Water Treatment Plant Design CEE157B

Water Treatment Design Proposal Group A Engineering March 14, 2016

Francisco Mier y Teran, Adam Richardson, Breeana Rimbach, Haowen Yue

Group A Engineering

Water Treatment Design Project

Dr. Catalina MarambioJones C&EE 157B: Design of Water Treatment Plants Boelter 5422 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Subject: Water Treatment Plant Design

New “Greenfield” Water Treatment Plant Anytown, USA

Dear Dr. Catalina MarambioJones,

In response to the Master Planning effort in your town of Anytown, USA, the design team of

Group A Engineering has designed a surface water treatment plant submitted to you in the following

report. Our design has met each of the requirements put forth by the federal drinking water regulations

and has complied with local water quality goals using the Brown River as its influent water source.

The attached report will summarize our findings for the proposed water treatment plant in

Anytown, USA, including the following items: I. Project Objective, II. Summary of the Source Water

Quality, III. Goals for Treated Water and Regulatory Requirements, IV. Alternative Treatment Process

Evaluations, V. Proposed Design, and VI. Calculations.

Thank you for this opportunity to work with the town of Anytown on this project. Please contact

us if you have any questions or concerns regarding this project proposal.

Sincerely,

Francisco Mier y Teran Adam Richardson Breeana Rimbach Haowen Yue

2

Group A Engineering


TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Executive Summary II. Introduction (Project Objective) III. Source Water Quality Summary IV. Regulatory Requirements and Treated Water Goals V. Evaluation of Alternative Treatment Processes

VI. Proposed Design

A. Selected Processes B. Treatment Schematic

1. Site Layout 2. Process Flow Diagram

C. Hydraulic Grade Line D. Compliance with Sustainability Objectives

VII. References VIII. Appendix

A. Source Water Quality B. Water Regulations C. Calculations D. Model 2.0 Outputs E. CT Spreadsheet F. RTW Spreadsheet

3

Group A Engineering


I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This design report of a water treatment plant addresses the necessities for Anytown, USA in

anticipation of projected population growth as part of the Master Planning Effort.

Group A Engineering implemented simple and effective treatment processes to provide all

citizens of Anytown access to clean water. This plant design complies with all federal and local

regulations for clean water MCLs. The plant’s specifications were modeled with WTP 2.0 according to

the available information from studies on the quality and characteristics of the Brown River water. Many

treatment processes were evaluated and analysed for optimal implementation given the guidelines and

characteristics of the water source (Brown River). Our plant’s simple and efficient design was constructed

with financial restrictions and minimal recycling goals in mind as requested by the citizens of Anytown,

USA.

The treatment process begins with the influent water from the Brown River at an elevation of

1035 ft. The water is first moved into presedimentation tanks. These were designed in efforts to reduce

stress on the plant during the summer storms when the turbidity levels have been recorded to reach 500

NTU. From this the water flows into the rapid mix/coagulation tanks where we pump alum (Al2[SO4]3) as

a the coagulation agent. After this it will pass through 5 trains for flocculation and later will be left to

settle in one of eight basins for sedimentation. After it has settled, the water will pass through filtration

process and the backwash will enter the plant again. Once it is clean the water will be sent to clearwell

tanks for further contact time with our disinfectant and to later enter the distribution center to exit the

plant and into Anytown. Our calculations and models show that this design is an acceptable response to

the needs and requirements of Anytown and those set by federal and local regulations.

4

Group A Engineering


II. INTRODUCTION

The water treatment plant presented in this report has been designed in accordance to the

objectives of Anytown’s Master Planning effort, and has been rigorously tested to ensure that it meets

state and federal requirements for disinfecting the water and minimizing the formation of disinfection

byproducts. The final design to accomplish these goals constitutes: presedimentation, rapid mix /

coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, clearwell storage, and distribution. We here at Group

A Engineering pride our design for its efficiency, simplicity, and robustness, in order to provide Anytown

with the water it needs.

III. SOURCE WATER QUALITY

The source water for this project is considered an “impaired source,” which under the State

Department of Public Health means that the Brown River does not meet one or more waterquality

standards and as a result is too polluted for its intended use of finished water. The Brown River contains

a high concentration of Cryptosporidium and other pathogens, including Giardia. The river also

fluctuates heavily in turbidity values, ranging from the average value of 5 NTU to 500 NTU after summer

thunderstorms. The water from this river shows high quality in regards to TDS and hardness, moderate

levels of TOC, but high levels of bromide. Overall, the source water for this treatment plant has not had

significant taste or odor issues in the past 30 years. The tables in Appendix I summarize the water quality

from the Brown River, as well as the pathogen information from this source.

5

Group A Engineering


IV. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND TREATED WATER GOALS

In 1974, President Ford enacted the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), which implemented

regulations regarding primary drinking water health concerns and secondary drink water aesthetic

concerns. These regulations set a balance between health and cost for treating water, setting maximum

contaminant levels (MCL’s), which should eliminate the problems from taste, odor, and color from

consumers. An additional regulation was enforced by the SDWA, creating an MCL of 100 ppb for total

trihalomethanes (TTHM). The Surface Water Treatment Rule was then applied in 1989 to surface water

sources used in public water systems. The most important guideline set forth by this rule was the MCL

for viruses, bacteria, Giardia, and Legionella.

In 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency established a rule to control the lead and copper in

drinking water aptly named the Lead and Copper Rule. The concentrations must be measured at the taps

of the pipe systems. This rule stipulates that the MCL for lead is 0.015 mg/L and 1.3 mg/L for copper.

There are two stages for disinfectant and disinfection byproducts rules. The Stage 1 Disinfectants and

Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR) limits the exposure of drinking water to disinfection byproducts.

The Stage 2 DBPR makes monitoring more strict for Trihalomethanes (TTHM) and Haloacetic acids

(HAA5).

In this case, as well as the regulations put forth above, the State Department of Public Health has

also required the treatment plant to achieve a total Cryptosporidium inactivation/removal of 3.0 logs,

Giardia inactivation/removal of 4.0 logs, and virus inactivation/removal of 5.0 logs. The state has set a

maximum filtration rate of 6 gpm/ft2 with one filter out of service for backwash, without any radically

new treatment options. The tables in Appendix I show the compliance regulations put forth by the state

and obtained by this treatment plant design.

6

Group A Engineering


V. EVALUATION OF ALTERNATIVE TREATMENT PROCESSES

Reverse Osmosis:

Reverse osmosis is a membrane process that separates dissolved solutes from water by

differences in solubility and diffusivity through the membrane material. Only pure water can go through

the membrane and the solids exit the system through a waste stream. The influent raw water at this

location has a total dissolved solids (TDS) of 43 mg/L and a total hardness of 25 mg/L. Therefore, it is

unnecessary to apply reverse osmosis in the treatment process. We have to increase the hardness of the

treated water before water enters the distribution system. Additionally, reverse osmosis system is far more

expensive and complicated for our water treatment plant design. Consequently, reverse osmosis is not a

viable option for alternative treatment process.

Ion Exchange:

Ion exchange is a process in which ions attached to a stationary functional group exchange for

ions in a solution. Ions are exchanged on an equivalence basis (MWH’s Water Treatment Principles and

Design, p1264). Ion exchange can be applied to water for softening the removal of calcium and

magnesium ions. However, as is mentioned above, the raw water influent has a low TDS and total

hardness. So ion exchange is not suitable for our design.

Powdered Activated Carbon:

Powdered Activated Carbon (PAC), with a mean particle size about 24 μm, can be added to water

at various locations in the water treatment process to provide time for adsorption to take place and then

remove the PAC by sedimentation and / or filtration. (MWH’s Water Treatment Principles and Design,

p1159). PAC is effective in removing organic constituents and tasteand odorcausing compounds (EPA).

In this report, the influent maximum Geosmin is 2 ng/L while the maximum MIB is 4 ng/L, which is quite

low since the average detectable level for ordinary people is around 10 ng/L. The odor problem is not a

7

Group A Engineering


primary concern in this situation. Considering the cost of adding PAC in the system, we do not apply

PAC into the treatment system. However, PAC may later be included in the system to ensure a very low

level of geosmin and MIB, if those problems arise.

UV Disinfection:

Ultraviolet light refers to electromagnetic radiation having a wavelength between 100 and 400

nm. (MWH’s Water Treatment Principles and Design, p991). By transforming the DNA of pathogens,

UV light can inactivate those pathogens. UV disinfection could be applied after conventional water

treatment process (Rapid mix, flocculation, sedimentation, filtration). Despite its efficiency, UV treatment

requires special facilities with high energy needs operated by skilled laborers and thus represents a large

initial financial investment for the plant’s construction and managerial budget. Therefore, we choose a

traditional disinfectant like free chlorine to achieve the removal of certain pathogens instead of UV

disinfection.

Ozone Disinfection:

The major advantage of ozone disinfection is that it does not produce significant downstream

residuals. One downside of ozone disinfection is its tendency to react with bromide to produce bromate, a

known carcinogen. Therefore, when considering the inclusion of ozone in Anytown’s water treatment

plant design, the raw water quality from the Brown River was taken into account. Due to the Brown

River’s high bromide concentration (200 ug/L), the addition of ozone as a disinfectant was rejected.

8

Group A Engineering


VI. PROPOSED DESIGN

A. Selected Processes We have selected a water treatment system that utilizes presedimentation, rapid mix,

flocculation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection, with appropriate chemical feeds and residual

treatment processes.

PreSedimentation:

Influent water will be brought in through a lowvelocity rack and screen, to prevent anything

living from getting caught and stuck to the inlet. The water will then flow to the presedimentation

process. The presedimentation system has 3 basins, with a designed settling velocity of 0.0069 m/sec

(corresponding to particles greater than 0.1 mm in diameter). These tanks have dimensions of 3 m wet

depths (5 m total depths), 5.84 m widths, and 38.04 m lengths, thus the crosssection per tank is 17.53 m2.

The sludge removal will be processed by a traveling bridge design that spans each basin. The rate of

operation of the traveling bridges can be adjusted based on how much sludge is being collected by this

presedimentation system, based on the influent water quality and physical observations. A lower rate of

operation is expected most of the time, with higher operations during periods of high turbidity.

Presedimentation basins. ‘Total’ dimensions shown.

9

Group A Engineering


Rapid Mix:

The rapid mix system is the process of injecting and mixing the coagulant into the influent flow.

The coagulation turbine mixer has a detention time of 5 seconds, having a total volume of 13.15 m3, with

diameter of 1 m and length of 4.19 m. A 27 hp motor is needed to attain a G = 1000 s1, including an 80%

efficiency factor. A second setup of the exact same capacity will also be constructed, allowing the flow to

be directed to either system, so that maintenance can be performed without interrupting the flow of water

to the rest of the plant.The coagulant, alum, will be injected at this step, right before the turbine blades.

Original image courtesy of “Flocculation and Coagulation.” Image not to scale.

10

Group A Engineering


Flocculation :

From the rapid mix step, the alumdoped water now passes to the flocculation process. A series of

closeable pipes will be used to evenly and quickly distribute this influent to the flocculation basins. The

flocculation process uses vertical turbines to agitate the influent, with a total detention time of 2400

seconds, through 5 trains of 4 basins per train. Each basin has a wet volume of 315.6 m3, with side

lengths of 6.8 m arranged in a square shape. An additional 2 m of dry wall will be added to the depth,

bringing the total depth of each basin to 8.8m The impeller in each basin is composed of a hydrofoil with

a diameter of 3.46 m,and is raised 2.7 m off of the bottom of the tank. Perforated baffles will be

constructed to separate each turbine in a train.

Sample flocculation basin. ‘Wet’ dimensions shown.

11

Group A Engineering


Sedimentation:

For sedimentation, we have determined that there should be 8 basins with areas of 901.7 m2 each,

with one out of operation at any given time. The basins have dimensions of 15 m wide, 60.1 m long, and

wet depths of 4 m. An additional 2 m of dry depth should be added, bringing the total depths to 6 m.

Each basin has a detention time of 1317 seconds (approximately 4 hours at average flow rate). The sludge

in each basin will be collected by a travelingbridge system, with each basin having an individual bridge

in order to simplify maintenance and repair. The resulting sludge will be drawn off by a simple pump and

sent to the lagoons for dewatering. A diffuser wall will be used to distribute the flow from the flocculation

trains into the sedimentations basins, using a tapered inlet system that collects flow from all the

flocculation trains and carries it to the sedimentation basins. The water will be collected at the end of each

basin by inboard effluent launders.

Side view of a sedimentation basin with travelling bridge sludge collector.

Original image courtesy of “Rectangular Sedimentation…” Image not to scale.

12

Group A Engineering


Dual Media Filtration:

The next portion of the treatment process contains 10 conventional dualmedia filtration systems,

with one out of service at all times for backwashing. The design filtration rate was determined to be 15

m/hr, correlating to filter dimensions of 5 m wide and 14.03 m long. The dual media filter contains a 0.3

m depth of gravel base for support, then 0.3 m of sand (d= 0.55 mm) and a 1.0 m of anthracite (d= 1 mm)

for filtration. The necessary water above these depths is determined to be 2.4 m. Allowing for 2 m of dry

wall above the water surface, that brings the total depth to 6 m (of which 4 m is wet). Cleaning the filter

media will be accomplished with backwashing at a flow rate of 50 m/h, air scouring at 50 m/h, and a

rotating singlearm surface wash at 1.5 m/h at 550 kPa. The backwashwastewater troughs will be set 2 m

from the surface of the anthracite (2.4 m below the top of the filtration tank), to provide plenty of space

for fluidized bed expansion and particulate separation. This will minimize media loss from backwashing.

Cross section of dualmedia sandanthracite filter.

Original image courtesy of “Rapid Sand Filtration.” Image not to scale

13

Group A Engineering


Disinfectant:

The disinfectant we chose to use in this process is chlorine. Chlorine is a traditional disinfectant,

which is effective to remove ammonia and virus. Given the fact that the raw water has a very high

concentration of E. Coli and cryptosporidium, we choose chlorine as the main disinfectant. The

chlorine(gas) is added right before rapid mix. According to the results from Model 2.0 and CT

calculation, the chlorine can be added only once. There is no need for a second disinfection segment since

the primary goal of disinfection can be achieved with only one disinfection segment. The concentration of

AmmoniaN in raw water is 0.01 mg/L. Thus, 0.0761 mg Cl2/L is required to remove all the Ammonia.

However, the dose of free chlorine should be increased to achieve a total Cryptosporidium removal of 3.0

logs, Giardia removal of 4.0 logs and virus removal of 5.0 logs.

The final dose of free chlorine is 2.1 mg Cl2/L under the temperature of 25°C. The required TOC

removal is 45%. Alum is added into the system to achieve TOC removal,reduce the concentration of

DBPs and adjust the pH. After a few trials, the appropriate dose of alum was determined to be 120 mg/L.

As is mentioned before, in order to achieve the TOC removal of 45% and reduce DBPs, the dose of alum

seems a little high, but it is still acceptable. Based on Model 2.0, the TOC removal achieved is 52%. The

formation of DBPs is partly determined by the position where disinfectant is added into the system.

Additionally, 75 mg/L soda ash is added before rapid mix and 23.2 mg/L lime are added into the system

after contact tank to adjust the pH.

In our design, the chlorine is added between flocculation and sedimentation to reduce the

production of DBPs. According to the state regulation, a concentration of 0.2 mg/L free chlorine is

required throughout the distribution system, in addition to meeting the CT standard. After a few trials in

Model 2.0, the final dose of free chlorine is 2.1 mg/L, which is added between filtration and contact tank.

14

Group A Engineering


In Table.8, the residual of chlorine is presented. According to the CT spreadsheet, the final logremoval of

Giardia is 4.83 and the final removal of viruses is 90.72.

Under the minimum temperature of 5°C, the dose of free chlorine is 2 mg/L. Since free chlorine

is not efficient under lower temperature, chlorine dioxide is added to enhance the disinfection. The dose

of chlorine dioxide is 1.3 mg/L. It is added after rapid mix. The dose of alum is 120 mg/L. The dose of

lime is 23.4 mg/L. The dose of ash soda is 75 mg/L. The logremoval of Giardia is 8.61 and the final

removal of viruses is 95.21.

These calculations were performed using the provided CT spreadsheet, based on detention times,

chemical doses, and baffling factors. The baffling factor chosen for the flocculation tanks was 0.5, and

will be produced by adding in perforated baffling walls between the turbines. Based on the sedimentation

tank design, we chose 0.5 to represent the influent distribution, effluent launders, and flow conditions,

according to "Selection of Baffling Factors and Operating Conditions for "T10" Calculations."

15

Group A Engineering


Chemical Feeds: For our plant design we have chosen the following chemicals to treat the water: Alum (Al2[SO4]3): standard water treatment coagulant. Alum will be stored in hydrous form as 5.6 lbs of alum per gallon. Dose: 120 mg/L Max feed: (wet) 446.8 gal/hr Pumps: 3 Size pump: 245.7 gal/hr Turndown ratio: 3 Max use 60048(lb) 10723 (gallons) Average use: 40032 (lb) 7149 (gallons) Minimum use: 20016 (lb) 6574 (gallons) Chlorine Gas (Cl2): disinfectant. Keep in cryogenic tank as liquid form Dose: max= 2.1 (mg/L) min= 1.8 (mg/L) Pumps = 3 Size of pump = 347.5 gal/h Turndown ratio: 3.5 Max use: 1051 (lbs) 15164(gallons) Average use: 600 (lbs) 8665 (gallons) Min use: 300(lbs) 4332(gallons) Storage tank: 9007.2 (lbs) Calcium Oxide (CaO): water hardening chemical. Commonly known as lime. Kept in fine powder form. Dose: max= 23.4 mg/L min= 23.2 mg/L Pumps = 3 Size of pump= 9.63 gal/hr Turndown ratio = 3.02 Max use: 11709(lbs) 420 (gallons) Average use: 7740 (lbs) 278 (gallons) Min use 3870 (lbs) 139 (gallons) Storage tank: 116092.8 (lbs) Sodium Carbonate (Na2CO3): Alkalinity and coagulant buffer. Injected into the treatment system to maintain pH levels at adequate levels for continuous operation. Commonly known as soda ash Dose: max=75 (mg/L) min= 75 (mg/L) Pumps: 3

16

Group A Engineering


Size of pump: 40 (gal/hr) Turndown ratio: 3 Max use 37530(lbs) 1778(gallons) Average use: 25020(lbs) 1185 (gallons) Min use: 12510(lbs) 593(gallons) Storage tank Chlorine Dioxide (ClO2): disinfectant. Strong oxidizing agent Dose: max= 1.3 (mg/L) min= 0.1 mg/L Pumps: 3 Size of pump: 223.5 (gal/hr) Turndown ratio: 39 Max use: 651 (lbs) 9753 (gallons) Average use: 434 (lb) 6501 (gallons) Min use 17 (lbs) 250 (gallons) Storage tank: 6505 (lbs) Residual Treatment:

Since the enaction of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, the residual sludge from

water treatment plants are categorized as industrial waste and thus must be treated with the best available

technology within economic constraints. There are various processes to treat residual waste, including

gravity thickening, mechanical dewatering and sludge lagoons. Given that Anytown’s water treatment

plant will have access to vast affordable land and emphasized their discretion in budgetary spending,

sludge lagoons were the prefered method of residual management. And since water conservation and

recycling are not a priority for this design guidelines, the dry sludge will be delivered into an

environmentally friendly landfill instead of redistributed to the plant treatment. From the chemicals and

treatment process we have advised to construct, the major sources of sludge for the plant will originate

from the presedimentation process and the alum coagulation byproducts. Lime (calcium oxide) is

commonly accounted as a contributor for sludge when softening the water, but since our influent water

source Ca hardness is relatively low (22 mg/L) our application of lime will be in the end stages of

17

Group A Engineering


treatment to instead harden the water before entering the distribution system and therefore not producing

any sludge.

Since typical plants using alum for their coagulant will retrieve 6090% of their sludge from the

sedimentation process and the remainder from the filters our presedimentation contribution assessment

created minimal values in comparison to alum byproducts (Wiley). The typical range for alum residual as

a percentage of entire plant water flow is 0.080.3. For our assessment we used the conservative value of

0.26 of entire plant flow. We had an end result of 1,320,556 lbs treated every 3.5 months (our

holding/drying period).

We also took into consideration the filtertowaste residual sludge and presedimentation in our

calculations, but the results were magnitudes lower than the alum residual produced. Since we are running

our backwash water through the plant we did not account for these numbers when designing our sludge

lagoons. From these calculations we were able to design four lagoons according to standard practices and

regulations. Our dimensions for each lagoon will be 4.5 ft (depth) x 500 ft (length) x 125 ft (width). So

the entire volume required for average plant operations is 661681 ft^3 and our four lagoons will provide

with 112500 ft^3. Though the extra volume might seem excessive and costly, land availability is not an

issue for this design and it accounts for summer storms which increase our daily turbidity from 5 NTU to

500 NTU. Our calculations also accounted for a conservative drying period of 3.5 months, which will

alleviate stress on the residual management process during the summer storms.

18

Group A Engineering


Sample lagoon layout. Image courtesy of Google Images

Clearwell Storage:

The total volume of the contact tank is 9 million gallons, with rectangular dimensions of 6 m

deep, 36 m wide, and 160 m long. This meets the requirements of a lengthtowidth ratio between 4:1 and

5:1, as well as barriers are set in the basin to make the contact tank well baffled with a baffling factor of

0.7.

Layout of contact tank / clearwater storage.

Addendum:

Due to the nature of any project, these values may require adjustment in during construction or

operation, in order to achieve the desired results. Group A Engineering reserves the ability to perform

minor adjustments needed in order to achieve the design criteria when this plant is constructed and

operated.

19

Group A Engineering


B. Treatment Schematic

1. Site Layout

20

Group A Engineering


2. Process Flow Diagram

21

Group A Engineering


C. Hydraulic Grade Line

22

Group A Engineering


D. Compliance with Sustainability Objectives

Will this design work? Excellent It meets all requirements set forth by the EPA and the local water treatment goals

Will this design last? Excellent It can last for decades, due to its simplicity and ruggedness

Will it survive extreme events? Excellent We measured different situations under higher and lower temperatures, and have designed the plant under worstcase turbidity scenario

Is it affordable? Excellent Traditional design costs less

Will it negatively impact the environment? Fair Water not recycled, uses lots of land

Does it require excessive amounts of energy? Excellent Pumps do not consume much energy

What is its carbon footprint? Fair The plant is spread over a large area. Also, chemical consumption contributes to carbon emission.

23

Group A Engineering


VII. REFERENCES Chris Wiant, PhD. “The Chlorine Residual: A Public Health Safeguard” May 2005. Web. 13 Mar. 2016 <http://www.waterandhealth.org/chlorineresidualpublichealthsafeguard/>. EPA. “Water Treatment Plant Model Version 2.0 User’s Manual” May 18 2001 "Flocculation and Coagulation." Civil Engineer. N.p., 26 Apr. 2015. Web. 13 Mar. 2016. <http://whatisacivilengineer.com/flocculationandcoagulation/>. Howe, Kerry J., John C. Crittenden, Kerry J. Howe, David W. Hand, George Tchobanoglous, and R. Rhodes. Trussell. Water Treatment: Principles and Design. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Kenneth D. Kerri. “Comparison of Treatment Process Sustainability at Water Plants in the Sacramento Region” Sep 2011 Marambio Jones, Catalina. “Design of Water Treatment Plants.” Los Angeles, CA. Winter 2016. Lecture. "Rapid Sand Filtration." Water Treatment Primer. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2016. <http://www.elaguapotable.com/WT%20%20Rapid%20Sand%20Filtration.htm>. Rectangular Sedimentation Tank with Traveling Bridge. Digital image.SlidePlayer.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Mar. 2016. <http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3453785/slides/slide_21.jpg>. "Selection of Baffling Factors and Operating Conditions for "T10" Calculations." Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (n.d.): n. pag. 1 Apr. 2004. Web. 13 Mar. 2016. <https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/watersupply/pdw/tcr/baffling_factors.pdf>. United States Environmental Protective Agency. “History of the Clean Water Act.” 1 June 2015. Web. 10 Mar. 2016 https://www.epa.gov/lawsregulations/historycleanwateract United States Environmental Protective Agency. “Stage 1 Disinfection and Disinfection Byproducts Rule: Laboratory Quick Reference Guide” https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/stage1andstage2disinfectantsanddisinfectionbyproductsrules Urs. von Gunten, Juerg. Hoigne. “Bromate Formation during Ozonization of BromideContaining Waters: Interaction of Ozone and Hydroxyl Radical Reactions” July 1994 Vedat Uyak, Sema Yavuz, Ismail Toroz, Sahin Ozaydin, Esra Ates Genceli. “Disinfection byproducts precursors removal by enhanced coagulation and PAC adsorption” 16 July 2006

24

http://www.waterandhealth.org/chlorine-residual-public-health-safeguard/

http://images.slideplayer.com/12/3453785/slides/slide_21.jpg

https://www.tceq.texas.gov/assets/public/permitting/watersupply/pdw/tcr/baffling_factors.pdf

https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/history-clean-water-act

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=3000663Y.txt

http://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=3000663Y.txt

https://www.epa.gov/dwreginfo/stage-1-and-stage-2-disinfectants-and-disinfection-byproducts-rules

http://pubs.acs.org/author/von+Gunten%2C+Urs.

http://pubs.acs.org/author/Hoigne%2C+Juerg.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001191640700447X#





Group A Engineering


VIII. APPENDIX

A. Source Water Quality Table 1. Brown River Water Parameters

Parameter Variable Units Value

Min Temperature Tmin deg C 5

Max Temperature Tmax deg C 25

TOC mg/L 4

UV 254 1/cm 0.12

Bromide ug/L 200

TDS mg/L 43

pH () 7.9

Alkalinity mg/L as CaCO3 20

Ca Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 22

Total Hardness mg/L as CaCO3 25

Chloride mg/L 3

Sulfate mg/L 1

AmmoniaN mg/L 0.01

Turbidity Avg NTU 5

Turbidity Max NTU 500

Max Flow Rate Qmax mgd 60

Avg Flow Rate Q mgd 40

Min Flow Rate Qmin mgd 20

Max Filtration Rate gpm/ft2 6

Influent Hydraulic Elevation Ho ft 1035

Finished Water Hydraulic Elevation Hf ft 995

Avg Distribution System Detention Time days 1

Max Distribution System Detention Time days 3

25

Group A Engineering


Table 2. Brown River’s Pathogen Information

Pathogen Information Units Value

E. Coli /100 mL Very High

Cryptosporidium /100 L Very High

Geosmin Max ng/L 2

MIB Max ng/L 4

B. Water Regulations

Table 3. COAGULATION:

Enhanced Coagulation Source Water Alkalinity

(mg/L) 060 60120 >120

2.04.0 35% 25% 15%

Source Water TOC (mg/L) 4.08.0 45% 35% 25%

>8.0 50% 40% 30%

Table 4. FLOCCULATION: Detention time greater than 30 min FlowThrough Velocity 0.5 < v < 1.5 ft/min 0.00254 < v < 0.00762

Conventional G steps 50, 30, 10 Vertical Turbine mixing system impeller hydrofoil or PBT blade diameter/ effective tank diameter D/Te 0.30.6 tank height/effective tank diameter H/Te 0.91.1 blade elevation from bottom/tank height C/H 0.50.33

26

Group A Engineering


revolutions per minute N 10.030.0 tip speed m/s 2.03.0 effective tank diameter Te sqrt(4*plan area/pi) baffling (0.0625 or 0.1) * D depth H < 8m Table 5. SEDIMENTATION: Minimum sedimentation basins 2

Water Depth 35 ft

LengthtoDepth Ratio, minimum 15:1

WidthtoDepth Ratio 3:1 6:1

LengthtoWidth Ratio, minimum 4:1 5:1

Surface Loading Rate 1.25 2.5 m/h

Horizontal meanflow velocity 0.3 1.1 m/min

Detention Time 1.5 4 h

Reynolds Number < 20,000

Froude Number > 10^6

Table 6. FILTRATION: Filtration Rate 2 6 gpm/ft^2

Media Diameter 0.5 1.2 mm

Bed Depth 2 6 ft

Required Head 6 10 ft

Run Length 1 4 days

Pretreatment Coagulation

C. Calculations

PreSedimentation: Requirements & Equations: Max Plant Flow Rate 2.63 m3/sec Max hf 0.05 m/sec Settling vs 0.0069 m/sec For particles > 0.1 mm # Basins 3 Safety Factor SF 1.75 1.52.0

27

Group A Engineering


CrossSection per Tank 17.53333333 m2 Qmax/(#tanks*hf) Depth 3 m Width 5.844444444 m Length 38.04347826 m SF*depth*hf/vs

Length:Depth 12.68115942 > 6 Length:Width 6.509340387 > 4

Detention Time 12.68115942 min > 6

Overflow Rate 340.662857 m/day 200400

Coagulation Turbine Mixer Max Plant Flow Rate 2.63 m3/sec Detention Time 5 sec Pipe Volume 13.15 m3 Pipe Diameter 1 m Pipe Length 4.185765215 m G 1000 Mixer Power, in hp 27 Flocculation Vertical Turbine Max Plant Flow Rate 2.63 m3/sec Detention Time 2400 sec Total Volume Needed 6312 m3 # Trains 5 # Basins per Train 4 Volume per Basin 315.6 m3 Basin Dimensions (Cube) 6.80841m Max FlowThrough Velocity 0.00284 m/sec 0.00254 < v < 0.00762

T = 5 C T = 25 C u= 0.00152 0.000895 Mixer Power for given G, in hp: Motor to Choose: 70 3.152139581 1.856029556 4 hp 50 1.60823448 0.946953855 2 hp 30 0.5789644128 0.3409033878 1 hp 10 0.0643293792 0.0378781542 1 hp

Blade and Tank Ratios impeller hydrofoil

28

Group A Engineering


effective tank diameter Te (m) 7.68 impeller diameter D (m) 3.46 tank height/effective tank diameter H/Te 0.89 0.91.1 blade elevation from bottom C (m) 2.72 revolutions per minute N 10.030.0 tip speed m/s 2.03.0 baffling B (m) 0.277 Sedimentation Basins: Basins Number of Floc Trains 5 Recommended min #: 2

Number of Sedimentation Basins 7 0.5 x Flocc Trains, rounded up

Flow Values Typical Overflow Rate 0.000417 m/sec Typical Overflow Rate 1.50 m/hr Range: 1.52.5 Max Plant Flow 2.63 m3/sec Avg Plant Flow 1.75 m3/sec Min Plant Flow 0.88 m3/sec

Per Basin Size Area 901.714m2 A = Q_max / (OR x # basins)

Width 15 m (can be multiple of 6) Length 60.114 m L = A/W Depth 4 m 4 m avg Volume 3606.857 m3

Detention Time Detention Time 1371.429 sec tD = D/(OR*#Basins)

Size Ratios Detention time (Qmax) 2.667 hr 1.5 < tD < 4

Detention time (Qav) 4.008 hr 1.5 < tD < 4 Detention time (Qmin) 7.970 hr 1.5 < tD < 4 Length:Depth 15.029 > 15:1 Length:Width 4.008 > 4:1 Width:Depth 3.75 3:1 5:1 Max Horizontal Flow 0.376 m/min 0.3 < hf < 1.1

Reynolds & Froude Reynolds, Max Flow, 5 deg C 10755.14874 < 20,000 (p*v*Rh)/u Numbers 2.608695652 m Rh = Ax/Pw

0.006266666667 m/sec vf = hf/60 0.00152 kg/m/sec u 1000 kg/m3 p

Reynolds, Max Flow, 25 deg C 18210.93029 < 20,000 (p*v*Rh)/u

2.608695652 m Rh = Ax/Pw

29

Group A Engineering


0.006266666667 m/sec vf = hf/60 0.000895 kg/m/sec u 997 kg/m3 p

Froude, Max Flow 0.000001534549024 > 1E6 vf^2/(g*Rh)

0.006266666667 m/sec vf 9.81 m/sec2 g 2.608695652 m Rh

Filtration Dual Media Total # of Filters Max Flow Rate 60 mgd

Max Flow Rate 9468 m^3/h # Filters 9 N = 1.2 x Q^0.5 Filtration Rate 15 m/h 1525

Size Total Filter Area Needed 631.20 m^2

Per Filter Area 70.13 m^2 25 100 Width 5 m 3.06.0 Length 15.59 m Depth of Sand (d = 0.55 mm) 0.30 m 0.3 avg Depth of Anthracite (d = 1 mm) 0.45 m 0.45 avg Depth Water Above Media 2.40 m 1.82.4 Volume 220.92 m^3 Length:Width 3.46 2:1 4:1

Detention Time, tD 0.21 h tD = (h x A) / Q

Filter Wash System Backwash Flow Rate 50 m/h 4555

Surface Wash, Single Rotating Arm 1.5 m/h 1.251.75 @ Pressure 550 kPa 480690

Disinfection:

Transform all the ammonia into nitrogen gas.

3HOCl + 2NH3 N2(g) + 3H2O + 3HCl→

3 mol of HOCl is needed for every 2 mol of NH3

Weight ration: (1.5 mol/mol) = 7.61 mg Cl2 / mg N 14 g N14 g N71 g Cl2

Required dose = 7.61mg Cl2 /mg N 0.01mg N/L = 0.0761 mg Cl2 /L×

30

Group A Engineering


Chemical Feeds:

31

Group A Engineering


32

Group A Engineering


D. Model 2.0 Outputs Under higher temperature (2.1 mg/L Free chlorine)

Table 1 Water Quality Summary for Raw, Finished, and Distributed Water At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Parameter Units Raw Water Effluent Avg. Tap End of Sys pH () 7.9 9.1 9.1 9.2 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 20 60 60 60 TOC (mg/L) 4.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 UV (1/cm) 0.120 0.033 0.033 0.033 (T)SUVA (1/cm) 3.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 Ca Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 22 53 53 53 Mg Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 3 3 3 3 AmmoniaN (mg/L) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bromide (ug/L) 200 115 110 115 Free Cl2 Res. (mg/L as Cl2) 0.0 0.3 0.2 0.0 Chloramine Res. (mg/L as Cl2) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TTHMs (ug/L) 0 74 80 74 HAA5 (ug/L) 0 31 32 31 HAA6 (ug/L) 0 51 52 51 HAA9 (ug/L) 0 80 83 80 TOX (ug/L) 0 231 240 231 Bromate (ug/L) 0 0 0 0 Chlorite (mg/L) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TOC Removal (percent) 52 E.C. not required raw TOC, raw SUVA, and/or finished TOC <= 2 E.C. Step 1 TOC removal requirement ACHIEVED CT Ratios Virus () 0.0 840.4 840.4 840.4 Giardia () 0.0 166.4 166.4 166.4 Cryptosporidium () 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

33

Group A Engineering


Table 2 Selected Input Parameters Parameter Value Units TEMPERATURES Average 25.0 (deg. C) Minimum 5.0 (deg. C) PLANT FLOW RATES Average 2.0 (mgd) Peak Hourly 60.0 (mgd) DISINFECTION INPUTS/CALCULATED VALUES Surface Water Plant? TRUE Giardia Removal + Inactivation Required 3.0 (logs) Giardia Removal Credit by Filtration 2.5 (logs) Giardia Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Giardia Inactivation Credit Required 0.5 (logs) Virus Removal + Inactivation Required 4.0 (logs) Virus Removal Credit by Filtration 2.0 (logs) Virus Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Virus Inactivation Credit Required 2.0 (logs) Crypto Removal + Inactivation Required 4.0 (logs) Crypto Removal Credit by Filtration 2.0 (logs) Crypto Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Crypto Inactivation Credit Required 2.0 (logs) CHEMICAL DOSES (in order of appearance) Alum 120.0 (mg/L as Al2(SO4)3*14H2O) Soda Ash 75.0 (mg/L as Na2CO3) Chlorine (Gas) 2.1 (mg/L as Cl2) Lime 23.2 (mg/L as Ca(OH)2)

34

Group A Engineering


PROCESS HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS: T10/Tth T50/Tth VOL. (MG) (in order of appearance) Rapid Mix 0.1 1.0 0.0035 Flocculation 0.5 1.0 1.6675 Settling Basin 0.5 1.0 6.6698 Filtration 0.5 1.0 0.5252 Contact Tank 0.5 1.0 9.0000 Table 3 Predicted Water Quality Profile At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) | Residence Time | pH TOC UVA (T)SUVA Cl2 NH2Cl | Process| Cum. | Location () (mg/L) (1/cm) (L/mgm) (mg/L) (mg/L) | (hrs) | (hrs) | Influent 7.9 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Alum 3.1 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Soda Ash 6.4 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Rapid Mix 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.04 0.04 Flocculation 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 20.01 20.05 Settling Basin 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 80.04 100.09 Filtration 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 6.30 106.39 Chlorine (Gas) 6.4 1.9 0.033 1.7 2.0 0.0 0.00 106.39 Contact Tank 6.4 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.3 0.0 108.00 214.39 Lime 9.1 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.3 0.0 0.00 214.39 WTP Effluent 9.1 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.3 0.0 0.00 214.39 Average Tap 9.1 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.2 0.0 24.00 238.39 End of System 9.2 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.0 0.0 72.00 286.39 TOC Removal (percent): 52 E.C. not required raw TOC, raw SUVA, and/or finished TOC <= 2 E.C. Step 1 TOC removal requirement ACHIEVED

35

Group A Engineering


Table 4 Predicted Water Quality Profile At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Calcium Magnesium pH Alk Hardness Hardness Solids NH3N Bromide Location () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (ug/L) Influent 7.9 20 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Alum 3.1 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Soda Ash 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Rapid Mix 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Flocculation 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Settling Basin 6.4 30 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Filtration 6.4 30 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Chlorine (Gas) 6.4 29 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Contact Tank 6.4 29 22 3 61.9 0.0 115 Lime 9.1 60 53 3 61.9 0.0 115 WTP Effluent 9.1 60 53 3 61.9 0.0 115 Average Tap 9.1 60 53 3 61.9 0.0 110 End of System 9.2 60 53 3 61.9 0.0 115 Table 5 Predicted Trihalomethanes and other DBPs At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Temperature (25.0 C) BrO3 ClO2 TOX |CHCl3 CHBrCl2 CHBr2Cl CHBr3 TTHMs Location (ug/L) (mg/L) (ug/L)|(ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 0 0.0 231 9 21 38 6 74 Lime 0 0.0 231 9 21 38 6 74 WTP Effluent 0 0.0 231 9 21 38 6 74 Average Tap 0 0.0 240 10 23 41 7 80

36

Group A Engineering


End of System 0 0.0 231 9 21 38 6 74 Table 6 Predicted Haloacetic Acids through HAA5 At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Temperature (25.0 C) MCAA DCAA TCAA MBAA DBAA HAA5 Location (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 3 9 8 3 8 31 Lime 3 9 8 3 8 31 WTP Effluent 3 9 8 3 8 31 Average Tap 3 9 9 3 9 32 End of System 3 9 8 3 8 31 Table 7 Predicted Haloacetic Acids (HAA6 through HAA9) At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and InfluentTemperature (25.0 C) BCAA BDCAA DBCAA TBAA HAA6 HAA9 Location (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 19 3 3 24 51 80 Lime 19 3 3 24 51 80 WTP Effluent 19 3 3 24 51 80

37

Group A Engineering


Average Tap 20 3 3 25 52 83 End of System 19 3 3 24 51 80 Table 8 Predicted Disinfection Parameters Residuals and CT Ratios At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) CT Ratios Temp pH Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location (C) () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Giardia Virus Crypto Influent 25.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 25.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rapid Mix 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Settling Basin 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filtration 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine (Gas) 25.0 6.4 2.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Contact Tank 25.0 6.4 0.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 166.4 840.4 0.0 Lime 25.0 9.1 0.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 166.4 840.4 0.0 WTP Effluent 25.0 9.1 0.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 166.4 840.4 0.0 Average Tap 25.0 9.1 0.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 166.4 840.4 0.0 End of System 25.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 166.4 840.4 0.0 Table 9 Predicted Disinfection Parameters CT Values At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location <(mg/L * minutes)> Influent 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rapid Mix 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Settling Basin 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filtration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine (Gas) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

38

Group A Engineering


Contact Tank 840.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lime 840.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 WTP Effluent 840.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Average Tap 840.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 End of System 840.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table 10 Predicted Disinfection Parameters At Peak Flow (60.0 MGD) and Minimum Temperature (5.0 C) for Surface Water Plant with Coagulation and Filtration CT Ratios Temp pH Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location (C) () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Giardia Virus Crypto Influent 5.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 5.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rapid Mix 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Settling Basin 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filtration 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine (Gas) 5.0 6.5 2.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Contact Tank 5.0 6.5 1.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 5.9 34.5 0.0 Lime 5.0 9.3 1.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 5.9 34.5 0.0 WTP Effluent 5.0 9.3 1.3 0.0 0.00 0.00 5.9 34.5 0.0 Average Tap 5.0 9.3 1.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 5.9 34.5 0.0 End of System 5.0 9.3 1.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 5.9 34.5 0.0 Table 11 Predicted Inactivation at Minimum Temperature and Peak Flow and DBPs at Plant Flow and Influent Temperature _____ CT Ratios ____ Cl2 NH2Cl ClO2 BrO3 TTHM HAA5 Location Giardia Virus Crypto (mg/L as Cl2)(mg/L) <(ug/L)> Influent 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Alum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

39

Group A Engineering


Flocculation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Filtration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 5.9 34.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0 74 31 Lime 5.9 34.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0 74 31 WTP Effluent 5.9 34.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0 74 31 Average Tap 5.9 34.5 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0 80 32 End of System 5.9 34.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 74 31

Table 1 Water Quality Summary for Raw, Finished, and Distributed Water At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Parameter Units Raw Water Effluent Avg. Tap End of Sys pH () 7.9 9.2 9.2 9.2 Alkalinity (mg/L as CaCO3) 20 60 60 60 TOC (mg/L) 4.0 1.9 1.9 1.9 UV (1/cm) 0.120 0.033 0.033 0.033 (T)SUVA (1/cm) 3.0 1.7 1.7 1.7 Ca Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 22 54 54 54 Mg Hardness (mg/L as CaCO3) 3 3 3 3 AmmoniaN (mg/L) 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 Bromide (ug/L) 200 116 111 116 Free Cl2 Res. (mg/L as Cl2) 0.0 0.2 0.1 0.0 Chloramine Res. (mg/L as Cl2) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 TTHMs (ug/L) 0 74 80 74 HAA5 (ug/L) 0 30 31 30 HAA6 (ug/L) 0 49 51 49 HAA9 (ug/L) 0 78 80 78 TOX (ug/L) 0 229 238 229 Bromate (ug/L) 0 0 0 0 Chlorite (mg/L) 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 TOC Removal (percent) 52 E.C. not required raw TOC, raw SUVA, and/or finished TOC <= 2 E.C. Step 1 TOC removal requirement ACHIEVED CT Ratios Virus () 0.0 713.5 713.5 713.5 Giardia () 0.0 141.1 141.1 141.1

40

Group A Engineering


Cryptosporidium () 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table 2 Selected Input Parameters Parameter Value Units TEMPERATURES Average 25.0 (deg. C) Minimum 5.0 (deg. C) PLANT FLOW RATES Average 2.0 (mgd) Peak Hourly 60.0 (mgd) DISINFECTION INPUTS/CALCULATED VALUES Surface Water Plant? TRUE Giardia Removal + Inactivation Required 3.0 (logs) Giardia Removal Credit by Filtration 2.5 (logs) Giardia Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Giardia Inactivation Credit Required 0.5 (logs) Virus Removal + Inactivation Required 4.0 (logs) Virus Removal Credit by Filtration 2.0 (logs) Virus Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Virus Inactivation Credit Required 2.0 (logs) Crypto Removal + Inactivation Required 4.0 (logs) Crypto Removal Credit by Filtration 2.0 (logs) Crypto Removal Credit by Membranes 0.0 (logs) Crypto Inactivation Credit Required 2.0 (logs) CHEMICAL DOSES (in order of appearance) Alum 120.0 (mg/L as Al2(SO4)3*14H2O) Soda Ash 75.0 (mg/L as Na2CO3) Chlorine Dioxide 1.3 (mg/L as ClO2) Chlorine (Gas) 2.0 (mg/L as Cl2) Lime 23.4 (mg/L as Ca(OH)2) PROCESS HYDRAULIC PARAMETERS: T10/Tth T50/Tth VOL. (MG) (in order of appearance)

41

Group A Engineering


Rapid Mix 0.1 1.0 0.0035 Flocculation 0.5 1.0 1.6675 Settling Basin 0.5 1.0 6.6698 Filtration 0.5 1.0 0.5252 Contact Tank 0.5 1.0 9.0000 Table 3 Predicted Water Quality Profile At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) | Residence Time | pH TOC UVA (T)SUVA Cl2 NH2Cl | Process| Cum. | Location () (mg/L) (1/cm) (L/mgm) (mg/L) (mg/L) | (hrs) | (hrs) | Influent 7.9 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Alum 3.1 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Soda Ash 6.4 4.0 0.120 3.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 Rapid Mix 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.04 0.04 Chlorine Dioxide 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.04 Flocculation 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 20.01 20.05 Settling Basin 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 80.04 100.09 Filtration 6.4 1.9 0.047 2.4 0.0 0.0 6.30 106.39 Chlorine (Gas) 6.4 1.9 0.033 1.7 1.9 0.0 0.00 106.39 Contact Tank 6.4 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.2 0.0 108.00 214.39 Lime 9.2 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.2 0.0 0.00 214.39 WTP Effluent 9.2 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.2 0.0 0.00 214.39 Average Tap 9.2 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.1 0.0 24.00 238.39 End of System 9.2 1.9 0.033 1.7 0.0 0.0 72.00 286.39 TOC Removal (percent): 52 E.C. not required raw TOC, raw SUVA, and/or finished TOC <= 2 E.C. Step 1 TOC removal requirement ACHIEVED

42

Group A Engineering


Table 4 Predicted Water Quality Profile At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Calcium Magnesium pH Alk Hardness Hardness Solids NH3N Bromide Location () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (ug/L) Influent 7.9 20 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Alum 3.1 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Soda Ash 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Rapid Mix 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Chlorine Dioxide 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Flocculation 6.4 30 22 3 0.0 0.0 200 Settling Basin 6.4 30 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Filtration 6.4 30 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Chlorine (Gas) 6.4 29 22 3 61.9 0.0 200 Contact Tank 6.4 29 22 3 61.9 0.0 116 Lime 9.2 60 54 3 61.9 0.0 116 WTP Effluent 9.2 60 54 3 61.9 0.0 116 Average Tap 9.2 60 54 3 61.9 0.0 111 End of System 9.2 60 54 3 61.9 0.0 116 Table 5 Predicted Trihalomethanes and other DBPs At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Temperature (25.0 C) BrO3 ClO2 TOX |CHCl3 CHBrCl2 CHBr2Cl CHBr3 TTHMs Location (ug/L) (mg/L) (ug/L)|(ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine Dioxide 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 0 0.9 229 8 21 38 6 74 Lime 0 0.9 229 8 21 38 6 74

43

Group A Engineering


WTP Effluent 0 0.9 229 8 21 38 6 74 Average Tap 0 0.9 238 10 22 41 7 80 End of System 0 0.9 229 8 21 38 6 74 Table 6 Predicted Haloacetic Acids through HAA5 At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Temperature (25.0 C) MCAA DCAA TCAA MBAA DBAA HAA5 Location (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine Dioxide 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 3 8 8 3 8 30 Lime 3 8 8 3 8 30 WTP Effluent 3 8 8 3 8 30 Average Tap 2 9 8 3 8 31 End of System 3 8 8 3 8 30 Table 7 Predicted Haloacetic Acids (HAA6 through HAA9) At Average Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and InfluentTemperature (25.0 C) BCAA BDCAA DBCAA TBAA HAA6 HAA9 Location (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) (ug/L) Influent 0 0 0 0 0 0 Alum 0 0 0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0 0 0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0 0 0 0 0 0 Chlorine Dioxide 0 0 0 0 0 0 Flocculation 0 0 0 0 0 0 Settling Basin 0 0 0 0 0 0 Filtration 0 0 0 0 0 0

44

Group A Engineering


Chlorine (Gas) 0 0 0 0 0 0 Contact Tank 19 2 2 24 49 78 Lime 19 2 2 24 49 78 WTP Effluent 19 2 2 24 49 78 Average Tap 20 3 3 25 51 80 End of System 19 2 2 24 49 78 Table 8 Predicted Disinfection Parameters Residuals and CT Ratios At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) CT Ratios Temp pH Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location (C) () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Giardia Virus Crypto Influent 25.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 25.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rapid Mix 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine Dioxide 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.30 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Settling Basin 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filtration 25.0 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine (Gas) 25.0 6.4 1.9 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Contact Tank 25.0 6.4 0.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 141.1 713.5 0.0 Lime 25.0 9.2 0.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 141.1 713.5 0.0 WTP Effluent 25.0 9.2 0.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 141.1 713.5 0.0 Average Tap 25.0 9.2 0.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 141.1 713.5 0.0 End of System 25.0 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 141.1 713.5 0.0 Table 9 Predicted Disinfection Parameters CT Values At Plant Flow ( 2.0 MGD) and Influent Temperature (25.0 C) Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location <(mg/L * minutes)> Influent 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

45

Group A Engineering


Rapid Mix 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine Dioxide 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Settling Basin 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Filtration 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine (Gas) 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Contact Tank 713.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Lime 713.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 WTP Effluent 713.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Average Tap 713.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 End of System 713.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Table 10 Predicted Disinfection Parameters At Peak Flow (60.0 MGD) and Minimum Temperature (5.0 C) for Surface Water Plant with Coagulation and Filtration CT Ratios Temp pH Cl2 NH2Cl Ozone ClO2 Location (C) () (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) Giardia Virus Crypto Influent 5.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Alum 5.0 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soda Ash 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Rapid Mix 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.0 0.0 0.0 Chlorine Dioxide 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 1.30 0.0 0.0 0.0 Flocculation 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.67 3.4 24.4 0.1 Settling Basin 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.28 3.4 24.4 0.1 Filtration 5.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.26 3.4 24.4 0.1 Chlorine (Gas) 5.0 6.5 1.9 0.0 0.00 0.26 3.4 24.4 0.1 Contact Tank 5.0 6.5 1.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.0 56.7 0.1 Lime 5.0 9.3 1.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.0 56.7 0.1 WTP Effluent 5.0 9.3 1.2 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.0 56.7 0.1 Average Tap 5.0 9.3 1.1 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.0 56.7 0.1 End of System 5.0 9.3 1.0 0.0 0.00 0.00 9.0 56.7 0.1

46

Group A Engineering


Table 11 Predicted Inactivation at Minimum Temperature and Peak Flow and DBPs at Plant Flow and Influent Temperature _____ CT Ratios ____ Cl2 NH2Cl ClO2 BrO3 TTHM HAA5 Location Giardia Virus Crypto (mg/L as Cl2)(mg/L) <(ug/L)> Influent 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Alum 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Soda Ash 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Rapid Mix 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 0 Chlorine Dioxide 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9 0 0 0 Flocculation 3.4 24.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0 0 0 Settling Basin 3.4 24.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0 0 0 Filtration 3.4 24.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0 0 0 Chlorine (Gas) 3.4 24.4 0.1 1.9 0.0 0.9 0 0 0 Contact Tank 9.0 56.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.9 0 74 30 Lime 9.0 56.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.9 0 74 30 WTP Effluent 9.0 56.7 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.9 0 74 30 Average Tap 9.0 56.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.9 0 80 31 End of System 9.0 56.7 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.9 0 74 30

E. CT Spreadsheet

47

Group A Engineering


48

Group A Engineering


F. RTW Spreadsheet

49

Group A Engineering


Design Project Responsibilities:

Francisco Adam Breeana Haowen

Executive Summary ✓

Introduction ✓

Source Water Quality ✓

Regulatory Requirements

✓

Alternative Treatment Methods

✓

Selected Processes ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Site Layout ✓

Flow Diagram ✓

Hydraulic Gradeline ✓ ✓

References ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Calculations ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓

Pre Sedimentation Design

✓

Rapid Mix Design ✓

Flocculation Design ✓

Sedimentation Design ✓ ✓

Filtration Design ✓ ✓

Disinfection Design ✓

DBPs Management ✓

Chemical Feeds Design ✓

Residuals Management ✓

Lagoons Design ✓

PowerPoint ✓

50

Group A Engineering


Model 2.0 ✓ ✓

CT Spreadsheet ✓ ✓

RTW Spreadsheet ✓ ✓

51

Date post:	26-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	adam-richardson
View:	161 times
Download:	6 times

Water Treatment Plant Design CEE157B

Documents