fluid.2015.09.045Uploaded byMaryori Sanchez
- JCTB-09-0731-finalUploaded byMohamadMostafavi
- Lecture-1-Introduction.pdfUploaded byAbo-Khaled Mohammed
- Starch and Dextrin Based Adhesives - ArticleUploaded byMahesh Awati
- Civil Engineering DescriptionUploaded byjay
- New Cad Cam Prodjects List (1)Uploaded byDhanish Kumar
- Nuclear , RadiopharmaceuticalUploaded byarun231187
- ACETYLCYSTEINE BP2Uploaded byRPh Krishna Chandra Jagrit