Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design Project 1
University of Mauritius
Faculty of Engineering
Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering
11/28/2014
Soomaree Keshav
1114132
Page 1 of 134
ID: 1114132
Student Group: 3A
Members
Soomaree Keshav
St Paul M.M Eldora
Ramanah R. Devi
Ramdewar P.Kumar
Ramdhonee A.K.R Mishra
Coordinator: Mr A Mudhoo
Page 2 of 134
ID: 1114132
Table of Contents
Table of Figures .......................................................................................................................................... 7
Acknowledgment ....................................................................................................................................... 8
List of abbreviations .................................................................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 10
1.1 Aim of the design ..................................................................................................................... 10
1.2 Environmental and social impact .......................................................................................... 10
1.3 The trend of treated water, demand and supply ................................................................. 11
1.4 Existing and Future market for treated water...................................................................... 12
1.5 Brief comparison and competitors......................................................................................... 12
1.6 Development of new process techniques ............................................................................. 12
1.6.1 Preliminary/Primary Treatment ................................................................................... 12
1.6.2 Secondary Treatment ....................................................................................................... 13
1.6.3 Tertiary Treatment ........................................................................................................... 13
1.7 The problem statement .............................................................................................................. 14
CHAPTER 2 : LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 15
2.1 Literature review for primary Treatment ............................................................................. 15
2.1.1 Oil-water separator Design ............................................................................................. 15
2.1.2 Equalisation tank .............................................................................................................. 15
2.2 Literature review for secondary Treatment ......................................................................... 16
2.2.1 Primary Clarifier .............................................................................................................. 16
2.2.2 Aerobic versus Anaerobic treatments ........................................................................... 17
2.2.3 The Aerobic Membrane Bioreactor ................................................................................ 20
2.3 Literature review for tertiary treatment................................................................................ 24
2.3.1 Filtration ............................................................................................................................ 25
2.3.2 Disinfection ....................................................................................................................... 28
2.4 Literature review on sludge thickening, digestion and gas handling .............................. 29
2.4.1 Thickening of sludge ....................................................................................................... 29
2.4.2 Sludge disposal................................................................................................................. 30
2.4.3 Sludge dewatering ........................................................................................................... 30
CHAPTER 3: PROCESS CONSIDERATION .................................................................................... 32
Page 3 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 4 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 5 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 6 of 134
ID: 1114132
Table of Figures
Table 1.1: Characteristic of waste water
Table 4.1: Summary of mass balance for the sewage flow over the system
Table 9.1: The control of liquid level for the whole plant
Table 9.2: The control of flow rate for the whole plant
Page 7 of 134
ID: 1114132
Acknowledgment
I wish to thank Mr. Ackmaz Mudhoo, our design coordinator, for guiding us and giving
us all the possible help that he could. I am thankful to him since he was always present
when we needed him and was here to direct us to the right way.
I am also grateful to Mr. Arvinda Ragen, our program coordinator, who ensured that
we did not lack anything with regards to the project and he did his best to give us all
the facilities we needed.
A special thank goes to all my group members; St Paul, Ramanah, Ramdewar and
Ramdhonee, who actively participated in the design project to make it successful.
I would also like to thank Dr. Dinesh Soorup, the head of department, who responded
positively to all the problems faced by us.
Page 8 of 134
ID: 1114132
List of abbreviations
OWS: Oil Water Separator
Abs: Absolute
Q: Influent Flowrate
X: MLSS concentration
Page 9 of 134
ID: 1114132
CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION
1
http://www.defimedia.info/news-sunday/nos-news/item/8181-news-in-
brief.html?tmpl=component&print=1
2 http://statsmauritius.gov.mu (2007)
Page 10 of 134
ID: 1114132
The Environmental Protection Agency was established in 1993 to license, regulate and
control activities for the purposes of environmental protection. In Section 60 of the
Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1992, it is stated that "the Agency may, and shall
if so directed by the Minister, specify and publish criteria and procedures, which in the
opinion of the Agency are reasonable and desirable for the purposes of environmental
protection, in relation to the management, maintenance, supervision, operation or use
of all or specified classes of plant, sewers or drainage pipes vested in or controlled or
used by a sanitary authority for the disposal of any sewage or other effluent to any
waters ". Criteria and procedures in relation to the treatment and disposal of
wastewater are being published by the Agency in a number of manuals under the
general heading: 'Wastewater Treatment Manuals'. Where criteria and procedures are
published by the Agency, a sanitary authority shall, in the performance of its functions,
have regard to them. 3
3 http://www.gov.mu
Page 11 of 134
ID: 1114132
flushing toilets, washing clothes, washing the car and watering the garden is not
sustainable (Laakkoken et al., 2010)4.
New technologies such as moving bed bioreactors and submerged aerated filters are
starting to replace the traditional activated sludge systems due to their cost-
effectiveness, smaller footprints, use of recycled plastics for media, and lower power
consumption. The ability to upgrade existing systems with minimal new construction
provides for a low-impact solution. For residential wastewater systems, which require
minimal maintenance, do not require mechanical blowers and feature very low power
consumption. These are becoming a popular solution.
The Salsnes filter uses a removable fine mesh screen attached to an inclined moving belt
of wire cloth to sieve solids from wastewater simultaneously filtering the water and
dewatering the solids. The belt rotates to an “air knife” for self-cleaning with
compressed air to remove the solids to a sludge compartment. In one installation, the
Salsnes filter has proven to reduce influent BOD and TSS by 40% and 65% respectively
(McElroy, 2012)5. Performance depends on the size distribution of influent solids and
Page 12 of 134
ID: 1114132
the size of the mesh selected for the filter screen which typically ranges from 100 to 500
microns (Sutton et al. 2008)6 although a 1000 micron mesh screen was installed at the
Daphne Utilities WWTF. The screen surface hydraulic loading rate is an important
factor affecting screen performance. A pressure transmitter varies belt speed to
maintain liquid level at near the overflow elevation to assure effective flow distribution.
The belt is backwashed to remove fats, oils, and grease. Filters are available in sizes
with capacities up to 2200 gpm for free standing units and 3500 gpm for units installed
in a concrete channel. Multiple units may be installed in parallel to achieve the desired
capacity. A dewatering screw press is available to transport the solids, and when used
can produce sludge at up to 27% solids (Sutton 2008).
6 Sutton, P. et al. “Rotating Belt Screens: An Attractive Alternative for Primary Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater” WEFTEC 2008.
7 Schuler, S. “Operating Experience with Rotating Membrane Bioreactors”, Water World, March 2009.
8 Meera, V., et al., “Microwave UV Comes to Texas,” WEFTEC Proceedings, 2010
Page 13 of 134
ID: 1114132
pH 7.40
Temperature (0C) 29
9Black and Veatch Corporation, “White’s Handbook of Chlorination and Alternative Disinfectants,”
5thed., Wiley, 2010
11 Newton, J., “Disinfection Utilizing an Innovative Microwave UV System,” WEFTEC Proceedings, 2009
Page 14 of 134
ID: 1114132
The raw sewage will enter the STP from a complex network of pipes and it is assumed
that the site requirements needed for the construction of the plant is available. Also,
some amount of oil is assumed to be entering in the effluent.
The AIP Oil-Water Separator is highly efficient and can remove up to 99.9% of oil
droplets 20 microns or larger. It has a compact design, requires smaller footprint and
space. It has also almost zero operation and maintenance cost with zero power
consumption. Furthermore, no chemical cleaning of the media is required as the media
can be cleaned by just high pressure water jet.
Sewer line is gravity-fed, and is likely to be at considerable depth below the ground
level. Hence, it is effective not to place the tank too deep; otherwise it will demand very
deep excavations and expensive construction. It also renders the maintenance and
cleaning processes very hazardous and costly. The equalization tank is used only for
Page 15 of 134
ID: 1114132
buffering the daily fluctuations in the sewage flow quantity and must be of sufficient
capacity to hold the peak time inflow volumes, else the tank will overflow. Peak time
volumes are site-specific and variable. In the case of residential complexes, there is a
distinct morning major peak when all residents are using their kitchens, bathrooms and
toilets, followed by a minor peak in the late evening hours. In addition, the sewage
generation may be heavier during the weekends. In a typical residential complex, an
equalization tank with a capacity to hold 4-6 hours of average hourly flow should be
adequate. (Ananth S. Kodavasal, 2011)
The main function of primary sedimentation is firstly to reduce the load on the
biological treatment units and to increase sludge solids concentration in sludge
thickening. For efficient design and operation, primary clarifiers should remove 50 to 65
percent of the suspended solids and 25 to 40 percent of the BOD. The clarification tanks
are designed to provide shorter detention time and a higher rate of surface loading.
Efficient grit removal is very important at plants since it prevents abrasion and wear of
mechanical equipment, deposition of grit in pipes and also accumulation in aerators
and anaerobic digesters (Marcos von Sperling et aL, 2005).
Page 16 of 134
ID: 1114132
impurities (COD < 1000 ppm) impurities (COD > 1000 ppm)
and for and easily
Applications
wastewater that are difficult to biodegradable wastewater
biodegrade e.g. food and
etc. alcohol
Page 17 of 134
ID: 1114132
Foot-Print
Relatively large Relatively small and compact
Capital
Investment Relatively high Relatively low with pay back
Reactors.
Page 18 of 134
ID: 1114132
No methane produced.
Digested sludge has lower solid content, thus volume of sludge to be dewatered
is much larger.
Reduces production of landfill gas which when broken down aerobically releases
methane into atmosphere.
Page 19 of 134
ID: 1114132
2.2.3.1 Pre-treatment
Membranes are very sensitive to damage with coarse solids such as plastics, leaves, rags
and fine particles like hair from wastewater. In fact, a lack of good pre-
treatment/screening has been recognized as a key technical problem of MBR operation
(Santos and Judd, 2010a). For this reason fine screening is always required for
protecting the membranes. Typically, screens with openings range between 1 mm (HF
Page 20 of 134
ID: 1114132
modules) to 3 mm (FS modules) are common in most facilities. However, data reported
by Frechen et al. (2007) for 19 MBR.
Relaxation and back flushing (only for HF) are commonly applied for 30–130 seconds
every 10–25 min of filtration (Judd, 2010). Frequent maintenance cleanings (every 2–7 d)
are also applied to maintain membrane permeability. However, these pre-set fixed
values of key parameters, based on general background or the recommendations of
membrane suppliers, lead to under-optimized systems and results in loss of permeate
and high energy demand. Recently, several authors have proposed a feedback control
system for finding optimal operating conditions. For example, Smith et al. (2006) have
successfully validated a control system for back flush initiation by permeability
monitoring. This system automatically adjusts the back flushing frequency as a function
of the membrane fouling, which results in a reduction of up to 40% in the back flushing
water required. Ferrero et al. (2011) have used a control system at semi-industrial pilot
scale trials based on monitoring membrane permeability, which achieved an energy
saving between 7 to 21% with respect to minimum aeration recommended by
membrane suppliers.
Page 21 of 134
ID: 1114132
decreasing SMP production (Trussel et al., 2006). Conversely, high solids concentration
results in a higher viscosity of the microbial suspension (Rosenberger et al., 2002b), as a
consequence, higher concentrations decrease air sparging efficiency and oxygen transfer
rate to the microorganisms, resulting in a higher energy demand as well as increasing
membrane fouling and the risk of membrane clogging. Given all of these factors, for
economical reasons, most full-scale facilities are designed for MLSS range of 8-12 g/l
and SRT range of 10-20 d (Asano et al., 2006; Judd, 2010).
Mitsubishi-Rayon
Kubota (Japan) Zenon (Canada)
(Japan)
Number of installations 1538 374 374
Membrane FS HF HF
Vertical Horizontal Vertical
Configuration
immersion immersion immersion
Pore size (μm) 0.4 0.1/0.4 0.04
Material Chlorinated PE PE PVDF
Module size (m2) 0.8 105 31.6
Backpulse and
Cleaning method Relax Relax
relax
Cleaning
1/60 2/12 0.5/15
frequency(min/min)
Chlorine
Recovery method Chlorine backwash Chemical soak
backwash
Energy usage for membrane aeration is a significant operating cost for any membrane
bioreactor facility (Yoon et al., 2004) calculated the total variable operational cost of
MBR by summing the decreasing sludge-treatment cost and increasing aeration cost(See
fig 2). Since minimized sludge production implies maximized aeration cost, and vice
versa, they considered the existence of an optimum point between these two extreme
cases, where the total operational cost is minimized. They concluded that for reasonable
ranges of HRT and MLSS sludge treatment cost overwhelms aeration cost, so the most
adequate strategy for MBR cost reduction would be maintenance of low sludge
production conditions.
Page 22 of 134
ID: 1114132
Fig 1 Aeration demand for biodegradation of organic matters as a function of target MLSS and
HRT. Flow rate and COD of influent were 1000m3 day–1 and 400 mg/L, respectively (Source:
from Yoon SH et al., 2004)
Despite its relative youth, MBR technology has developed over a decade to a mature
product available for all sizes of application, in domestic, municipal, or industrial
sector. Further improvement of the process will increase its cost-effectiveness and MBR
technology is expected to play a key role for wastewater treatment in the next years, in
Europe as well as worldwide. To date, European countries with the highest number of
full-scale MBR plants are England, France, Germany, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
MBR markets are expected to open in other countries as well: in dry southern states like
Spain, Greece, and Italy, due to their water shortages, and in Central and Eastern
European countries (such as Hungary, Poland, Bulgaria, etc.) that will be obligated to
develop their wastewater treatment technologies and adapt them to the standards and
environmental legislation of the European Union.
Page 23 of 134
ID: 1114132
Fig 2 Relative cost decrease of Kubota membranes and MBR systems (Source: Kennedy et al.,
2005)
Page 24 of 134
ID: 1114132
2.3.1 Filtration
Filtration is a physical and usually the final step in the solids removal process in a plant
with no advanced treatment. Filters like screens are used to remove about 99.5 percent
of solids which comprise mainly floc and associated minerals but of a more particulate
size, some BOD, nutrients, heavy metals and some coliforms in water. . There are four
mechanisms which form part of the filtration process namely straining, adsorption,
biological action, and absorption. Each filter is equipped with a sequential automatic
wash system known as filter backwash. A sensor will detect the level of water after
filtration. After which a backwash pump takes part of the filtered water and re-
circulates it through the media and porous plate. This washes the filter media and
solids are aspired by a pump which goes to a backwash tank.
Page 25 of 134
ID: 1114132
Biomat is a thick layer which forms part of the filter ecosystem. This layer is formed
near the surface of the filter. This layer contains bacteria which consume particles in the
wastewater. In turn, protozoa feed on the bacteria and help prevent the biomat from
becoming so dense that it clogs the filter. This balance between the various life forms
and the physical and chemical processes that take place in the sand filter results is
extremely efficient in wastewater treatment requiring minimal operation and
maintenance. Eventually, the biomat becomes clogged, and the top layer of sand needs
to be raked or removed as part of regular filter maintenance.
Sand filters cost less to construct in rural areas than centralized treatment
systems.
Page 26 of 134
ID: 1114132
Item Requirement
Raking Check every 6 months. If drainage time between doses has increased
significantly, rake top 3 in. (for surface filters only).
Replacement Skim media when heavy incrustations occur. Add new media when
depth falls below 24 in. Rest when ponded continuously. Replace top
2-3 in. media when surface ponds more than 12 in. deep. Rest while
alternate unit in operation (60 days).
The filter design and local costs for labour and materials are dependent on exact costs
for sand filter construction, operation, and maintenance. Costs for pre-treatment and
additional treatment and disposal also need to be factored in when calculating the
entire system costs.
The filters can be constructed or assembled onsite using local labour and materials as
construction of the sand filter units themselves usually is economical. Land and media
costs are two most significant factors that affect the cost of sand filter treatment. In areas
where media is expensive or needs to be hauled a long distance, costs are much higher.
Page 27 of 134
ID: 1114132
Operating costs include electricity used by the pump, and the cost for inspections and
maintenance.
2.3.2 Disinfection
Disinfection is normally the last step before final disposal. This practice removes and
reduces about 99.5 percent of microorganisms and waterborne pathogenic organisms
that would otherwise be transmitted to human beings. Protection of public water
supplies, fish and aquatic life, irrigation and agricultural waters is ensured by
disinfection. The most common types of disinfection are UV radiation, halogens
compounds like chlorine, chlorine dioxide, bromine, sodium hypochlorite and use of
ozone.
2.3.2.1 UV radiation
This method is a highly effective means of disinfection but has no residual capacity
which means re-growth of microorganisms is possible. The efficiency of UV radiation
depends on the quality and temperature of water, turbidity, flow rate and also UV
transmittance. UV disinfection is now becoming an economically competitive
alternative to chlorination and ozonation and does not generate toxic or genotoxic by
products. It is a physical process that instantaneously neutralizes microorganisms as
they pass by ultraviolet lamps submerged in the effluent.
2.3.2.2 Ozone
Air or oxygen-generated ozone is a highly effective disinfectant. It is
normally generated on-site by electrical discharge and is thus energy intensive. Ozone
has the same effects as UV radiation means it has no residual effects.
2.3.2.3 Chlorination
Chlorine is the most widely used disinfectant in water and wastewater treatment. It is
used to destroy pathogens, control nuisance microorganisms, and for oxidation.. It is,
however, a highly toxic substance and recently concerns have been raised over handling
practices and possible residual effects of chlorination.
Page 28 of 134
ID: 1114132
2.4.1.2 Flotation
Dissolved air flotation is used for thickening of sludge that originates from suspended
growth biological treatment processes. It involves the introduction of air into a sludge
solution that is being held at an elevated pressure. When the solution is depressurized,
Page 29 of 134
ID: 1114132
the dissolved air is released as finely divided bubbles which attach to the suspended
solids. The floating solids are collected by a skimming mechanism similar to a scum
skimming system. (Metcalf & Eddy, 2003)
2.4.1.3 Centrifugation
Centrifuges are used to thicken and dewater waste activated sludges. They involve the
settling of sludge particles under the influence of centrifugal forces. Two basic types of
centrifuges are the solid bowl and the imperforate basket.
Page 30 of 134
ID: 1114132
available are: 1) vacuum filtration, 2) centrifuge, 3) belt filter press, 4) filter press, 5)
drying beds and 6) lagoons.
i.Vacuum filtration
In this method, vacuum is applied downstream to the filter media, causing the liquid
phase to move through the porous media, thus the separation of solid particles from
water. The vacuum filter consists of a horizontal cylindrical drum that rotates which is
partially submerged in a mat of conditioned sludge and there is a porous media that is
covered on the surface of the drum.
Page 31 of 134
ID: 1114132
3.1.1 Screenings
Table 3.1: Manually versus mechanically cleaned screen bar.
Inexpensive Expensive
Inefficient Efficient
Usually found in small plants Used in both small and large plants
Page 32 of 134
ID: 1114132
The mechanically cleaned screen bar is chosen because even though it is expensive, it is
the one that involves less labor as well as is more efficient in terms of removal of
screenings. It has been used at the head works of most medium to large wastewater
treatment plants for the past fifty or more years. The fact that the sewage plant would
be operated continuously, automated units would be favorable for us.
Depth (mm) 25 - 80 25 - 80
The medium screening mechanical screen bar that has been chosen has bar spacing of
25mm. Two medium screening will be used; of which one will be continuously in use
and the remaining one is kept as spare in case of breakdown. Also, the medium screen
bars will be followed by fine mechanically cleaned screen bars of bar spacing 6mm.
Two fine screening will be used; one of them to be continuously in use while the
remaining one is kept as spare.
Page 33 of 134
ID: 1114132
the need for more space and an increase in construction costs. It provides sufficient
storage volume to permit a non-uniform flow of waste water to be collected, mixed and
pumped forward to a treatment system at a uniform rate. For the design, the flow
entering the balancing tank is by gravity.
Page 34 of 134
ID: 1114132
1. A higher level of treatment which may make a smaller drain field possible,
2. May work when the soil or ground water level will not support a standard septic
system,
3. Help reduce environmental impacts,
4. Helps to protect valuable water resources,
5. Higher efficiency regarding removal of nutrient/COD/BOD,
6. Lower capital cost and rapid recovery of the cost due to high efficiency and good
quality of product,
7. It provides much more sludge than anaerobic systems which is important to our
design because it includes sludge treatment with biogas removal,
By comparison between anaerobic and aerobic systems, anaerobic digestion has more
benefits for consuming less energy to achieve good BOD and COD removal, for the
production of energy as methane which can be used for heating purposes and less
sludge production. However, anaerobic digestion works best for wastewater with COD
above 4000 mg/L, which is not the case with the design COD which is below
1000mg/L, thus aerobic system is chosen. Furthermore, solids that form anaerobically
do not flocculate well, also its effluent needs further treatment which is not economical
and such systems are susceptible to small changes in temperature and pH, thus the
need to control these parameters. There is nutrients removal like nitrogen and
phosphorus and the possibility of yielding methane from waste activated sludge in
aerobic systems making it a better choice than anaerobic systems (Metcalf and Eddy,
2003). However, the activated sludge process differs in two ways:
Page 35 of 134
ID: 1114132
Fine bubble diffusers, specially ceramic diffusers due to its resistivity to chemical and
biological fouling, are chosen for its high oxygen transfer and aeration efficiencies;
therefore satisfying the demand of oxygen.
Page 36 of 134
ID: 1114132
(Negulescu, 2011). Rapid sand filter are preferred compared to slow filter as back
washing occurs rapidly and it has a high filtration rate of about 150 to 200 million
gallons of water per acre per day.
3.4 Disinfection
The most frequent disinfectants are chlorine, ozone and UV rays (See literature review).
UV rays, being highly effective for pathogen sterilization, are also very expensive.
Ozone is highly toxic but not readily available. Considering the effects and
inconveniences of UV rays and ozone, Chlorination is chosen, even though it is
somehow toxic as it increases the total dissolved solids in the effluent, it is the less
expensive one (Hung et al. 2012). It must be noted that due to the selection of the
membrane bioreactor in our system, which has a very high initial cost, we need to
minimize the cost for our other units.
3.5.2 Stabilization
Anaerobic digestion is the process chosen for the stabilization of sludge since it is a
closed system which eliminates odors. Even though it involves a high capital costs, the
recovery of methane and thus the production of energy offset the high operational costs
Page 37 of 134
ID: 1114132
of the energy intensive aerobic process. This energy can be used for the plant’s own use
decreasing the dependency on external sources. The digested sludge can then be used
as fertilizers or a fuel source. Although a large detention time is required and therefore
a large reactor, the positive outcome is the destruction of pathogens and at the same
time reducing about 50 to 65 % of the total solids mass. Methane captured can be piped
to boilers to generate electricity and produce hot water which can be used for heating
purposes.
Page 38 of 134
ID: 1114132
3.7.3 Dewatering
The aim of the dewatering equipment is to achieve fifty percent by dry weight solids
content and centrifuge equipment can produce the required percent. In addition, its
capital cost is low when compared to other methods, there is minimization of odor as it
is an enclosed unit and requires little supervision; thus continuous solid bowl centrifuge
is chosen since it is more suited for high solid content and used for medium and large
plants compared to imperforated basket centrifuge. Filter press has many
inconveniences such as mechanical complexity; high chemical and labor costs and
limitation on filter cloth life while vacuum filtration has low operational costs but
higher initial costs and land requirements.
Page 39 of 134
ID: 1114132
Table 4.1: Summary of mass balance for sewage flow over the system
Bar
Oil-water Sand filter
Influent screens
separator Eq. tank to Primary MBR to
Stream to
to to Primary Clarifiers sand
to disinfectio
Oil-water clarifiers to MBR filter
Bar screens Eq. tank n unit
separator
COD
68,880 68,880 68,880.0 69,091 38,000 1221 1221
(kg/d)
BOD
21,490 21,490 12,105 21,491 9,671 2800 1148
(kg/d)
NH3-N
1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 1,750 140.0 140
(kg/d)
NO3—N
1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400 623.1 623
(kg/d)
Coliforms
(MPN 420,000 420,000 420,000 420,000.0 420,000 420,000 420,000
100mL–1)
Total
114,170 114,170 114,170 98,020 56,509 6,174 3634.5
Page 40 of 134
(kg/d)
ID: 1114132
Table 4.1: Summary of mass balance for sewage flow over the system [continued from table 4.1]
Disinfection
Sludge
Streams unit MBR Primary Thickener
Digester to Sludge
clarifier to to Sludge
to Irrigation to thickener Dewatering output
Thickener Digester
Unit
authority
NH3-N
140.00 490 490 490 135.45 140.00
(kg/d)
NO3—N
623.12 903 903 903 490 623.12
(kg/d)
Coliforms
(MPN 420 - - - - 420
100mL–1)
Page 41 of 134
ID: 1114132
CH4 5069.7
CO2 2421.33
H2O 52.8065
H2S 0.1604
Note: Refer to appendix 1 for more detail about the biogas balances
Page 42 of 134
ID: 1114132
number of channels 2
Width of channel 8m
Number of bars 12
Width of bar 10 mm
Thickness of bar 50 mm
Page 43 of 134
ID: 1114132
Number of bars 48
Width of bar 10 mm
Thickness of bar 50 mm
Page 44 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 45 of 134
ID: 1114132
Liquid depth 7m
Diffuser submergence 7m
SRT 10 days
𝐾𝑔
BOD vol. loading 0.938
𝑚3 . 𝑑𝑎𝑦
F/M 0.3
Page 46 of 134
ID: 1114132
5.3.2 Chlorination
Number of tank 4
Depth 1.8 m
Breadth 2.2m
Length 91.6 m
5.3.3 Thickener
Number of thickeners 2
Page 47 of 134
ID: 1114132
Diameter (m) 15 m
Page 48 of 134
ID: 1114132
Number of tank 1
MATURATION TANK
Number of tank 1
Page 49 of 134
ID: 1114132
4 Scrappers in PST + 4
Primary treatment sludge pump + -5604.48 14.37
8 dosing pump
Pumps
Tertiary treatment -25.6 4.57
Thickening + 2 pumps+ 2
-2693.96 6.90
scrappers
Page 50 of 134
ID: 1114132
CHP +17185 48
Net electricity to be taken from CEB 18623 52
Energy is the measure of the use of electricity over time. It is measured in kilowatt-
hours (kWh). One kWh is a kW used for 1 hour. The minus sign (-) indicates electricity
consumption whereas the plus sign (+) refers to electricity production. Energy balances
can be calculated theoretically, based on the running time and power consumption of
the equipment.
Page 51 of 134
ID: 1114132
7.2 Screening
Hazards Causes Consequences Preventive measures
Can result in health problems Provide correct
such as nausea, nerve storage, increase
irritations in respiratory tracts, frequency of removal
Inappropriate mouth or eyes and may cause and disposal
Obnoxious
or extended breathing difficulties,
odors
storage of sneezing, swelling of nasal
and vermin membranes, tearing of the eyes
screenings
etc.
Page 52 of 134
ID: 1114132
Low velocity
through the
rack
Automatic
rake action
not frequents
enough.
Remove flow
Excessive Low irregularities, reslope
grit velocities in the floor, rake the
accumulation the channel channel and flush
frequently.
Eliminate the
Jammed obstruction
Obstruction
raking
still on the
mechanism
screen
will not reset
Screen not
Broken chain, Inspect the rakes,
being raked
cable or limit switches and chains,
but motor is
switch replace them if needed.
working
Page 53 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 54 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 55 of 134
ID: 1114132
7.7 Thickener
Parameter Deviatio Possible Consequence Safeguar
Hazards Action
s n causes s d
Major Gases High Odor 1. Discomfort Safety 1. Limit the
spills of such as Spreadin and mask are access to
liquor or methane g psychological provided such places
cake and HsS problems
sludge: related to bad
smells of the
waste
Risks of 2. Contain 2. Check
slippery the spills valves and
surfaces within an pipe works
earth bund for leaks
and absorb
the contained
liquid using
additional
sand / earth
Page 56 of 134
ID: 1114132
7.8 Digester
Deviati Possible Consequen Safeguar
Hazards Parameters Action
on causes ces d
Safety Flammable High Formati Risks of fire 1. Avoid 1. Obey all
problems gases on of or being safety
Flamma explosion exposed instructions
ble gases to this concerning
unit for a entry into
long confined
period of spaces e.g.
time; check
atmosphere for
oxygen or
poisonous
gases,
Page 57 of 134
ID: 1114132
2. Wear 2. use
personal respiratory
protective protection
equipmen equipment if
ts and needed,
Chemical
resistant
Clothing
3. have a co-
worker stand
guard in case
of need for
help
Page 58 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 59 of 134
ID: 1114132
As the solid content of the sludge is increased, a small fraction of the liquid is removed.
This liquid is overflowed from the thickener. It is returned to the inlet of the primary
wastewater treatment plant for further treatment.
8.4.2.2 Composting
It is the biological decomposition of organic constituents in the water. Compost is
made by mixing sludge with a bulking agent to ensure that the mixture can be aerated
for an accelerated aerobic degradation process; and thus drying it. The resultant
product can be applied on land. (Metcalf & Eddy, 2003)
It is a thermal treatment process in which the sludge (or biomass) is heated under
pressure to a temperature of350–500 °C in the absence of oxygen. In this process, the
sludge is converted into char, ash, pyrolysis oils, water vapor, and combustible gases.
Part of the solid and/or gaseous products of the pyrolysis process are incinerated and
used as heating energy in the pyrolysis process.
Gasification
Page 60 of 134
ID: 1114132
This involves the breakdown of dried sludge (or biomass) in an ash and in combustible
gases at temperatures usually about 1000 °C in an atmosphere with a reduced amount
of oxygen.
Pyrolysis and gasification of sewage sludge have some potential advantages compared
to incineration. One advantage is that the conversion of the combustible gases of both
systems into electrical power can be achieved more efficiently (Metcalf & Eddy, 2003).
8.5 BIOGAS
Float: The liquid level is In When water is at its maximum level, the
detected and converted receiving valve at receiving chamber will close,
onto an electric signal to causing the opening of the storage tank
Page 61 of 134
ID: 1114132
Ultrasonic level measuring Equalizing When the maximum level has been
devices: A pulse of tank reached, the valve will be closed,
ultrasonic wave is causing water to be stored in preceding
In rapid
generated which bounce units.
gravity
off the liquid surface. The
sand filters
echo and echo’s travel time
is detected and calculated
respectively, which is then
converted to a level In As the maximum water surface has
measurement. anaerobic been reached, the sludge inflow to
digester digester and outflow of gravity
thickener close. This will cause the
primary and WAS to be stored in the
spare primary sedimentation tank.
an optical sludge level In the whereby the sludge level blanket should
detector is used which Gravity be measured, taking into consideration
determines the thickener its corrosivity and sticking process,
concentration of sludge
through the intensity of
light
Page 62 of 134
ID: 1114132
Digested sludge
towards
centrifuge
Centrate towards
the primary units As the flow increases or
decreases, a signal is sent such
Dry polymer
that the inlet valve adjusts itself
from hopper to
to the preset flow rate.
dissolving tank
anaerobic
digester
RAS
(Return
Page 63 of 134
ID: 1114132
Activated
Sludge)
Thermocouple: It MBR In low or high temp the mean cell residence time
operates on the can be raised or decreased accordingly.
Aeration
principle that
tank
current flows in a
circuit made of two Chlorination Any change in temp will cause the flow/amount
different metals of chlorine to be added to change
when the two
electrical junctions Anaerobic If the temp of the digester goes down, part of the
between the metals digestion digester contents is recycled to the heaters.
are at different
temperatures.
9.4 Control of pH
The control of pH is an important parameter to achieve the norms for irrigation and to
be within the range, chemicals are added to control pH.
Page 64 of 134
ID: 1114132
Page 65 of 134
ID: 1114132
all biogas produced will be used in the plant itself for providing energy for
pumps and other equipments(Calculation to be done in appendix)
Page 66 of 134
ID: 1114132
1) For sludge cake, total sludge cake = 14,492.71 kg/d (from mass balance)
= Rs 2,845,752.4
= Rs 181,821,085.30/ Rs 25,611,771.6
= 7.0
The objective of the project was to design a wastewater treatment plant which can treat
domestic wastewater with the inlet parameters as stated in the design statement in the
introduction.
The wastewater received at the head works undergoes oil-water separation, screening,
grit removal as preliminary treatment, primary sedimentation, activated sludge process
for the destruction of many of the inlet parameters such as BOD, COD and also
nitrification and de-nitrification and the most important treatment in the plant being the
disinfection unit where 99.8 percent of the total coliforms count were deactivated. All
these treatment units were necessary for the treated wastewater to meet the standards
for effluent regulations for irrigation. Mauritius, being a water-stressed country can
Page 67 of 134
ID: 1114132
benefit on the re-use of wastewater such that it does not have to utilize fresh water for
irrigation and this water can be used for other purposes.
Almost all the waste within the treatment unit was analyzed, with sludge production
being the major waste. The sludge was treated by anaerobic digestion after being
thickened. The choice for this treatment was the recovery of energy to be used for the
plant, thus reducing the electricity bill.
An energy analysis was performed for the consumption of electricity for the different
equipments in the treatment plant with 22% taken up by the activated sludge process,
while on the other side; energy is being generated by the biogas. The percentage of
energy generated is 48, that is; requiring only 52 percent for the operation of the plant.
The equipments used in the treatment plant have to be purchased and the tanks,
chambers and other buildings constructed making up the capital investment together
with the installation, piping and other costs. The income for the plant comes from the
sales of wastewater for irrigation and sludge cake to power station and thus the range
for payback period is about 7 years.
Hence we can conclude that the wastewater treatment plant can provide an
environmentally friendly, cost effective production of the product and most probably
socially acceptable.
References
Albertson,O.E ,1991,Dewatering Municipal Wastewater sludges, Noyes Data
Corporation Publications
Ananth S. Kodavasal, 15 August 2011. The STP Guide – Design, Operation and
Maintenance.(Pg 33, 34) Available at: http://kspcb.kar.nic.in/STP-Guide-web(Lo).pdf
APHA (1992). Standard Methods for the examination of Water and Wastewater,
18th ed. AmericanPublic Health Association/Water Environment Federation,
Washington, DC, USA.
Page 68 of 134
ID: 1114132
Asano, T.; Burton, F., Leverenz, H.; Tsuchinashi, R. & Tchobanoglous, G. (2006).
Water Reuse:Issues, Technologies and Applications. Metcalf & Eddy/AECOM. ISBN:
978-0-07-145927-3. 1st ed.
Ayala, D.F.; Ferre, V. & Judd. S.J. (2011). Membrane life estimation in full-scale
immersedmembrane bioreactors. Journal of Membrane Science (in press), doi:
10.1016/j.memsci. 2011.03.013.
BCC. (2011). Membrane bioreactors: global markets. BCC Report MST047C.
March 2011.
Berlinwasser Wastewater Basic and Advanced Training Manual Course, Vol 16,
polsh J of Environment
Brepols, C.; Dorgeloh, E.; Frechen, F.-B.; Fuchs, W. ; Haider, S.; Joss, A.; de Korte,
K. ; Ruiken, C.; Schier, W.; van der Roest, H.; Wett, M. & Wozniak, T. (2008). Upgrading
and retrofitting of municipal wastewater treatment plants by means of membrane
bioreactor (MBR) technology. Desalination, Vol. 231, No. 1-3, pp. 20-26.
Chang, I.S.; Le-Clech, P.; Jefferson, B. & Judd, S. (2002). Membrane fouling in
membrane bioreactors for wastewater treatment. Journal of Environmental Engineering,
Vol. 128, No. 11, pp. 1018–1029.
Cicek, N., Franco, J.P., Suidan, M.T., Urbain, V., Manem, J. (1999).
Characterization and comparison of a membrane bioreactor and a conventional
activated-sludge system in the treatment of wastewater containing high-molecular-
weight compounds. Water Environ. Res., Vol. 71, No. 1, pp. 64-70.
Coello Oviedo, M.D., López-Ramírez, J.A., Sales Márquez, D. & Quiroga Alonso,
J.M. (2003). Evolution of an activated sludge system under starvation conditions. Chem.
Eng. J., Vol. 94, pp. 139-146.
Cui, Z.F., Chang, S. & Fane, A.G. (2003). The use of gas bubbling to enhance
membrane processes, Journal of Membrane Science, Vol. 221, pp. 1–35.
Defrance L., Jaffrin, M.Y.; Gupta, B.; Paullier, P. & Geaugey, V. (2000).
Contribution of various constituents on activated sludge to membrane bioreactor
fouling. Bioresource Technology, Vol. 73, pp. 105-112.
Delgado, S.; Villarroel, R.; González, E. (2010). Submerged Membrane Bioreactor
at Substrate-Limited Conditions: Activity and Biomass Characteristics. Water
Environment Research, Vol. 82, No. 3, pp. 202-208.
Page 69 of 134
ID: 1114132
Dennis Gellerman, Steve Clary and Mark Takemoto, 2011, SMCSD Headworks,
Primary and Secondary Treatment Pre-Design
Dubois, M.; Gilles, K.A.; Hamilton, J.K.; Rebers, P.A. & Smith, F. (1956).
Calorimetric method for determination of sugars and related substances. Anal Chem.,
Vol. 28, No. 3, pp. 350-356.
Environmental Engineering. 2008-2010. Equalisation Tank Design. Available
at: http://www.4enveng.com/edetails.php?id=58.
EQ tanks - Equalization Tanks, Flow Equalization Tanks EQ tanks Available at:
http://www.wedotanks.com/eq-equalization-tanks.html.
Ferrero, G.; Monclús, H.; Buttiglieri, G.; Comas, J. & Rodriguez-Roda, I. (2011).
Automatic control system for energy optimization in membrane bioreactors.
Desalination, Vol. 268, No. 1-3, pp. 276-280.
Foley, G. (2006) A review of factors affecting filter cake properties in dead-end
microfiltration of microbial suspensions. Journal of Membrane Science, Vol. 274, pp. 38–
46.
Frechen, F.B.; Schier, W.; & Linden. C. (2008). Pre-treatment of municipal MBR
applications.
Gans, N., Mobini, S. and Zhang, X.N., 2006. Mass and Energy Survey at the
Gaobeidian Wastewater Treatment Plant in Beijing, China. Water and Environmental
Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering, Lund Institute of Technology, Lund
University
Garcés, W.; De Wilde, C.; Thoeye & De Gueldre, G. (2007). Operational cost
optimisation of
Icon. (2008). the 2009-2014 world outlook for membrane bioreactor (MBR)
systems for wastewater treatment. Icon Group Publications.
Judd, S. (2008). The status of membrane bioreactor technology. Trends in
Biotechnology, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 109-116.
Judd, S. (2010). The MBR Book. Principles and Applications of Membrane
Bioreactors in Water and Wastewater Treatment, Elvesier, ISBN: 978-0-08-096682-3, 2nd
Ed, London.
Page 70 of 134
ID: 1114132
Metcalf and Eddy, 2003, Wastewater Engineering Treatment and Reuse, 4th ed.,
McGraw Hill, China
Ms. Anne Butler, Mr. Gerry Carty, Dr. Matt Crowe, Dr. Paddy Flanagan and Ms.
Marion Lambert, 1995, Waste water treatment manuals, preliminary treatment, Ireland
Napier – Reid, 2007, NR-Coarse Screens, Manual and Mechanical Coarse Screens,
Canada
Nouri, J., Jafarnia, M., Naddafi, K., Nabizadeh, R., Mahvi, A.H. and Nouri, N.,
2006. Energy Recovery from Wastewater Treatment Plant, Pakistan Journal of Biological
Sciences, Vol. 9, 3-6, pp 3, 6.
Page 71 of 134
ID: 1114132
Peters, M.S., Timmerhaus, K.D., 1991. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical
Engineers. Fourth edition. Singapour: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
Pollice A., Giordano, C., Laera, G., Saturno, D. & Mininni, G. (2007). Physical
characteristics of the sludge in a complete retention membrane bioreactor. Water
Research, Vol. 41, pp. 1832-1840.
Pollice A., Laera, G. & Blonda, M. (2004). Biomass growth and activity in a
membrane bioreactor with complete sludge retention. Water Research, Vol. 38, pp.
1799-1808.
Rahzia Hendricks, 2011, Assessment of the biological quality of raw and treated
effluents from three sewage treatment plants in the Western Cape, South Africa
Page 72 of 134
ID: 1114132
Sudarshan Prasad Mahajan, 2009, Air Pollution Control, TERI Press, India p. 139
Syed. R, Motley.E.M, Guang Zhu, Chiang.P & Yerby, Water Works Engineering
Planning, Design and Operation, First Edition. Prentice Hall PTR
Tao, G.; Kekre, K.; Oo, M-H.; Viswanath, B.; Lew, C-H.; Kan, L-M. & Seah, H.
(2009). Large scale membrane bioreactor plant design (retrofit) and optimisation.
Proceedings of the 4th IWA Membrane Technology Conference, Beijing, China, Sept 1-3.
Trusell, R.; Merlo, R.; Hermanowicz, S. & Jenkins, D. (2006). The effect of organic
loading on process performance and membrane fouling in a submerged membrane
bioreactor treating municipal wastewater. Water Research, Vol. 40, pp. 2675-2683.
Turovskiy, I.S., Mathai, P.K., 2006. Wastewater Sludge Processing. New Jersey:
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Page 73 of 134
ID: 1114132
Wicaksana, F.; Fane, A.G. & Chen, V. (2006). Fibre movement induced by
bubbling using submerged hollow fibre membranes, Journal of Membrane Science, Vol.
271, pp. 186–195.
Wilén, B-M.; Nielsen, J.; Keiding, K. & Nielsen, P. (2000). Influence of microbial
activity on the stability of activated sludge flocs. Colloids and Surfaces B: Biointerfaces,
Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 145-156.
Wu, J., Le-Clech P., Stuetz, R., Fane, A., Chen, V. (2008). Effects of relaxation and
backwashing conditions on fouling in membrane bioreactor. Journal of Membrane
Science, Vol. 324, pp. 26–32.
Yang W, Cicek N, Ilg J (2006) J Membr Sci 270:201
Yoon SH, Kim HS, Yeom IT (2004) Water Res 38:37
Zaloum R, Lessard S, Mourato D, Carriere J (1994) Water Sci Technol 30:21
Zhang S. (2000). Polluted water treatment by the combining processes of
membrane separation and biodegradation. PhD thesis, Research Centre for Eco-
Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, China.
Page 74 of 134
ID: 1114132
BOD 260.95mg/l
BOD 307 mg/l
Coarse screen
TSS 228mg/l
TSS 285 mg/l
COD 984mg/l
COD 984mg/l
Nitrogen 45mg/l
Nitrogen 45mg/l
Phosphorus 10mg/l
Phosphorus 10mg/l
BOD 46.5 mg/l
By product
Q = 260.95mg/l
Page 75 of 134
ID: 1114132
Kg/s Kg/m3
Page 76 of 134
ID: 1114132
Total 1.6311
Therefore flowrate of wastewater at outlet = 0.8102 m3/s - 0.00008336 m3/s = 0.810 m3/s
b. Fine screen
Page 77 of 134
ID: 1114132
By product
Kg/s Kg/m3
Total 1.528
Therefore flowrate of wastewater at outlet = 0.810 m3/s - 0.0001278 m3/s = 0.8099 m3/s
Page 78 of 134
ID: 1114132
Q = 182.7 mg/l
c. Equalization Tank
I.Assumptions12 :
Mass out in underflow (in sludge) = 0.75 × 415.625 = 311.71875 = 311.7 kg/h
Page 79 of 134
ID: 1114132
Knowing that typical solids concentrations in raw primary sludge from settling
municipal wastewater are 6%-8%13, an average concentration of 7% will be assumed to
be the solids concentration.
Mass flow rate of sludge equals to the mass of dry solids. Therefore let mass of dry
solids be Sdry = 311.7 kg/h and wet solids be Swet
13
Information retrieved from a word document available online at
http://home.engineering.iastate.edu/~leeuwen/CE%20523/Supplementary%20Notes/Sludge%20Disposal.doc
Page 80 of 134
ID: 1114132
The primary sludge density ranges from 1.0 to 1.03 g/cm3 [14] which makes an average
of 1.015 g/cm3 or 1015 kg/m3
Therefore total flow rate from both clarifiers, Qs = 4.38 × 2 = 8.77 m3/ h
Hence,
14
Wastewater sludge processing, Izrail S. Turovskiy et al, Physical and Biological properties, p.47
Page 81 of 134
ID: 1114132
Q = Influent Flowrate
Given: BOD in domestic wastewater entering Primary Settling Tank = 307 𝑚𝑔⁄𝐿
Page 82 of 134
ID: 1114132
Therefore;
Hence;
Typical recycle ratio for conventional activated sludge process = 0.25 – 0.50
Therefore;
Also by the methodology of Shu Dar lin (2005), 𝑄𝑅 can be expresses as follows:
𝑄0 (𝑥 − 𝑥0 )
𝑄𝑅 =
𝑥𝑤 − 𝑥
Whereby:
𝑥𝑤 = 3893.07 𝑔⁄𝑚3
Page 83 of 134
ID: 1114132
Also;
𝑄𝑅 𝑋
𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = =
𝑄0 𝑋𝑅 − 𝑋
Whereby:
2500 𝑔⁄𝑚3
𝑅𝑒𝑐𝑦𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 =
𝑋𝑅 − 2500 𝑔⁄𝑚3
Waste Activated Sludge: QW = Waste flow from recycle waste line, 𝑚3 ⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
Page 84 of 134
ID: 1114132
As calculated:
BOD Efficiency = 78 %
Therefore:
Assuming:
Page 85 of 134
ID: 1114132
𝑁𝐻3 − 𝑁𝐸 = 𝑁𝐻3 − 𝑁𝑊𝐴𝑆 = 𝑁𝐻3 − 𝑁𝑅 = 1400 𝐾𝑔⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦 − 1260 𝐾𝑔⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦 = 140 𝐾𝑔⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
Since nitrification occurs, let 𝑁𝑂3 − 𝑁𝑥 be the amount of nitrates obtained by the
nitrification of ammonia.
Therefore:
Since 𝑁𝑂3 − 𝑁𝑖𝑛 = 1200 Kg⁄day 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎𝑠 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑒𝑑 𝑁𝑂3 − 𝑁𝑥 = 5031.2 Kg⁄day
Page 86 of 134
ID: 1114132
𝑃ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑝ℎ𝑜𝑟𝑢𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑜𝑣𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑎𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 = 65% × 70 Kg⁄day = 45.5 Kg⁄day = 0.65 g⁄m3
𝑃𝑅 = 24.5 Kg⁄day
Page 87 of 134
ID: 1114132
Summary of balances:
Streams Influent
Oil water Equalization Primary Membrane
to Bioreactor
seperator tk clarifiers Skid
screening
COD
65,436.00 68,880.00 65,436.00 48,363.00 1221.4 1221.4
(kg/d)
BOD
20,415.50 21,490.00 20,415.50 12,894.00 2800.0 2800.0
(kg/d)
TSS
17,955.00 19,950.00 17,955.00 3,990.00 3,990.00 1364.6
(kg/d)
NH3-N
1,750.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 1,750.00 140.0
(kg/d)
NO3—N
1,400.00 1,400.00 1,400.00 1,400.00 1,400.00 623.1
(kg/d)
Coliforms
(MPN 420,000.00 420,000.00 420,000.00 420,000.0 420,000.0 420,000.0
100mL )–1
Total
107,656.50 114,170.00 107,656.50 69,984.28 11861.4 6,173.6
(kg/d)
Page 88 of 134
ID: 1114132
Filtration across the sand filter normally achieves reductions of 65% in TSS and 59% in BOD.
Qo SAND FILTER Qe
So Se
Xo Xe
Given,
Qo & Qe = 69,673.5 m3/day (flow rate is same for both inlet and outlet)
So = 2800.0 kg/day,
Xo = 1364.6 kg/day
Se = So – (59/100 x So)
= 1148.0 kg/day
Xe = Xo – (65/100 x Xo)
= 477.61 kg/day
Page 89 of 134
ID: 1114132
Calculating whether amount of BOD & TSS are within permissible limits
Therefore in,
1L 16.48 mg of BOD
1L 6.84 mg of TSS
b. Chlorination
Parameters r
Q in Q out
Disinfection
Parameters in Parameters
out
Page 90 of 134
ID: 1114132
Assumptions:
S thickened sludge
S influentt Seffluent
Gravity thickener
Parameters in Parameters out
S effluent=0.90*S influent
=1831 m3/d.
Page 91 of 134
ID: 1114132
b. Sludge Digester
Qin Qout
CODin CODout
NH3in NH3out
PO4-in PO4-out
TSSin TSSin
= 505.7 m3/day
TSS: 65%, COD: 90%, BOD: 90%, NH3: 85% and PO4-: 10%
= 9733.5 kg/day
= 4082.5 kg/day
Page 92 of 134
ID: 1114132
= 135.45 kg/day
PO4-out = PO4-in - (0.9 x PO4-in)
= 655 – (0.1 x 655)
=589.5 kg/day
c. Dewatering unit
Scentrate
Parameterscentrat
e
S in
S cake
Centrifuge
S in = Scake+ Scentrate
S centrate= 58.38Kg/d
Page 93 of 134
ID: 1114132
Assuming both screens uses same amount of power, the energy consumption can be
computed as follows:
g = 9.81 m/s2
Page 94 of 134
ID: 1114132
b) Distribution Chamber
It is assumed that the flow from the distribution chamber to the primary circular
settling tanks is through gravity. Therefore there is no consumption of energy in this
section.
Secondary treatment
In order to meet the oxygen demand in the aeration tanks, diffusers are placed and
these diffusers require energy.
By the methodology of Frank R. Spellman (2013), the power requirement for aeration is
calculated as follows:
Page 95 of 134
ID: 1114132
Whereby:
η is the efficiency of the blower which is normally within the range 70%-80%
Pdis = discharge pressure of blower which varies between 1.7 and 2.4 bar for fine bubble
diffusers. Therefore:
Whereby:
Radius of clarifier, R = 13 m
Hence;
kg
𝑇 = 29.8 m × 13.02 𝑚2 = 5036.2 𝐾𝑔. 𝑚 = 49,405.12 𝑁𝑚
𝐿𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑆𝑝𝑒𝑒𝑑
𝑃𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 = 𝑇𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 × 𝐴𝑛𝑔𝑢𝑙𝑎𝑟𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 = 𝑇 ×
𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠
Page 96 of 134
ID: 1114132
From N.F Gray (2005), the speed of rakes varies between 3-6m/min and taking an
average speed; Speed of rake = 4.5m/min = 0.075m/s
Since 6 clarifiers are used, overall power requirements= 6841.68 x 6 = 41.05 kWh/d
As illustrated in the process flow diagram, 13 pumps are being used, therefore, the
energy required by the pumps are calculated as follows:
Where:
Ph = power (kW)
Assuming a head of 2 m
Page 97 of 134
ID: 1114132
In the high rate sludge digestion, the sludge is mixed by recirculating the gas formed in
a draft tube or by pumping. Power consumption for stirrers is generally 20-100kW/m3.
(R.L. King, R.A Hiller and G.B Tatterson, 2004)
i.scrapper
ii.Thickener
iii.Digester
Energy consumed by 2 draft tube +2 pumps = (3.878x 2 x 1000) + (1.996) = 7758 kW/d
iv.Polymer
Page 98 of 134
ID: 1114132
Assumption:
Density of biogas is 1.18 kg/m3
Efficiency of CHP plant is 40%
Page 99 of 134
ID: 1114132
Appendix 3: SIZING
w = 0.72 m
h = 2m
𝑤 𝑣2
H = β. ( 𝑏 )4/3. (2𝑔). Sin Q
H= 0.0744m
H = 74.4mm
Fine screen:
H = ½ x (Q/ A.c)2
c: discharge coefficient
A = 0.81/0.9 = 0.9m2
W= 0.45m
n= W/ opening space
n= 0.45/ 0.0095m
n=47.36
W = 0.95m
H = 1/2g x (V/c)2
H = 0.115m (115mm)
In an ideal separator, any oil globule with Vt equal or greater than surface loading rate
will reach the separator surface and be removed.
Design variables
L = length of channel, m
n = number of channel
The design
Data Given:
Temperature = 29 °C
Assumptions taken:
Design constraints
• 1.0 m ≤ d ≤ 2.5 m
• 1.8 m ≤ B ≤ 6.0 m
• n = 2 (minimum 2 channels)
• L/B ≥ 5
Calculating Vt using:
Vt = 0.0123[(Sw - So)/μ]
Vt = 2.224 cm/s
Also,
Hence,
Ac = (0.8102 x 100)/1.5
Ac = 54 m2
Similarly,
d = 54/ (8 x 2)
d =3.38 m
Calculating L using:
F is found to be 1.46
Hence,
L = F x (VH/Vt) x d
L = 3.33 m
Design inputs:
Results:
number of channels 2
69,673.55
Flow rate per hour = = 2,903.06 m3/h
24
Assumptions:
= 2,903.06 × 3 = 8,709.18 m3
10,015.56
iii. Volume/ tank = = 3,338.52 m3
3
3,338.52
iv. Surface area/ tank = = 556.42 m2
6
2× Breadth2 = 556.42 m2
2,903.06 m3
Flow rate per tank ( )
vi. Inlet velocity = Surface area of tank = 556.42
3 h
= 1.73 m/h
(m2)
Design parameters:
Detention time = 2 h
Assumptions: From Qasim (livre avec amit) p. 329, a surface loading rate of 35 m3/m2.day and a
weir loading rate of 250 m3/m.day are assumed for a daily flow rate of 113,500 m3 , therefore, the
same design parameters will be assumed for a flow of 70, 000 m3.
35 (m3/m2.day)
Surface loading rate per hour = = 1.46 m3/m2.h
24 (ℎ)
250 (m3/m.day)
Weir loading rate per hour = = 10.42 m3/m.h
24(ℎ)
Design Calculation:
2920
Flow in unit tank per hour = = 1460 m3
2
Volume of unit clarifier tank (m3) = Flow rate × retention time = 1460 × 2 = 2920 m3
Knowing that, area of circle = 𝜋r2, diameter of tank can be found using cross sectional area of
circular clarifier.
𝐷2
𝜋 = 1001.14
4
D = 35.7 ≈ 36 m
Hence,
Given, volume of cylinder = πr2h, height of cylindrical part of clarifier can be found using
D2
π h = 𝑉 = 2920 m3
4
D= 35.7 m
h = 2.92 ≈ 3 m
From Clarifier Design 2nd Edition, p.468, it is said that for tanks having diameter approximately
above 25 m, a slope of 18 m is usually taken. Therefore the bottom slope of the primary clarifier
will be 18 m.
As per methodology, the SRT for a membrane bioreactor tank is typically 5 to15 days so
as to achieve efficient achieve BOD & nitrogen removal. Therefore, the average SRT is
assumed:
5 + 15
𝑆𝑅𝑇 = = 10 𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠
2
2. Feed to microorganism ratio
As the biomass is actively removing the organic substrate in the wastewater, it follows
that the BOD loading should be related to the volume of the biomass in the aeration
tank (i.e. Sludge Loading)
𝐹 0.2 + 0.4
𝐴𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = = 0.3
𝑚 2
The lower the f/m ratio, the lower the rate of metabolism and the greater the BOD
removal and sludge settleability. However, as removal efficiency increases so does the
overall oxygen demand of the system and so the overall cost of BOD removal. F/m ratio
is also the rate of BOD or COD applied per unit volume of mixed liquor.
From Metcalf and Eddy, 2003; F/M ratio can be expressed as:
𝐹 𝑄0 (𝑆0 − 𝑆𝐸 )
=
𝑀 𝑉𝑥
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑏𝑦:
𝑆𝐸 = 𝑂𝑢𝑡𝑙𝑒𝑡𝐵𝑂𝐷, 𝑚𝑔⁄𝐿
𝐹 𝑄0 (𝑆0 − 𝑆𝐸 )
=
𝑀 𝑉𝑥
𝑊ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒𝑏𝑦:
𝑄0 = 70,000 𝑚3 ⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
Assuming that the bioreactor have a concentration varying in the range 2000 𝑚𝑔⁄𝐿-
3000𝑚𝑔⁄𝐿 Hence, an average MLSS concentration is calculated which equals to 2500
𝑚𝑔⁄𝐿
𝑉 = 14934 𝑚3
Assuming depth 4 m and width 4.4 m typical length to width ratio for MBR
Therefore:
Width = 4.4 m
Length = 44 m
14934 𝑚3
𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑘 = = 3733.33 𝑚2
4𝑚
3733.33 𝑚2
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑙𝑠 = = 19.28 = 20 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑛𝑒𝑙𝑠
4.4 𝑚 × 44𝑚
Therefore:
𝑆𝑢𝑟𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑒 𝐴𝑟𝑒𝑎 3733.33
Actual Length = = = 42.42 𝑚
𝐴𝑐𝑡𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ 4.4×20
Total surface area of the Aeration tank = 42.5m × (4.4m × 20) = 3740 𝑚2
𝑉 𝑚3 14934
𝐻𝑅𝑇 = 3
= = 0.213 𝑑𝑎𝑦 = 5.12 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠
𝑄 𝑚 ⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦 70000
The volumetric BOD loading is defined as the ratio of BOD (Kg/day to the Volume
(m3).
6. Oxygen Requirements
Therefore:
8960 Kg / day
Air Requirement = = 7454.24 𝑚3 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑖𝑟⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
1.202 Kg/𝑚3
7454.24 𝑚3 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑖𝑟⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
𝐴𝑖𝑟𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 = = 0.106 𝑚3 𝑜𝑓𝑎𝑖𝑟⁄𝑚3 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
70000 𝑚3 ⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
1565.40 𝑚3 𝑜𝑓 𝑂2⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
𝑂𝑥𝑦𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑝𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑑 = = 0.022 𝑚3 𝑜𝑓𝑂2⁄𝑚3 𝑤𝑎𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟
70000 𝑚3 ⁄𝑑𝑎𝑦
Shape Rectangular
Liquid depth 7m
Diffuser submergence 7m
SRT 10 days
𝐾𝑔
BOD vol. loading 0.938
𝑚3 . 𝑑𝑎𝑦
F/M 0.3
The filter should be able to treat all the water that is decanted from secondary clarifier
tank.
The following calculations and assumptions show the filter capacity required for our
sewage treatment plant:
Assumptions
Calculations
70000
Flow rate in each filter bed = = 17500 m3/d
4
m3
Flowrate ( ) 17500
Area = h
d
m = 20×10 = 87.5 m2
(20 ×Filtration rate )
d h
= 305.98 m3
Stock of NaOCl is kept for 15 days and considering a decay rate of 0.03% per day
Volume of contact tank = flowrate in contact tank (m3/s) x contact time (s)
Length of each pass (m) = length of tank inside basin / number of passes in basin =
91.6/3 = 30.5m
Sizing of thickener
Solids from primary clarifier = 10773 kg/d
𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠
4) Total area =𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑑𝑠 𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑛𝑔= (18311.07Kg /d) / (60 kg/ m3.d) = 305.18 m3
5) Diameter of thickener
305.18
2 thickeners are provided; area of 1 thickener = = 152.59 m2
2
For combined primary and waste activated sludge, hydraulic loading should be in the
range of 6 – 12m3/m2.d.
1.80 m3/ m2.d is less than the minimum value; therefore provision for dilution water
should be provided.
Generally, clear water and settling zone is in the range of 1.2 m – 1.8 m and the
thickening zone is 3.0 m (Metcalf & Eddy, 2003).
For the purpose of design, clear water zone = 1.1 m; settling zone = 1.7 m; thickening
zone = 3.0 m
Total side – water depth = (1.1 + 1.7 + 3.0) m = 5.8 m + freeboard of 0.6 m
9) Thickening period
Volume of each thickener = {(∏ / 4) x 13.942 m2 x 5.8 m} + {(∏ / 12) x 13.942 m2 x 1.394
m} = 956.12 m3
2 𝑥 956.12
Thickening period = = 3.48 days
548.71
For the total amount of thickened sludge, TSS in dilution water has been assumed to be
negligible in thickened sludge withdrawal:
= 269.28 m3
1831.107 𝑥 106
Concentration of solids in recovered water = 1526.13 𝑥 1000=1200 mg/ L
(d) According to Metcalf & Eddy, Diameter should be 6-38 m and height should be
7.5 -15 m
Solids from primary clarifier = 10773 Kg/d; vss Solids from final clarifier =
7538.07Kg/d
10773 𝑥 0.7+7538.07
Percentage VSS for combined primary and WAS =( ) x 100 % = 82%
18311.07
From table 14-28, VSS loading rate should be between 3.3-3.8 Kg VSS / m3.d for 15 days
4039.2
Volume of 1 digester = = 2019.6 m3
2
Grit deposit = 0.608 m; scum blanket = 0.608m; space below cover at maximum level =
0.608m
Single stage digesters operate without supernatant withdrawal. Therefore, the volume
of m3/d fed is the same as the volume withdrawn.
Assumptions:
Heat required for 1 digester, Q1 = feed sludge weight * specific heat of sludge *
(operating temp. of digester – temp. of incoming sludge)
Each digester will have its own heat exchanger; thus the need for 2 heat exchangers
with capacity of 519.06 MJ/d each.
Assumption:
(a) Heat loss to surroundings is minimized due to insulation and will be analyzed in
detailed design
(c) Fouling factors and tube resistance will be taken care of in detailed design
(d) Mass flow rate of water (the heating liquid) will be twice that of sludge
(g) Diameter of inner and outer tubes are 75 mm and 150 mm respectively to heat
thickener sludge (Metcalf& Eddy, 2003)
From literature review, the amount of polymer used = 8 lb of polymer per ton of dry
solids
Thus, total amount of polymer used = [18311.07 kg/d / (1000kg)] x 3.632kg = 39.27 kg/
day
= 2.771 kg/hr
1) Volume of Tank
Thus, 2771 g of polymer (total amount of polymer per hour) is present in (1/1.5) x
2771= 1847.4L of water
Thus the volume of water (and polymer) in the first tank = [1847.4L/ (1000 L / m3)]
=1.85m3
1 tank is used.
L x B = 2B * B =2B2
b. Maturation tank
c. The tank mixer should be low speed with a low shear impeller designed for a
maximum tip speed of less than152.4 m /min
1) Sizing of Tank
The volume of the dissolving tank is the same as the volume of maturation tank since
all the contents of the dissolving tank goes into the maturation tank; thus the volume
and surface area are the same.
Volume = 1.85 m3
Freeze Design
This primary design was an overview of a typical sewage treatment plan.
However, many basic assumptions were taken, where detailed information are not
taken into consideration.
The detailed design introduces a more specific plan of the plant where each and every
single steps of calculations, sketches, instrumentation and control, detailed mass and
energy balances are further discussed. The detailed design will include:
Hence, all the units discussed in this primary design would be further elaborated in
much more detail in the detailed design coming next.
Minutes of meeting
09/08/2014
Chairperson: Mr. Mudhoo
MEETING DETAIL:
The roll of secretary or chairman will be assigned to every member of the group
in a specific order at each meeting intervals:
Secretary Chairperson
Keshav Mr.Mudhoo
Teesha Keshav
Amit Teesha
Pravish Amit
Mr.Mudhoo Pravish
The secretary need to take notes of the important topics talked in the meeting.
Note: Members of the group agreed that they will be able to follow the guideline given.
Each member of the group needs to keep record of the different individual work
of all the group members in separate folders.
There will be at least ten unit operations both majors and minors.
Impact on environment
Cost implications(Locally)
The introduction must be concluded by an intro on the design project: “The design
project will consist of designing: ....”
Each member must do their own research and give their ideas on the next
meeting scheduled.
The overall PFD of the system must be ready and submitted to the supervisor in
five weeks time, that is, on the 30/08/2014.
Each member of the group must have a printed copy of the work done on every
chapter covered.
Any module done in the previous academic years must be pin pointed in every
relevant section worked.
The name of each member must be noted on a separate sheet specifying which
work they performed.
A note need to be affixed at the end of the project confirming: “Each member of
the group has fairly contributed in every part of the design works”.
The note must be signed by all members and approved by the supervisor.
End of meeting
20/09/2014
Chairperson: Pavish Ramdewar
Introduction
Literature review
Process consideration
Mass balance
Energy balance
Sizing
Control strategies
Preliminary Hazop
Waste treatment
Costing
End of meeting
04/10/2014
Chairperson: Eldora St Paul
We agreed to complete our mass balances and share the work by the week after.
Note: All problems tackled and discussion made were shared with Amit
End of meeting
11/10/2014
Chairperson: Keshav Soomaree
Discussion was done on the biogas balances and energy strategies of the out but
biogas.
We decided to fully use the electricity, being obtained from the biogas, for the
self consumption of the plant (Pumps Blower, mechanical stirrer, etc...).
We discussed how to manage our recycle streams especially for the secondary
treatment.
End of meeting
25/10/2014
Chairperson: Pravish Ramdwar
All biogas to be removed would be obtained only from the sludge digester,
The unit of carbon adsorption is removed from the plant: No need of it; costly
and difficult to design,
Note: The new work format of our treatment plant was approved by Mr. Mudhoo.
End of meeting
08/11/2014
Chairperson: Amit Ramdewar
Control strategies
PID
End of meeting