MAKERERE UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY

Fourth Year Project Report

PERFORMANCE OF BIOSAND FILTERS WITH

PRETREATMENT IN IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF RAW
WATER FOR DRINKING PURPOSES

Main Supervisor: MRS KULABAKO ROBINAH

Signature:

Co Supervisor: ENG. Dr. RUGUMAYO ALBERT

Signature:

Student: MASUBA IVAN

Reg. No: 03/U/314
Signature:
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS.....................................................................................................i
TABLE OF FIGURES..........................................................................................................i
LIST OF TABLES..............................................................................................................ii
CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION........................................................................................1
1.1 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY.......................................1
1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM.....................................................................2
1.3 OBJECTIVES........................................................................................................2
1.5 SCOPE...................................................................................................................3
CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW............................................................................4
2.1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................4
2.2 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS.....................................................................4
2.2.1 Raw Water Quality Standards............................................................................4
2.2.2 Drinking Water Standards..................................................................................4
2.3 BIOSAND FILTER TECHNOLOGY...................................................................5
2.3.1 Theory of BioSand Filtration..............................................................................6
2.3.2 Pre-Treatment of Raw Water Prior to BSF.........................................................7
2.3.3 Benefits of BioSand Filtration............................................................................9
2.3.4 Performance and Considerations of BioSand Filtration...................................10
CHAPTER 3 - MATERIALS AND METHODS..............................................................11
3.1 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................11
3.2 ACTIVITIES.......................................................................................................11
3.2.1 Field Visits........................................................................................................11
3.2.2 Construction of Biosand Filters........................................................................11
3.2.3 Water Sample Collection..................................................................................11
3.2.4 Experimental set-up..........................................................................................11
3.3 METHODS..........................................................................................................12
3.3.1 Water Sample Analysis.....................................................................................12
3.3.2 Filter Run..........................................................................................................13
3.4 DATA ANALYSIS.............................................................................................13
3.5 EXPECTED OUTPUT........................................................................................13
APPENDICES...................................................................................................................14
A1. ACTIVITY/TIME CHART...........................................................................14
A2. BUDGET ESTIMATES................................................................................15
REFERENCES..................................................................................................................16

2
 TABLE OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Map of Uganda ....................................................................................................3
Figure 2: Cross section of a typical biosand filter ..............................................................6
Figure 3: Shows the stages of raw water treatment...........................................................12

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2. 1: Drinking Water Standards.................................................................................5

Table 2. 2: The different forms of pre-treatment methods .................................................8
Table 2. 3: Performance of BioSand Filter ......................................................................11

3
 CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION OF STUDY

The demand for water is rapidly increasing at a rate three times faster than the world’s
population growth. About 1.2 billion people in the world are lacking safe water supplies,
were highlighted at the 3 rd
World Water Forum to confront some of the issues that
attribute to the current global water crisis. This Forum and many more in the past and
future have consistently emphasized the need for local communities, governments, and
non-government organizations to build on sustainable development and technologies to
improve water supply and sanitation needs in developing countries (Yung, 2003).

Currently 2.3 billion people suffer from diseases related to unclean water conditions,
resulting in 5 million deaths each year which is ten times the number of people killed in
wars (Kelly et al., 2004). To address this need, low cost and appropriate water treatment
technologies of have been developed and implemented world wide for example the
traditional slow sand filters, the rapid sand filters, biosand filters, purifier of water (PuR),
fabric filters, the use of coagulants and flocculants, sedimentation, and many more.
However of interest to this study, the biosand filter technology will be used to address the
above issues. It is an innovation on traditional slow sand water filters, having been
specifically designed for intermittent use because of its adaptability and sustainability in
developing communities. It can achieve excellent removals of waterborne pathogens, is
cheap to construct, requires little maintenance, and operates under gravity flow
conditions (ie. no pumping required during treatment). The technology has the ability to
improve community health and as a result increase economic productivity in rural
communities. Overall, it is an attractive technology for local governments on a limited
budget, as well as hospitals, humanitarian NGOs, disaster relief camps and individual
households (Cleary et al., 2004).

4
Recent studies show that there are 20,000 household size concrete Biosand Filters (BSF)
in over 30 developing countries. The BSF is a simple and robust design and is made from
readily available materials such as concrete, sand, and piping. However, in the case of
almost all projects, the BSF continues to require more research and address issues such as
the appropriateness of the design when applied to a developing country, cost, and the
technical problems that the BSF encounters under different environments (Yung, 2003).

Therefore this project is designed to assess the performance of Biosand filters with
pretreatment in improving the quality of raw water from different domestic supply
sources for drinking purposes.

1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

It has been observed that drinking water in rural and urban fringe areas in Uganda is
usually contaminated mainly because of poor sanitation around the water collection
points which have led to the spread of water-borne diseases (Rubarenzya, 1997).
Examples include: In 2004, cholera hit Kawempe and parts of central division of
Kampala claiming over 12 lives and according to the Ministry of Health Statistics, the
cholera epidemic claimed 119 lives in Uganda in 2002 plus the recent out break of
cholera in Kawempe and Makindye divisions which saw 147 patients admitted and ten
dead in Kampala (Mwanje, 2006). And because of this, there is a need to develop suitable
and less costly technologies that will safely treat contaminated waters to make them
suitable for drinking as given by the Uganda guidelines and WHO standards for drinking
water quality. This study therefore assesses the performance BSF technology with regard
to drinking water treatment. Considering that like all other slow sand filters, the BSFs can
only treat relatively clear water. Pretreatment will have to be included to cater for high
turbid waters.

1.3 OBJECTIVES
The aim of this project is to assess the performance of a biosand filter with pretreatment
in improving the quality of raw water for drinking purposes.
The specific objectives are to:

5
 i) Construct three full scale models of the biosand filters
ii) Identify the different domestic water supply sources and collect samples from
these sources.
iii) Determine the raw water quality from the selected water sources prior to
treatment and also to determine the quality of influent (pretreated water) and
effluent from the BSF.
iv) Compare the performance of BSF with or without pretreatment so as to justify or
otherwise the essence of the pretreatment stage.
v) Determine the filter run and hence make recommendations on the filter with or
without pretreatment.

1.5 SCOPE
This study will cover the analysis of water samples that will be taken from different
selected domestic water sources in Kampala (shaded red) as shown by the map in
Figure1. The selected water sources will be limited to springs, shallow wells and
collected rainwater from an iron roof house.

Figure 1: Map of Uganda - A Case Study: Kampala

6
 CHAPTER 2 - LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 INTRODUCTION
In many developing countries adequate sanitation facilities are scarce to non-existent
especially in the rural areas as well as in informal settlements in the peri-urban areas of
the cities. Sanitation issues increase when rural or urban areas become densely populated
without appropriate water treatment services and sewage is left untreated in the
community’s drinking water supply (Yung, 2003).

Therefore this study is aimed at assessing the performance of the biosand filter
technology with pretreatment in improving the quality of raw water for drinking
purposes.

2.2 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

World Health Organization (WHO) has defined guidelines and standards and has set the
maximum limits on levels of contaminants permitted in water for specific use.

2.2.1 Raw Water Quality Standards

The classification of raw waters can sometimes be useful in indicating under what
conditions a water source could be used or whether it’s inadvisable to use it at all for
public supply purposes. In any such classification, bacteriological content of water plays
a dominant part (Mulowooza, 2002).

2.2.2 Drinking Water Standards

The quality of drinking-water may be controlled through a combination of protection of
water sources, control of treatment processes and management of the distribution and
handling of the water. Guidelines must be appropriate for national, regional and local
circumstances, which require adaptation to environmental, social, economic and cultural
circumstances and priority setting (WHO, 2006).
The Guidelines outline a preventive management “framework for safe drinking-water” as
given in Table 2.1.

7
Table 2. 1: Drinking Water Standards (Source: WHO, 2006)
Parameter Units WHO,
Guidelines
Turbidity NTU 5
Temperature o
C -
Iron mg/l 0.3
Manganese mg/l 0.4
TDS mg/l 1000
Conductivity µS/cm -
Colour PtCo 5
pH ----- 6.5-8.5
DO ----- -
E. Coli cfu/100ml 0

2.3 BIOSAND FILTER TECHNOLOGY

The BioSand Filter (BSF) in figure 2 is a water filtering technology that was modified
from the traditional large-scale community slow sand filter to a small-scale filter for
household use. The BSF was developed in 1988 by Dr. David Manz of the University of
Calgary, Canada, in response to various issues that were brought to attention from
previous water treatment projects. The issues the BSF had to face were higher flow rates
than the traditional slow sand filter, effective pathogen removal, improve the taste and
appearance of the water, allow for intermittent flow, and still provide an appropriate
technology for the developing world. The filter can be produced locally anywhere in the
world because it is built using materials that are readily available. It is simply a concrete
container, enclosing layers of sand and gravel whose purpose is to eliminate sediments,
pathogens and other impurities from the water. Water is poured into the top of the filter
as needed, where a diffuser plate placed above the sand bed dissipates the initial force of
the water. Traveling slowly through the sand bed, the water then passes through several
layers of gravel and collects in a pipe at the base of the filter. At this point, the water is
propelled through plastic piping encased in the concrete exterior, and out of the filter, for
the user to collect (Yung, 2003).

8
Figure 2: Cross section of a typical biosand filter (Source: Manz, 2006)

2.3.1 Theory of BioSand Filtration

As with all slow sand filters, the removal of pathogens occurs in the BSF due to a
combination of biological and mechanical processes. When water is poured into the top
of the filter, the organic material it is carrying is trapped at the surface of the fine sand,
forming a biological layer (biofilm) or schmutzdecke. Over a period of two to three
weeks, micro-organisms colonize the schmutzdecke, where organic food and oxygen
derived from the water abounds. The biofilm involves a set of biological mechanisms in
which it is not easy to pinpoint a specific mechanism that attributes to the removal, as the
system operates in multiple biological and physical mechanisms. The biological
mechanisms include:
1. Predation: where micro-organisms within the Schmutzdecke consume bacteria and
other pathogens found in the water (i.e. bacteria grazing by protozoa)
2. Scavenging: detritus are scavenged by organisms such as, aquatic worms that are
found in the lower layers of the sand beds.
3. Natural death/inactivation: most organisms will die in a relatively hostile environment
due to increased competition. For example, it was found that E. Coli numbers decrease as
soon as they are introduced into the filter supernatant water.
4. Metabolic breakdown: is a step that accounts for partial reduction of the organic
carbon.

9
The physical mechanisms include:
1. Straining: particle capture mechanism where particles are too large to pass through the
media grains.
2. Adsorption: even though a physical process, it still accounts for organic matter
removals that were traditionally attributed to purely biological effects (Yung, 2003).

2.3.2 Pre-Treatment of Raw Water Prior to BSF

The sand within the BSF requires periodic cleaning because typically the Schmutzdecke
layer (biofilm) in the BSF continues to accumulate and grow until the pressure and flow
loss due to the top layer becomes excessive. The Schmutzdecke layer in the BSF is
cleaned every one to three months depending on the average level of turbidity. However,
during wet seasons, the turbidity is so high that the sand requires cleaning every two
weeks or even as frequent as daily cleaning. The amount of cleaning depends on
available head, sand particle distribution, the quality of influent, and the temperature of
the water. As the filter becomes more clogged and the flow rate decreases, the initial head
(5cm above the sand) in the outflow pipe decreases causing the overall head loss to
increase. As the media pore size decreases, the amount of particle capture increases.
Without cleaning the biofilm, build-up of particles will become excessive. An important
note is that the majority of the water turbidity could be eliminated in pre-treatment
processes preceding the BSF, whereby lowering the amount of suspended solids would
reduce the amount of cleaning of the biosand layer (Yung, 2003).
There are many forms of pre-treatment methods that are implemented world wide
however studies must be made on the appropriateness of these methods when
implemented in a developing country. Table 2.2 gives the different forms of pretreatment
methods. However, in this study to address the BSF’s problems with respect to high
turbidities clogging the BSF, a pre-treatment alternative is suggested. The pretreatment
preferred will be the use of a cloth filter. The cloth filter method is the cheapest with
other merits in view of the other pretreatment alternatives considered in Table 2.2.

10
Table 2. 2: The different forms of pre-treatment methods (Source: Herman et al., 1996)
Forms of Pretreatment Description/ Function Advantage Disadvantages
Physical forms of pretreatment methods
Roughing filter In this method, the water Effectively removes It would increase the
passes through one or two large particles and initial cost
roughing filters in series. excess iron and substantially due to
This allows most of the manganese increased filter
solids to be filtered out. materials.
Fiber/cloth filter Fiber filters contain spun Its cheap Easily contaminated
cellulose or rayon or cloth. It’s less larbour and needs cleaning
They remove suspended intensive. after every use.
sediment (or turbidity). Requires less training.
It effectively removes
large particles.
Carbon filtering Charcoal, a form of carbon It’s cheap. Slightly changes the
with a high surface area, Absorbs toxic colour of water and
absorbs many compounds compounds taste
including some toxic
compounds.
Reverse Osmosis It includes a pre-filter to Effective at removing It’s expensive.
remove sediment, an pathogens and large Unless membranes are
activated carbon filter to and small particles in well-maintained, algae
remove odors and taste, a water. and other life forms
semi-permeable membrane Removes odors and can colonise the
through which water flows taste. membranes.
under pressure
Ultrafiltration membranes They use polymer film with Effective at removing Needs pressure to
chemically formed large particles and drive the water
microscopic pores that can microorganism through the
be used in place of granular (pathogens) membrane.
media to filter water It’s expensive.
effectively without
coagulants.
pH Adjustment

11
Softeners (lime/Soda ash) If the water is acidic, lime Removes hardness- Expensive.
or soda ash is added to raise calcium and
the pH. magnesium
Coagulation and flocculation methods
Alum (Aluminum Sulphate) Alum removes dissolved Very effective in Expensive
salts by forming flocs of removing dissolved High concentrations
aluminum hydroxide. particles of alum are toxic to
humans
Iron Sulphate or Chloride This acts similarly to Alum Work over a large pH Leave brownish stains
by forming Iron (III) range compared to in water.
coagulant Alum Impart slight changes
It’s a needed trace in taste of water.
mineral in humans Not as effective as
Alum
Cationic and Other Polymers These act in conjunction Produce less settled Expensive.
with inorganic compounds waste. Block sand filter.
to remove arsenics in water. Don’t need water to be Work in very narrow
alkaline range of effective
doses.
Moringa Coagulant In this method, particles are Cheaper than the Limited to only
destabilized through chemical coagulants. Moringa growing
electrostatic means by the It’s independent of raw areas.
addition of a Moringa water pH, and it does
coagulant, thereby leading not affect the pH of the
to the formation of larger treated water.
flocs.
Sedimentation
Sedimentation in tank or This is the quiescent settling It’s a self cleansing It’s a slow process
basin of suspended particles with action. Requires a temporary
specific weight heavier than storage tank or basin
water.

2.3.3 Benefits of BioSand Filtration

Some of the main benefits of the BSF include:

12
1) Allows for intermittent flow and can be used only during the times when treatment is
required without any decrease in performance.
2) Pre-treatment methods or other treatment process can be used before or after the BSF.
3) BSF has a faster flow rate of 0.6 m/h (30L/hr), whereas the traditional slow sand
filtration rates are 0.1m/hr.
4) There is no surface scraping, media disposal or replacement, and very little
wastewater. The means of cleaning the Schmutzdecke is through a method called filter
harrowing. The sand within the filter does not need replacement and filter harrowing does
not produce a lot of sludge, therefore waste levels are kept at a minimal (Yung, 2003).

2.3.4 Performance and Considerations of BioSand Filtration

Taking into account that the BSF is versatile, and that biological treatment of the raw
water is very successful (see table 2.3 below), there are two major drawbacks of the
current BSF technology. These drawbacks include:
1. The BSF’s inability to handle high turbidity during wet seasons, where the high
amount of rain and runoff greatly increase the turbidity.
The high turbidity leads to increased particle deposition and decreased pore size. As a
result, frequent clogging of mainly the top layer of the sand occurs, reducing the flow rate
of the BSF greatly.
2. The initial cost of the BSF is also relatively high in most developing countries,
depending on the availability of the materials (Yung, 2003).

In view of the above, despite the relatively high initial cost of the BSF, it’s a one-time
cost and the maintenance is free. To address the issues of high turbidities clogging the
BSF, a cloth filter pretreatment method will be considered in this study for the reasons
clearly stated in section 2.3.2.
Table 2. 3: Performance of BioSand Filter (Source: Manz, 2006)
Water Quality Parameters Purification Effect
Faecal coliform More than 90% reduction
Protozoa and helminthes 100% removal
Organic and inorganic toxicants 50-90% removal
Iron and Manganese < 67% reduction

13
 Arsenic <47% reduction
Zinc, copper, cadmium and lead 95-99% removal
Suspended sediments Removes all

CHAPTER 3 - MATERIALS AND METHODS

3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter will cover the materials and methods to be used in this study. It will
highlight the activities and methods to be undertaken, details of which are presented in
the subsequent sections.

3.2 ACTIVITIES
The activities to be carried out will include; field visits, construction of the BSF,
collection of the water samples and the experimental set up.

3.2.1 Field Visits

The springs and the shallow wells of Kampala district will be visited and then identified
especially those near contaminated grounds.

3.2.2 Construction of Biosand Filters

Three BSFs will be constructed in this study in view of the different selected water
sources. The construction and installation of the BSFs will be according to the Concrete
Biosand Water Filter Construction Manual provided by Dr. David H. Manz of the
University of Calgary (Manz, 2006). Activities under this item will include construction
of a steel mould for the concrete filter body, diffusers and lids, sieve set, and preparation
of the filter media. After the construction of the biosand filters, they will be placed at the
Makerere technology centre for the experimental purposes.

3.2.3 Water Sample Collection

Water samples will be collected from the identified selected water sources taking into
consideration the seasonal variations.

14
3.2.4 Experimental set-up
The experiment will involve the pretreatment stage with the cloth filter and the final
treatment stage with the BSF as shown in the figure 3 below.

Raw water Pretreated Effluent

Cloth Filter BSF
Water
Figure 3: Shows the stages of raw water treatment

The cloth filter will be adapted as a form of pretreatment of raw water. This will involve
placing the cloth on an empty bucket. Raw water will then be filtered through the cloth to
remove suspended particles. After filtering, the cloth shall be rinsed in clean water and
then dried in sunlight. The pretreated water from the cloth filter will then be subjected to
the BSF from which the effluent will be collected.

3.3 METHODS
3.3.1 Water Sample Analysis
Samples of raw water, filtered water from the cloth filter and the effluent from the BSF
will be collected every twice a week and analyzed for physical, chemical and
bacteriological parameters as given in the subsequent sections.
Physical Parameters
Turbidity
The turbidity of raw water, pretreated water (influent) and treated water (effluent) will be
measured using the HACH DR 4000 spectrophotometer plus assorted glassware.
Colour
The HACH DR 4000 spectrophotometer plus assorted glassware will be used for water
sample colour.
pH and temperature
A pH meter will be used for pH measurement and temperature
The above physical parameter will be analyzed based on the Standard Methods for the
Examination of the Water and Wastewater (APHA et al., 1998).
Chemical Parameters

15
Iron and Manganese
The tests will be done according to the laboratory manual using the Atomic Absorption
Technique (Kruis, 1994).

Dissolved Oxygen
It will be determined by the use of a dissolved oxygen meter.
Electrical conductivity
This will be tested using the conductivity meter.
Bacteriological Analysis
This will involve the analysis of thermotolerant coliforms using the Membrane Filtration
Technique. Details of which are provided in the standard methods for the examination of
the water and wastewater (APHA et al., 1998).

3.3.2 Filter Run

The filter run will be determined by assessing the flow rate variations. The filter flow rate
will be known by determining the time it will take to fill a container of a known volume
with the effluent from the filter.

3.4 DATA ANALYSIS

Tables and graphs will be drawn in Microsoft excel sheets to give a comparison of the
quality of water that is raw water, pretreated water and the effluent from the biosand
filters. Data will also be analyzed to check if the quality of the effluent meets the WHO
and the national drinking water standards or requires further treatment.

3.5 EXPECTED OUTPUT

The expected outputs of the study will include:
i) An increased understanding of the performance of the BSF with pretreatment of
the selected studied water sources.
ii) And finally a report shall be prepared showing the outcome of the study.

16
 APPENDICES

A1. ACTIVITY/TIME CHART

Month (2006 /07) Sept Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
Activity                
Project Proposal                  
Literature Review                  
Construction of the biosand Filters                  
Field Visits and Collection of
Water Samples
Mid Presentation
Water Sample Tests                  
Analysis of Test Results                  
Report Writing
Final Presentation                  

17
A2. BUDGET ESTIMATES.

NO. OF
ITEM FILTERS COST/ FILTER TOTAL
Biosand Filter
Gravel, sand, Portland cement 3 40,000 120,000
Coarse gravel, fine gravel ,fine
sand 3 20,000 60,000
Plastic diffuser 3 5,000 15,000
wood lid 3 5,000 15,000
Miscellaneous
Jerry cans (20 litres) 3 3,000 9,000
Plastic pipe (half inch) 20,000
Plastic elbows 10,000
Buckets 3 5,000 15,000
Others lumpsum 50,000
Water Quality Analysis
Laboratory tests lumpsum 300,000
Consumables lumpsum 200,000
Stationery lumpsum 50,000
Field trips lumpsum 100,000
Form of Pretreatment
cloth filter 50,000
10% Contingency 111,480
TOTAL 1,114,800

18
REFERENCES
1. Yung, K. (2003). BioSand Filtration: Application in the Developing World.
Research project proposal, Civil Engineering, University of Waterloo.
2. Liam Kelly, Christina Sabatino, Joel Westberg (2004). An Investigation into the
Maintenance of a Biosand Filter. Research proposal, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Waterloo.
3. World Health Organization (2006) Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality FIRST
ADDENDUM TO THIRD EDITION Vol.1 Recommendations. Geneva,
Switzerland.130p.
4. Mwanje, R. (2006). Cholera: 147 admitted ten dead in Kampala. An article dated
December 5th 2006 published by the Daily Monitor Publishers, Kampala, Uganda.
5. Clearly, S. and Canham, E. (2004). BioSand Filtration Project Proposal. Faculty
of Engineering, University of Waterloo.
6. Mulowooza, R. (2002). An Investigation into Appropriate Technologies for
Swamp Water Treatment: Activated Carbon and Slow Sand Filtration. B Sc. Civil
Engineering Dissertation, Makerere University, Kampala, Uganda.
7. Rubarenzya, M. (1997). Adaptation of Domestic water Storage Units into Slow
Sand Filters. B Sc. Civil Engineering Dissertation, Makerere University,
Kampala, Uganda.
8. David H.Manz (2006) Review of Government Approvals for the Use of the
Biosand Water Filters Alberta, USA,46p.
9. APHA/AWWA/WEF (1998) Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and
Waste Water 20th Edition. American Public Health Association, American Water
Works Association and Water Environment Federation Publication. Washington
D.C, USA.1220p.
10. Kruis, F. (1994). Environment Chemistry Selected Analytical Methods. A
Laboratory Manual on environmental chemistry tests.

19
20