K. Sundara Kumar et al.

/ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology

Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF
WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT
* K. SUNDARA KUMAR1, P. SUNDARA KUMAR1, Dr. M. J. RATNAKANTH BABU2
1
Associate Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, K L University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India
2
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, K L University, Guntur, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract

The present study has been undertaken to evaluate performance efficiency of a waste water treatment plant. A
sewage treatment plant operating on biological treatment method (Activated Sludge Process) with an average
wastewater inflow of 23MLD bas been considered for case study. Waste water samples were collected at different
stages of treatment units and analysed for the major water quality parameters, such as biological oxygen demand
(BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD), total suspended solids (TSS) and total dissolved solids (TDS). The
performance efficiency of each unit in treating the pollutants was calculated. Overall performance of the plant also
has been estimated. The obtained results were very much useful in identification and rectification of operational and
maintenance problems as well as the future expansion to be carried out in the plant to meet the increased hydraulic
and organic loadings.
Keywords: Waste water treatment plant, BOD, TSS, Biological treatment, Removal efficiency

1. INTRODUCTION

"There is no truer sign of civilization and culture than good sanitation. A good drain reflects the culture as much as
a beautiful statue", [1]. Wastewater is essentially the water supply of the community after it has been fouled by a
variety of uses. The water supplied to a community receives a range of chemical substances and microbial flora
during its use such that the wastewater acquires a polluting potential and becomes a health and environmental
hazard. Communicable diseases of the intestinal tract such as cholera, typhoid, dysenteries and water borne
diseases like infectious hepatitis etc., can be spread from uncontrolled disposal of waste water, and therefore
prevention of communicable diseases and protecting public health attracts the primary objective of sanitary waste
water disposal.

The sites for disposal of wastewater have traditionally been natural watercourses, land and the coastal waters. One
of the major sources of organic pollution is effluents from sewage treatment works. Prevention of pollution of
natural resources such as land and water by the waste water and adequate preparation or renovation of the
wastewater before reuse, are further important considerations in formulating and designing appropriate waste water
disposal arrangements.

Given the characteristics of raw wastewater and the requirements of disposal or reuse, the waste water usually
requires some type of preparation or treatment before it is rendered fit for disposal or reuse. Generally, in many
situations involving domestic wastewater, the treatment consists of removal of suspended solids and 5-day, 20°C
BOD, which are the two usual parameters of prime interest. The degree of treatment provided to the wastewater will
largely be based on the effluent standards prescribed by the regulatory agencies when the treated effluent is to be
discharged into a watercourse or land. If the effluent is to be reused, the quality of the effluent required to support
such reuse will indicate the degree of treatment necessary. The complete treatment of wastewater is brought by a
sequential combination of various physical unit operations, and chemical and biological unit processes. The general
yardstick of evaluating the performance of sewage treatment plant is the degree of reduction of BOD, and
suspended solids, which constitute organic pollution. The performance efficiency of treatment plant depends not
only on proper design and construction but also on good operation and maintenance.

ISSN: 0975-5462 7785

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Performance evaluation of existing treatment plant is required (1) to assess the existing effluent quality and/or to
meet higher treatment requirements and, (2) to know about the treatment plant whether it is possible to handle
higher hydraulic and organic loadings. Performance appraisal practice of existing treatment plant units is effective
in generation of additional data which also can be used in the improvement in the design procedures to be followed
for design of these units. Existing facilities can be made to handle higher hydraulic and organic loads by process
modifications, where as meeting higher treatment requirements usually requires significant expansion and/or
modification of existing facilities [2].

One of the primary considerations in evaluating an existing wastewater plant is in the area of plant operation and
control. A major tool required for proper process control is frequent and accurate sampling and laboratory analysis
[3]. Poor conditions of sewerage system, improper design of the plant and organizational problems are important
factors that cause treatment plant not to meet the effluent standards [4]. Overloading due o increase in population
and water use, discharge of trade effluents are other reasons of recent times for the poor performance of waste water
treatment plants [5]. The treatment efficiency may be badly affected if the system is hydraulically under loaded [6].

2. CASE STUDY

Nesapakkam Sewage Treatment Plant

The Chennai city sewerage system has been divided into five zones. Each zone has been provided with
individual collection areas, pumping stations, force mains etc. Nesapakkam Sewage Treatment Plant is located
on the western part of city and receives the sewage collected from zone 4, covering the areas like Saidapet,
West-mambalam, Ashoknagar, M.G.R Nagar, K.K.Nagar, Thirunagar etc,. The plant was commissioned in 1974
which is the first sewage treatment plant in Chennai. The plant is designed to cater for an average flow of 23 MLD
(million liters per day) with a peak factor of 2.67. Fig 2.1 gives the layout of the above plant.

Dimensions and specifications of the treatment units

Inlet chamber: Inlet chamber is a rectangular tank with 2 m x 3 m sides and 6 m depth.

Screen Chamber: Screen chamber is provided with manually cleaned bar rack of medium size. Width of the screen
chamber is 2.41m and depth is 1.37 m. The bars are rectangular sharp edged ones having 6 mm thickness at clear
spacing of 25 mm.

Detritus Tank: Side of the square detritus tank is 10m and Side Water Depth is 1.0 m

Primary Clarifier: There are two identical circular primary clarifiers with 21.4 m diameter and 2.4 m side water
depth in each.

Aeration Tanks: Three numbers of aeration tank (Fig 4.5) of 40 m length, 10 m width and 3.8 m depth each are
provided. The system is provided with 12 numbers of fixed aerators having a capacity of 12.5 HP each. The flow in
the aeration system is in completely mixed flow regime.

Secondary clarifiers: There are two identical secondary sedimentation tanks (SST), having 24.5 meter diameter and
3.1m side water depth, each.

Primary and secondary digesters: The primary as well as secondary digesters are having 21.4 m diameter and
6.1 m side water depth.

ISSN: 0975-5462 7786

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Fig. 2.1 Schematic Diagram of Nesapakkam Sewage Treatment Plant, Chennai

Sludge drying beds: There are 26 numbers of sludge drying beds with 30.5 m x 11.6 m x 0.3 m size each, which
are meant for dewatering the sludge.

Balancing tank : Balancing tank is a rectangular tank with dimensions of 60 m x 27 m x 3 m. Six numbers of floating
aerators with 5 HP capacity are installed in the balancing tank to provide aeration and mixing to avoid the settlement
of solids.

Pump details: Raw sludge pump house is having three vertical centrifugal pumps with 20 HP capacities each, to
pump the raw sludge from the clarifier to the digesters. Return sludge pump house is having four horizontal,
centrifugal pumps with 10 HP capacities each, to pump the secondary sludge to the aeration tank to maintain the
desired F/M ratio in the aeration tank. Filtrate pump house is having two submersible pumps with 5 HP capacities
each to pump the filtrate from the sludge drying beds to the inlet chamber. Balancing tank is provided with two
submersible pumps having 15 HP capacities each.

The average wastewater inflow in to the system is nearly 23MLD. The characteristics of wastewater from a grab
sample tested in the laboratory are given in Table: 2.l

ISSN: 0975-5462 7787

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Table: 2.1 Characteristics of wastewater

SI, No Name of Parameter Unit Raw Sewage

1 Colour - Grayish black

2 Odour . - -nil-

3 Temperature °C 24 to 32

4 BOD(5-day,20°C) mg/1 320

5 Suspended Solids mg/1 450

6 COD mg/1 480

7 Total Dissolved Solids mg/1 1100

8 Total Solids mg/1 1550

9 PH - 7.2 to 7.6

10 Alkalinity mg/1 250

11 Chlorides mg/1 450

12 Ortho Phosphates as P mg/1 20

13 Total Phosphate as P mg/1 30

14 Ammonical Nitrogen mg/1 60

15 Organic Nitrogen as N mg/1 35

16 Total Kjeldhal Nitrogen as N mg/1 95

17 Sulphate mg/1 65

18 Settleable solids ml/l 10

19 Dissolved Oxygen mg/1 -nil-

20 Specific Conductance Mho/cm 1980

3. METHODOLOGY

Performance appraisal has been carried out by comparing the concentrations of pollutants at the inlet and outlet of
the treatment unit. The grab samples were collected at the inlet and outlet of all the treatment units and analysed as
outlined in the standard methods for the examination of water and wastewater [7]. The samples were analysed for
various parameters like pH, BOD, COD, TSS and TDS and depending on the results, performance of each unit was
evaluated. By regression analysis correlation between BOD and TSS were established.

ISSN: 0975-5462 7788

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The evaluation of performance efficiency of the plant was undertaken in terms of effluent quality. The evaluation was
based on the plant operation data such as FLOW, BOD, Total Suspended Solids measurements for the period of 6
months from June '09 toNov"09. The typical data for the FLOW, BOD, and Total Suspended Solids for the month of
June are given in Table 4.1. Daily variations of these parameters are shown graphically in Fig 4.1, Fig 4.2 and,
Fig 4.3 for the month of June '09. It has been observed that the overall treatment efficiency for the BOD removal
is 94.56% and that for Total Suspended Solids removal is 93.72%.
Table 4.1 Typical Characteristics of the waste water for June '09

Date Flow m3/s BOD mg/1 TSS mg/1

UTE TE UTE TE
1.6.99 0.2575 360 17 470 27
2.6.99 0.2691 330 18 410 29
3.6.99 0.2602 340 19 430 27
4.6.99 0.2566 300 15 380 25
7.6.99 0.2602 350 18 440 28
8.6.99 0.2629 380 19 470 28
9.6.99 0.2602 340 18 425 27
10.6.99 0.2566 320 15 390 26
11.6.99 0.2611 300 17 350 25
14.6.99 0.2664 310 16 420 25
15.6.99 0.2816 350 18 480 28
16.6.99 0.2744 280 16 340 27
17.6.99 0.2869 300 17 390 28
18.6.99 0.2762 350 19 420 28
21.6.99 0.2744 350 18 480 26
22.6.99 0.2664 320 19 440 28
23.6.99 0.2566 300 19 480 29

24.6.99 0.2637 340 19 480 29

25.6.99 0.2807 380 19 520 28
28.6.99 0.2691 360 19 490 28
29.6.99 0.2664 320 18 410 27
30.6.99 0.2727 350 19 480 29

Note: UTE - Untreated effluent, TE - Treated effluent TSS - Total Suspended Solids

ISSN: 0975-5462 7789

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

To characterize the quality of waste water averages, standard deviations as well as maximum and minimum
values were calculated for the above parameters from the data .The characteristics of the waste water(monthly
average values) during the period of data collection from June '99 to November '99 are given in Table 4.2. The
removal efficiency for the above parameters during the period of data collection from June '99 to November '99 is
given in Table 4.3.
Table 4.2 Characteristics of the Wastewater (monthly average values) during the period of data collection

NO. OF

MONTH PARAMETER MAXIMUM MINIMUM mg/1 MEAN mg/1 STNDARD OBSER

mg/l DEVIATION -VATIONS

UTE TE UTE TE UTE TE UTE TE

JUNE BOD 380 19 280 15 333.1 17.8 27.3238 1.3322 23

TSS 520 29 340 25 436.1 27.3 47.0874 1.2926 23

JULY BOD 390 19 240 16 330.0 18.1 36.8781 1.0779 21

TSS 520 29 340 25 445.2 27.8 54.8287 1.1233 21

AUGUST BOD 410 19 290 15 344.5 17.9 34.3271 1.0455 22

TSS 520 29 340 25 454.5 27.3 45.6411 1.4324 22

SEPT BOD 360 19 300 15 331.5 17.7 20.6722 1.4545 20

TSS 480 29 360 25 434.5 26.7 40.5845 1.3327 20

OCT BOD 380 19 180 10 316.3 16.7 58.4247 3.0107 19

TSS 410 29 320 15 422.1 25.1 59.5892 4.1486 19

NOV BOD 410 19 210 17 346.3 17.9 54.3836 1.2140 22

TSS 540 29 360 25 474.0 27.2 51.3307 1.1518 22

Note: UTE - Untreated effluent, TE - Treated effluent TSS - Total Suspended Solids

ISSN: 0975-5462 7790

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Table 4.3 : Removal Efficiency of BOD and TSS during the period of data collection (June '09 To Nov '09)

MONTH PARAMETER CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION REMOVAL TOLERANCE

EFFICIENCY
IN THE INFLUENT IN THE EFFLUENT LIMITS
%

JUNE BOD 333.1 17.8 94.65 20

TSS 4361 27.3 93.72 30

JULY BOD 330.0 18.1 94.48 20

TSS 445.2 27.8 93.89 30

AUG BOD 344.5 17.9 94.78 20

TSS 454.5 27.3 93.98 30

SEPT BOD 331.5 17.7 94.66 20

TSS 434.5 26.7 93.84 30

OCT BOD 316.3 16.7 94.69 20

TSS 422.1 25.1 94.05 30

NOV BOD 346.3 17.9 94.81 20

TSS 474.0 27.2 94.25 30

Table 4.4 Characteristics of the waste water (average values) in the individual units of the wastewater treatment plant

Sl. Concentration, mg/l

No. Unit Operation/Process BOD TSS

1 Untreated Waste water 316.12 445.67

2 After Primary Clarifier 219.41 220.12

3 After Aeration Tank 59.17 1320.72

4 After Secondary Clarifier 19.12 29.14

ISSN: 0975-5462 7791

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Table 4.5 Removal efficiency of the individual units in the waste water treatment plant

Sl. No. % Removal Efficiency for

Unit Operation/Process BOD TSS

1 Primary Clarifier 30.59 50.61

2 Aeration Tank 73.03 --

3 Secondary Clarifier 67.67 97.79

4 Activated Sludge Plant 91.28 86.76

(Aeration Tank & Secondary Clarifier)

Typical Variation of FLOW, BOD, TSS during the period of data collection for the month of June '99 are given in
Fig. 4.1, Fig. 4.2, Fig, 4.3.

Fig. 4.1 Daily variation of Flow during the month of June’09

ISSN: 0975-5462 7792

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Fig. 4.2 Daily variation of TSS during the month of June’09

Fig. 4.3 Daily variation of BOD during the month of June’09

Typical Variation of FLOW, BOD, TSS during the period of data collection from June '99 to October '99 are
given in Fig. 4.4, Fig. 4.5, Fig, 4.6.

ISSN: 0975-5462 7793

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Fig. 4.4 Variation of flow during the period of data collection (June’09 to Nov’09)

Fig. 4.5 Variation of BOD during the period of data collection (June’09 to Nov’09)

ISSN: 0975-5462 7794

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

Fig. 4.6 Variation of TSS during the period of data collection (June’09 to Nov’09)

CORRELATIONS

Establishment of constant relationships among the various measures of organic content depends primarily on the
nature of the wastewater and its source. By using regression analysis, variation of influent BOD with the influent
TSS and variation of removal efficiency of BOD with removal efficiency of TSS was determined. Because of the
rapidity with which TSS test can be conducted, these correlations can be very useful as BOD measurement will
take 5 days. Once the correlation has been established, TSS measurement can be used to good advantage for
treatment plant control and operation.
Table 4.6 Correlations developed between BOD and TSS

Correlation between Expression Correlation

coefficient

Variation of influent BOD with TSS y = (232.694) + (0.248455) x r = 0.361863

y: BOD, x: TSS

Variation of BOD removal efficiency with r= 0.338677

TSS removal efficiency y = (70.76152) + (0.256231) x

y: BOD removal , x: TSS removal

ISSN: 0975-5462 7795

 K. Sundara Kumar et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology
Vol. 2(12), 2010, 7785-7796

5. CONCLUSION

A waste water treatment plant with Activated Sludge Process as biological treatment method has been considered
for performance evaluation. The overall performance of the existing was satisfactory. The removal efficiency of
BOD was found to be 94.56% and that of TSS was 93.72%. The individual units are also performing well and their
removal efficiencies are satisfactory. BOD and TSS removal efficiencies of the primary clarifier are 30.59% and
50.61% respectively. BOD and TSS removal efficiencies of the activated sludge plant(Aeration tank + Secondary
clarifier) are 91.27% and 86.76% respectively.

6. REFERENCES

[1] Sastry, C.A., Hashim, M. A. and Agamuthu, P., Waste Treatment Plants, Narosa Publishing House, New Delhi, 1995
[2] Environmental Protection Agency, US, (1974), Process design manual for upgrading existing waste water treatment plants, Technology Transfer,
13-17.
[3] Kaul, S. N., Mukherjee, P. K., Sirowala, T. A Kulkarni, H. and Nandy, T. (1993) Performance evaluation of full scale waste water
treatment facility for finished leather industry, Journal of Environmental Science and Health, 28. 1277-1286.
[4] Storhaug, R. (1990) Performance stability of small biological chemical treatment plants, Water Science and Technology, 22. 275-282.
[5] Dakers, J. L., Cockburn, A.G.(1990), Rising the standard of operation of small sewage works , Water Science and Technology, 22.261-266.
[6] Kapur, A., Kansal, A., Prasad, R. K. and Gupta, S (1999) Performance evaluation of Sewage Treatment Plant and Sludge bio- methanation,
Indian Journal of Environmental Protection, 19. 96 - 100.
[7] APHA, AWWA, WPCF. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater. 20th edition, American Public Health
Association, Washington,DC, New York, USA, 1998.

ISSN: 0975-5462 7796