You are on page 1of 120

Source: HYDRAULIC DESIGN HANDBOOK

CHAPTER 22
WATER AND WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
HYDRAULICS
Federico E. Maisch
Sharon L. Cole
David V. Hobbs
Frank J. Tantone
William L. Judy
Greeley and Hansen
Richmond, VA

22.1 INTRODUCTION
Designers of water treatment plants and wastewater treatment plants are faced with the
need to design treatment processes which must meet the following general hydraulic
requirements:

Water treatment plants. Provide the head required to allow the water to flow through
the treatment processes and to be delivered to the transmission/distribution system in
the flow rates and at the pressures required for delivery to the users.
W
Wastewater treatment
r plants. Provide the head required to raise the flow of wastewater
from the sewer system to a level which allows the flow to proceed through the treat-
ment processes and be delivered to the receiving body of water.

The above requires knowledge of open-channel, closed-conduit, and hydraulic


machine flow principles. It also requires an understanding of the interaction between these
elements and their impact on the overall plant (site) hydraulics. Head is either available
through the difference in elevation (gravity) or it has to be converted from mechanical
energy using hydraulic machinery. Distribution of flows using open channels or closed
conduit is critical for proper hydraulic loading and process performance.
This chapter brings together information on commonly used hydraulic elements and
specific applications to water treatment plants and wastewater treatment plants. The devel-
opment of hydraulic profiles through the entire treatment process with examples for water
treatment plants and wastewater treatment is also presented.
Many processes and flow control devices are similar in both water treatment plants and
wastewater treatment plants. Both types of plants require flow distribution devices, gates
and valves, and flowmeters. These devices are discussed in Section 22.2. The development
of water treatment plant hydraulics, including examples from in-place facilities, are pre-
sented in Section 22.3. Wastewater treatment plant hydraulics are discussed in Section
22.4, and Section. 22.5 is devoted to non-Newtonian flow principles.
22.1
Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)
Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.2 Chapter Twenty-Two

22.2 GENERAL

22.2.1 Introduction

This section addresses some elements which are common to both water treatment plants
and wastewater treatment plants including:

Flow distributionmanifolds
Gates and valves
Flowmeters
Local losses

22.2.2 Flow distributionmanifolds

In the design of water and wastewater treatment plants, proper flow distribution can be as
critical as process design considerations, which typically receive much more attention.
Plant failures resulting from unequal and unmanageable flow distribution are possibly as
common and as serious as those resulting from errors in process design.
Flow distribution devices, such as distribution channels, pipe manifolds or distribution
boxes, are commonly used to distribute or equalize flow to parallel treatment units, such
as flocculation tanks, sedimentation basins, aeration tanks, or filters.

22.2.2.1 Distribution boxes. The simplest of these devices, the distribution box, typical-
ly consists of a structure arranged to provide a common water surface as the supply to two
or more outlets. The outlets are typically over weirs and the key to equal flow distribution
is to provide independent hydraulic characteristics between the downstream system and
the water level in the distribution box. In other words, provide a free discharge weir (non-
submerged under all conditions) for each outlet to eliminate the impact of downstream
physical system differences on the flow distribution. Velocity gradients across the distrib-
ution box must be nearly zero to equalize flow conditions over each outfall weir. Weirs
clearly should be of uniform design in terms of physical arrangement length and materi-
als of construction. They should also be adjustable to account for any minor flow differ-
ences noted in actual operation. The same principles apply if the designer wishes to dis-
tribute flows in specific proportions which are not necessarily equal. In this case the
designer could control the proportions of flow distribution by varying the relative geom-
etry of the weirs (i.e., change the width or invert of each weir to achieve a desired flow
distibution). The specifics of weir hydraulics are covered in various texts in the literature.
Attention should always be paid to the selection of the proper coefficients to model the
specific weir geometry and the geometry of the approach flow.
22.2.2.2 Distribution channels and pipe manifolds. Distribution channels and manifolds
are also common in plant design but a bit more complex in their function and design. The
distribution of flow in these devices is impacted by the flow distribution itself. Since a por-
tion of the flow leaves the channel or manifold along the length of the device, the veloci-
ty of flow and, therefore, the relationship of energy grade line, velocity head and hydraulic
grade line varies along the length of the device. This is more clearly visible in a distribu-
tion channel of uniform cross section, using side weirs along its length for flow distribu-
tion. At each weir, flow leaves the channel, resulting in less velocity head in the channel

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.3

and possibly a higher water surface at each ensuing weir. Chao and Trussell (1980), Camp
and Graber (1968), and Yao (1972) have presented comprehensive approaches for the
design of distribution channels and manifolds and should be reviewed for details of
design.
As in distribution boxes, the most important consideration to achieving equalized flow
distribution is to minimize the effects of unequal hydraulic conditions relative to each
point of distribution. In channels this can be accomplished by tapering the channel cross
section, varying weir elevations, making the channel large enough to cause velocity head
changes to be insignificant or a combination of these. Similar considerations may be
applied to manifolds with submerged orifice outlets. A reliable approach here is to pro-
vide a large enough manifold, resulting in a total headloss along the length of the distrib-
ution of less than one tenth the loss through any individual orifice. This approach essen-
tially results in the orifices becoming the only hydraulic control and the accuracy of the
flow distribution is then dependent on the uniformity of the orifices themselves.

22.2.3 Gates and Valves

Gates and valves generally serve to either control the rate of flow or to start/stop flow.
Gates and valves in treatment plants are typically subjected to much lower pressures
than those in water distribution systems or sewage force mains and can be of lighter
construction.

22.2.3.1 Gates. Gates are typically used in channels or in structures to start and stop flow
or to provide a hydraulic control point which is seldom adjusted. Because of the time and
effort required to operate gates, they are not suited for controlling flow when rapid
response, frequent variation, or delicate adjustments are needed. Primary design consid-
erations when using gates are the type of gate fabrication and the installation conditions
during construction.
There are many fabrication details including materials used, bottom arrangement, and
stem arrangement. For instance, for solids bearing flows, a flush bottom, rising stem gate
can be used to avoid creating a point of solids deposition and to minimize solids contact
with the threaded stem. Gate manufacturers are a good source of information for gate fab-
rication details and can assist with advice regarding specific applications.
Most commonly used gates are designed to stop flow in a single direction. They may
use upstream water pressure to assist in achieving a seal (seating head), but typically also
must be designed to resist static water pressure from downstream (unseating head). Both
seating and unseating heads must be evaluated in design of a gate application. For most
manufacturers, the seating or unseating head is expressed as the pressure relative to the
center line of the gate.

22.2.3.2 Valves. Table 22.1 provides a summary of several types of valves and their
applications. Valves are used to either throttle (control) flow or start/stop flow.
Start/stop valves are intended to be fully open or fully closed and nonthrottling. They
should present minimum resistance to flow when fully open and should be intended for
infrequent operation.
Gate valves, plug valves, cone valves, ball valves, and butterfly valves are the most
common start/stop valve selections. Butterfly valves have a center stem, are most common
in clean water applications and should not be used in applications including materials that
could hang-up on the stem. Therefore, they are seldom used at wastewater plants prior to
achieving a filter effluent water quality.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.4 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.1 Typical Valves and Their Application*

Type Open/Close Throttling Water Wastewater

Sluice gate X X X
Slide gate X X X
Gate valve X X X
Plug valve X X X X
Cone valve X X X X
Ball valve X X X X
Butterfly valve X X X
Swing check X X X
Lift check X X
Ball check X X X
Spring check X X X
Globe valve X X
Needle valve X X
Angle valve X X
Pinch/diaphragm X X X X
*
Typical applicationsexceptions are possible, but consultation with valve manufacturers is recommended.

Check valves are a special case of a start/stop valve application. Check valves offer
quick, automatic reaction to flow changes and are intended to stop flow direction rever-
sal. Typical configurations include swing check, lift check, ball check and spring loaded.
These valves are typically used on pump discharge piping and are opened by the pressure
of the flowing liquid and close automatically if pressure drops and flow attempts to
reverse direction. The rapid closure of these valves can result in unacceptable water-
hammer pressures with the potential to damage the system. A detailed surge analysis may
be required for many check valve applications (see Chapter. 12). At times, mechanically
operating check valves should be avoided in favor of electrically or pneumatically operat-
ed valves (typically plug, ball, or cone valves) to provide a mechanism to control time of
closing and reduce surge pressure peaks.
Throttling valves are used to control rate of flow and are designed for frequent or near-
ly continuous operation depending on whether they are manually operated or electroni-
cally controlled. Typical throttling valve types include globe valves, needle valves, and
angle valves in smaller sizes, and ball, plug, cone, butterfly, and pinch/diaphragm valves
in larger sizes. Throttling valves are typically most effective in the mid-range of loose line
open/close travel and for best flow control should not be routinely operated nearly fully
closed or nearly fully open.

22.2.4 Flow meters

The most common types of flow meters used in water and wastewater treatment plants are
summarized in Table 22.2 and fall into the following categories:

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.5

TABLE 22.2 Common Types of Flow Meters

Type Typical Accuracy Size Range Headloss Cost W WW

Venturi 0.75% of rate 1120 in Low Medium X X


Orifice plate 2% of scale Any size Medium Low X X
Pitot tube 0.55% of scale 1/296 in Low Low X
Parshall flume 5% of rate Wide range Low Medium X X
Magnetic 0.5% of rate 1/10120 in None High X X
Doppler 12.5% of rate 1/8120 in None High X X
Propeller 2% of rate Up to 24 in High High X
Turbine 0.52% of rate Up to 24 in High High X

Pressure differential/pressure measuring meters (e.g., Venturi, orifice plate, pitot tube,
and Parshall flume meters)
Magnetic meters
Doppler (ultrasonic) meters
Mechanical meters (e.g., propeller and turbine meters)

Accurate flow measurements require uniform flow patterns. Most meters are
significantly impacted by adjacent piping configurations. Typically a specific number of
straight pipe diameters is required both upstream and downstream of a meter to obtain
reliable measurements. In some cases, 15 straight pipe diameters upstream and 5 straight
pipe diameters downstream are recommended. However, different types of meters have
varying levels of susceptibility to the uniformity of the flow pattern. Meter manufacturers
should be consulted.

22.2.4.1 Pressure differential/pressure measuring meters. Pressure differential/pressure


measuring flow meters include Venturi meters, orifice plates, averaging pitot meters, and
Parshall flumes. These meters measure the change in pressure through a known flow cross
sectionor in the case of the pitot meter, measure the difference in pressure at a point in
the flow versus static pressure just downstream in a uniform section of pipe.
Venturi meters and orifice plates are commonly used in water and wastewater. Solids
in wastewater could plug the openings of a pitot tube meter-limiting their use to relative-
ly clean liquids. The Venturi meter and orifice plate meter use pressure taps at the wall of
the device and can be arranged to minimize potential for debris from clogging the taps.
The Parshall flume can be arranged with a side stilling well and level measuring float sys-
tem or an ultrasonic level sensing device to measure water level.

22.2.4.2 Magnetic meters. In a magnetic flowmeter, a magnetic field is generated around


a section of pipe. Water passing through the field induces a small electric current propor-
tional to the velocity of flow. Because a magnetic meter imposes no obstruction to the
flow, it is well suited to measuring solids bearing liquids as well as clean liquids and pro-
duces no headloss in addition to the normal pipe loss. Magnetic meters are among the least
susceptible to the uniformity of the stream lines in the approaching flow.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.6 Chapter Twenty-Two

22.2.4.3 Ultrasonic meters. In an ultrasonic flow meter, a pair of transceivers (transmit-


ter/receiver) are positioned diagonally across from each other on the pipe wall. The
transmitter sends out a signal which is affected by the speed of the flow. The receiver mea-
sures the difference between the speed of the signal when directed counter to the flow
(slowed by the flow) and when directed with the flow (speeded up by the flow). The time
difference is a function of fluid velocity, which is used to compute the flow. As with mag-
netic meters, no flow obstruction is imposed resulting in no headloss in addition to the
normal pipe loss. Ultrasonic meters are also available for open-channel applications.
22.2.4.4 Mechanical meters. Mechanical meters include propeller and turbine-type
equipment. The two meters are similar in function in that in each a device is inserted into
the flowpath. The device is rotated by the flow and the speed of rotation is used to com-
pute rate of flow. These devices impose an obstruction to flow, are recommended for clean
water only, and generally result in significant headloss.

22.2.5 Local Losses

In any piping system as flow travels along the pipe, pressure drops as a result of headloss
due to friction along the pipe and local losses at bends, fittings, and valves. The local
losses at bends, fittings, and valves are least significant in long, straight piping systems
and most significant at treatment plants where the length of straight pipe is relatively short
and therefore, the frictional pipe losses comprise a smaller fraction of the total losses
when compared to the summation of all local losses. A term often used to refer to local
losses is minor losses, however, because of the later consideration the term minor loss-
es can be misleading.
Traditionally, local losses have been computed in terms of equivalent length of
straight pipe or in terms of multiples of velocity head. The equivalent length or loss fac-
tor K methods attempt to estimate the local losses based on the characteristic of the spe-
cific bend, fitting or valve. The K loss factor method is discussed here. Essentially, a local
loss is computed as follows:
2
hL  KV (22.1)
2g
where hL  local loss, K  loss factor, V  velocity, g  gravitational acceleration.
The values for K reported by various sources vary considerably for some local losses
and are relatively consistent for others. See references. There are many literature sources
for K values. The Bureau of Reclamation (1992) is one such source of information regard-
ing energy loss equations. Table 22.3 shows a range of K factors from additional sources
as well as a typically used value for each. Judgment must be applied in computing local
losses, taking into account any unique system conditions. Throughout this chapter K val-
ues were obtained from equipment manufacturers when available. Values from Table 22.3
were used only as an approximation when more specific data were unavailable. The read-
er is cautioned that there are application-specific characteristics which have significant
influence on the K factors. One of these characteristics, for example, is size. A K value of
0.6 is often encountered in literature to characterize the losses associated with flow
through the run of a tee. However, for flow past tees in large pipes this factor can be very
small and nearly zero.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.7

TABLE 22.3 Typical K Factors for Computing Local Losses

Bulletin No. 2552, University of Wisconsin

Committee on Pipeline Planning (1975)


Ten-State Standards (1978)

Cameron Hydraulic Data


Valve and Fitting Types

Typically Used Value


Daugherty (1977)
Crane Co. (1987)
Walski (1992)

Simon (1986)

Sanks (1989)
Gate valve
100% open 0.39 0.19 0.19 0.10.3 0.2 0.2
75% open 1.1 1.15 1.2 1.2
50% open 4.8 5.6 5.6 5.6
25% open 27 24 24 25
Globe valveopen 10 10 10 4.06.0 10 10
Angle valveopen 4.3 5 2.13.1 5 1.82.9 2.5 5
Check valveball 4.5 6570 5
Swing check 0.62.3 062.2 0.62.5 2.5
Butterfly valveopen 1.2 0.160.35 0.5
Foot valvehinged 2.2 1.01.4 2.2
Foot valvepoppet 12.5 5.014.0 14
Elbows
45 regular 0.300.42 0.42 0.42
45 long radius 0.180.20 0.18 0.5 0.2
90 regular 0.210.3 0.25 0.7 0.25
90 long radius 0.140.23 0.18 0.6 0.19
180 regular 0.38 0.38
180 long radius (flanged) 0.25 0.25
Tees
Std. teeeflowthrough run 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.3 1.8 0.6
Std. teeeflow-through branch1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 0.75 1.8
Return bend 1.5 2.2 2.2 0.4 2.2
Mitre bend
90 1.8 1.1291.265 0.8 1.3
60 0.75 0.4710.684 0.35 0.6
30 0.25 0.1300.165 0.1 0.16
Expansion
d/D = 0.75 0.18 0.19 0.2 0.2
d/D = 0.5 0.55 0.56 0.6 0.6
d/D = 0.25 0.88 0.92 0.9 0.9
Contraction
d/D = 0.75 0.18 0.19 0.2 0.2
d/D = 0.5 0.33 0.33 0.3 0.33
d/D = 0.25 0.43 0.42 0.4 0.43
Entranceeprojecting 0.78 0.78 0.83 0.8 0.8 0.78 0.8
Entranceesharp 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Entranceewell rounded 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.25 0.04 0.04
Exit 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.8 Chapter Twenty-Two

22.3 HYDRAULICS OF WATER TREATMENT PLANTS

22.3.1 Introduction

Water treatment comprises the withdrawal of water from a source of supply and the
treatment of raw water through a series of unit processes for the beneficial use of the
system customers. Raw water quality can vary widely. The ultimate uses of water by the
system customer (e.g., drinking, fire protection, irrigation, aquifer recharge, etc.) can also
vary and be subject to different treatment level requirements and regulations. Therefore,
the selected treatment processes vary widely over a multitude of treatment technologies in
use. Water treatment consists of a series of chemical, biological, and physical processes
connected by channels and pipelines. Figures 22.1 and 22.2 illustrate process
flow diagrams (flowsheets) for typical surface water and groundwater treatment plants,
respectively. The designer of the water treatment process must carefully evaluate source
water characteristics and desired water quality characteristics of the treated water to
design treatment processes capable of purifying the source water to water suitable for the
system customers. The objective of this chapter is to review the hydraulic considerations
required to convey water through the treatment process.
Design of a plants treatment process is closely linked with the hydraulic design of the
treatment plant. This chapter presumes that the designer has evaluated and selected treat-
ment processes for the water treatment plant. Although design flows are discussed below,
we have also assumed that the designer has chosen a design flow requirement for the treat-
ment process. For municipal treatment plants, design flows are based on the service area

FIGURE 22.1 Typical surface water treatment plant process flow diagram.

FIGURE 22.2 Typical ground water treatment plant process flow


diagram with dual trains (#1 and #2).

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.9

population and the per capita use of water by the population served. The per capita use of
water can be obtained from literature sources as an initial approximation. However, these
initial estimations must be corroborated with actual site specific population counts and
water usage. For nonmunicipal treatment facilities, treated water needs of the service area
must be individually evaluated.

22.3.1.1 Sources of supply. Natural sources of supply include groundwater and surface
water supplies. Groundwater supplies typically are smaller in daily delivery but serve
more systems than surface water supplies. Groundwater supplies normally come from
wells, springs, or infiltration galleries.
Wells constitute the largest source of groundwater. Except in rare circumstances of
artesian wells (wells under the influence of a confined aquifer) and springs, groundwater
collection involves pumping facilities. Hydraulics of groundwater treatment plants are fre-
quently based on hydraulics of conduits under pressure, such as pipelines, pressure
filters, and pressure tanks. Raw water characteristics of groundwaters are uniform in
quality compared with surface supplies.
Surface water supplies are normally larger in daily delivery. Surface supplies are used
to service larger population centers and industrial centers. In areas where groundwater
supplies are limited in yield or where groundwater supplies contain undesirable chemical
characteristics, smaller surface water treatment plants may be utilized. Surface water
sources of supply include rivers, lakes, impoundments, streams, and ponds. The treatment
processes chosen in plants treating surface water favor nonpressurized systems such as
gravity sedimentation. The larger flow volumes characteristic of surface water supplies
also favor open channel hydraulic structures for conveying water through the treatment
process. Raw water characteristics of surface supplies can vary rapidly over short periods
of time and also experience seasonal variation.

22.3.1.2 Treatment requirements. Treatment requirements for municipal water treat-


ment plants are normally defined by regulatory agencies having authority over the plants
service area. In the United States, regulatory agencies include national government regu-
lations promulgated through the Environmental Protection Agency and state government
regulations. Water treatment plants are designed to meet these regulations. Treatment reg-
ulations change through improved knowledge of health effects of water constituents and
through identification of possible new water-borne threats. The designer therefore should
attempt to select treatment processes which will also meet treatment requirements which
are expected to be promulgated over the next few years. To the extent possible, treatment
plant process design should provide flexibility for future plant expansions or for possible
additional treatment processes. Because hydraulic design of plants must go hand-in-hand
with the process selection, plant hydraulic design should provide for the flexibility to add
future plant facilities.
Treatment requirements for industrial water treatment plants are dictated by process
needs of the industry and less by regulatory agency requirements. Industrial water treat-
ment plants that result in contact between or ingestion of the treated water by humans
must conform to the local regulatory requirements.

22.3.1.3 General design philosophy. Effective design of water treatment plant hydraulics
requires that the hydraulic designer have a thorough knowledge of all aspects of the water
system. The overall treatment system hydraulic design must be integrated and coordinat-
ed including the treatment plant, the raw water intake and pumping facilities, the treated
water storage, and treated water pressure/head requirements. The design within the water
treatment plant must also be integrated between the various treatment processes.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.10 Chapter Twenty-Two

Additionally, design considerations must address the availability of operating personnel


and hours of operation such that the process and hydraulic requirements conform to avail-
able resources.

22.3.2 Hydraulic Design Considerations in Process Selection

Water treatment plant process selections are controlled principally by characteristics of


the raw water and by the desired water quality characteristics of the finished water. Flow
through each unit process and each conduit connecting processes results in loss of
hydraulic head. Most treatment plants have limited head available.
The selection of a particular unit process will include evaluation of numerous criteria
including costs, operability, performance, energy use and similar items. One criteria
which must also be evaluated for each process is the hydraulic head requirements of the
process.

22.3.2.1 Head available. For the design flow to pass through a water treatment plant, the
total available head must exceed the head requirements of the unit processes and con-
necting conduits. The head available is the difference in energy grade line (EGL) in the
hydraulic profile between the head works of the plant and the end of the plant. Additional
head may be provided by pumping or by lowering the elevation of treatment units at the
end of the plant. See Figure 22.3 for a typical water treatment plant hydraulic profile.
For most surface water plants, the hydraulic profile at the head of the plant is
controlled by raw water pumps pumping from the intake facilities. The hydraulic profile
at the head of a plant in a groundwater system is typically determined by the well pumps
serving the plant.

22.3.2.2 Typical unit process head requirements. Following below is a table of typical
head requirements for water treatment plant processes. This table may be used for initial
evaluation of unit processes. More detailed hydraulic evaluations must be performed after
plant operating modes and design flows are determined. Detailed hydraulic evaluations
must also include headlosses in connecting conduits.

Head Requirement
Unit Process at Rated Capacity, m (ft)

Intakes, including bar screens 0.30.9 (13)


Rapid mixing 0.150.30 (0.51)
Flocculation 0.060.15 (0.20.5)
Sedimentation 0.62.4 (28)
Filtration Gravity 34.6 (1015)
Pressure 37.6 (1025)
Disinfection 0.150.6 (0.52)
Aeration Spray 34.6 (1015)
Cascade 34.6 (1015)
Compressed air 0.150.6 (0.52)
Softening 0.150.6 (0.52)
Ion exchange softening 0.61.5 (25)
Iron and manganese removal 0.61.5 (25)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.11

FIGURE 22.3 Hydraulic profile.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.12 Chapter Twenty-Two

22.3.3 Hydraulic Design Considerations in Plant Siting

Plant sites are normally selected before the hydraulic designer initiates design of the treat-
ment system. If a plant site has not been selected, the designer should be aware of
hydraulic considerations which may influence site selection.
Site elevation has the most significant impact on plant hydraulics. A plant site located
above the service area will eliminate or reduce pumping requirements from the plant to
the service areas. Typical municipal distribution system pressures are 4070 psi, therefore
the elevation of the treatment plant should be at least 100 ft above the service area to elim-
inate finished water pumping. Similarly, plant sites which permit gravity intake of the
source water may reduce or eliminate raw water pumping. Few plants are able to meet
these optimal conditions.
The typical surface water plant must pump both raw and finished water. Raw water
(low-lift) pumps are used to pump water from the water source into the treatment facilities
and finished water (high-lift) pumps are used to pump from the treatment plant into the
service area distribution system.

22.3.4 Hydraulic Design Consideration in Plant Layout

After the plant site has been identified, the plant design may be arranged for optimal
hydraulic benefit. In particular, arrangement of treatment processes to allow flow to move
down gradient minimizes excavation needs for structures. Arrangements which are
designed for future expansion should consider the hydraulic needs of the expanded plant
as well as the process needs. Grouping of processes together facilitates movement of
water through the treatment process train.
The designer should also consider secondary hydraulic systems for optimal design.
Chemical feed systems and dewatering systems are examples of secondary hydraulic
systems which must be coordinated with the treatment flow system. Normally it is
desirable to minimize the length of chemical piping systems. Dewatering systems are usu-
ally based on gravity drainage of basins and conduits.

22.3.5 Bases for Design

After evaluation and selection of a source of supply and development of the treatment
plant process train, the designer is prepared to develop the plant Bases for Design. The
Bases for Design is a summary of design flow and capacity, and proposed treatment
processes, including the chemical storage and feed facilities.

22.3.5.1 Design flows. Design flows for water treatment plants serving municipalities
are typically based on the projected population within the water service area for the
design life of the treatment facilities. Population data is normally determined from
census records, land use zoning information, and studies of existing and projected
population densities. Service area per capita demands are affected by the mix of
domestic, commercial, and industrial water users which are unique to each service
area.Typically water consumption records are available for water service areas. For new
facilities, the use of generalized water consumption data may be needed. In the United
States, water consumption varies widely but generally ranges between 100200 gal-
lons per capita per day.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.13

From studies of projected population and per capita demand, planned design flows for
the water treatment facilities may be developed. These demands include the following:

Annual average demand. The average daily water consumption for the water service
areas, generally computed by multiplying the average daily consumption (gallons per
capita) by the projected population of the service area.
Maximum demand. Maximum demand experienced by the water plant throughout its
service life. The maximum hour demand is generally 200 to 300 percent of the aver-
age demand but numerous factors affect the peak demand experienced by water treat-
ment plants. These factors include seasonal demands (particularly for plants where ser-
vice areas are located in extremes of hot and cold temperatures), normal daily flow
variations, the community size, industrial usage, and system storage. Normally system
storage is provided to service peak hour demands, allowing the treatment facilities to
be designed on peak day demands. Peak day demands generally range between 125
and 200 percent of the average demand.
Minimum flow. As the name suggests, the minimum flow expected to be processed
through the treatment facilities. Minimum flow depends upon system operations. In
general, minimum flows for municipal plants may be estimated as 50 percent of the
average demand, but range between 25 and 75 percent of the average demand.

22.3.5.2 Rated treatment capacity. The rated treatment capacity of a plant is that capac-
ity for which each of the unit processes are designed. For municipal treatment plants with
adequate system storage, the rated treatment capacity is the systems maximum day
demand. Where storage is limited, the rated treatment capacity may be greater, for exam-
ple, the system maximum hour demand or greater. Smaller systems may be designed to
produce the rated treatment capacity in one or two 8-h shifts rather than over the entire
24-h day.
22.3.5.3 Hydraulic treatment capacity. Treatment plants are normally designed for a
hydraulic capacity greater than the rated treatment capacity. Hydraulic treatment capaci-
ties are normally equal to 125 to 150 percent of the rated treatment capacity. The hydraulic
treatment capacity provides flexibility for future process changes or alternative flow rout-
ings through the plant. Hydraulic capacities in excess of the rated treatment capacity pro-
vide some margin of safety for operations which may not be optimal (e.g., control gates
inadvertently left partially open).
22.3.5.4 Treatment process bases for design. The development of the water treatment
plants Bases for Design is a key step in establishing the criteria to which the plant will
be designed. This document must be reviewed carefully with the water treatment plant
owner representatives and understood and agreed to by all before the final design pro-
ceeds. The Bases for Design presents a summary of each treatment process including
design flows (minimum, average, rated capacity), specification of dimension of major ele-
ments (e.g., tanks, pumps), both hydraulic and process loading characteristics, required
performance, and design data for the chemical storage and feed system. Table 22.4 pre-
sents an example of the bases for design for sedimentation basins (one of the many unit
processes in a water treatment plant).

22.3.6 Plant Hydraulic Design

As noted above, a water treatment plant consists of a series of treatment processes


connected by free surface flow channels and pipelines. During development of the plants

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.14 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.4 Treatment Process Bases for DesignSedimentation Basins

Item Stage I Stage II StageIII

Maxi Maxi Maxi-


Annual mum Annual mum Annual mum
Average Day Average Day Average Day
Number of basins 4 4 8 8 12 12
Basin characteristics
Plan75 ft  2306 in
Nominal side water
depth12 ft (SWD)
Surface area/basin17,288 ft2
Volume/basin207,456 f3
Channels/basin2
L:W ratio6.1:1
Displacement time (h) 3.17 1.99 3.17 1.99 3.17 1.99
Surface loading [(galm)/ft ]2 0.47 0.75 0.47 0.75 0.47 0.75
Flowthrough velocity (ft/min) 1.21 1.93 1.21 1.93 1.21 1.93
Sludge collectors
Longitudinal collectors
Type: chain flight
Number per basin 8 8 8 8 8 8
Cross collectors
Type: chain flight
Number per basin 1 1 1 1 1 1
Settled sludge pumps
Type: progressive cavity
Number:
100 gal/min capacity 4 4 4 4 4 4
400 gal/min capacity 4 4 4 4 4 4
200 gal/min capacity 8 8 16 16
Capacity (gal/min)
Installed 2000 2000 3600 3600 5200 5200
Firm 1600 1600 3200 3200 4800 4800

Bases for Design, the designer determines the rated treatment capacity, average flow,
minimum flow and hydraulic capacity of the plant.
Following development of the Bases for Design, the designer must evaluate plant
operating modes to develop a detailed plant flow diagram and hydraulic profile
through the plant.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.15

22.3.6.1 Plant operating modes. Operating modes describe the sequence of treatment
processes the water goes through to achieve the required level of purification. Operational
modes are normally presented in the form of simplified block diagrams which illustrate
the flow path through the plant from one process to the next. These operational mode
block diagrams are useful in visualizing stages during construction, future planned plant
expansions or simply alternative operating modes.
Figures 22.4 through 22.9 show an example of a sequence of plant operating modes for
a surface water treatment plant which illustrate three stages of a plant expansion program
with alternatives for the flocculation and sedimentation basins to work in series or in par-
allel. Plant processes proposed include raw water control chambers, rapid mix chambers,
flocculation/sedimentation basins, ozone contact chambers, and filters. In this example,
the raw water control chambers are used to split flow between plant process groups and
also as a rapid mix chamber for chemical addition.

FIGURE 22.4 Stage Ioperational mode diagram.

FIGURE 22.5 Stage IIparallel operational mode diagram.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.16 Chapter Twenty-Two

The Stage I facilities including raw water control chamber, flocculation/sedimentation


basins and filters are depicted in Fig. 22.4. Operational modes for a proposed plant expan-
sion to double the plant capacity (Stage II) are shown in Figs. 22.5 through 22.7 and oper-
ating modes for a second plant expansion to triple the plant capacity (Stage III) are shown
in Figs. 22.8 and 22.9. Settled water ozone contact chambers were added to the expanded
plant, which illustrates treatment upgrades.
Operational modes for the Stage II treatment plant include parallel and series floc-
culation/sedimentation. When the plant is operated in the parallel mode, influent raw
water for each set of sedimentation basins flows by gravity from the raw water control
chamber serving the basin set. Raw water flow is divided between each sedimentation
basin in service at the raw water control chamber. Settled water from each set of basins
is routed to an ozone contact chamber. Ozonated settled water is then combined prior to
flowing to the filters.

FIGURE 22.6 Stage IIseries flocculation/sedimentation basin


operational mode diagram.

FIGURE 22.7 Stage IIsplit parallel operational mode diagram.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.17

FIGURE 22.8 Stage IIIparallel operational mode diagram.

FIGURE 22.9 Stage IIIsplit parallel operational mode diagram.

The Stage III split parallel operational mode is similar to the parallel operational mode
except that the ozonated settled water from each set of basins is not combined prior to
flowing to the filters. Side-by-side plant scale treatment studies are possible with the
future split parallel mode since part of the flocculation/ sedimentation/filtration processes
can be operated as a control while the remainder of the plant can be operated in a
controlled experimental mode.
The series flocculation/sedimentation operational mode is designed to permit opera-
tion of the sedimentation basins in two stages in lieu of the singlestage parallel mode.
Under certain raw water conditions, operation of the basins in series may enhance perfor-
mance of the basins. Chemical feed for the first and second sedimentation stages may be
adjusted to respond to raw water conditions and settled water quality after the firststage
sedimentation. Series flocculation/sedimentation increases hydraulic losses through the

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.18 Chapter Twenty-Two

plant. Under this mode, twice as much flow is routed to each basin and the flow pattern is
longer, since the settled water from the first sedimentation stage must be returned to the
influent of the second sedimentation stage.
Operational mode block diagrams are also a convenient means to illustrate the effect
of side stream flows which may impact the overall plant flow. For example, removal of
sludge from the sedimentation basins is accompanied by a decrease in flow leaving the
basins compared with flow entering the basins. In a similar manner, filter backwash water
removes a certain amount of flow. A plant designed to produce a certain rated capacity
may have to treat more than the rated capacity through certain processes. The impact of
these side stream flows must be evaluated on an individual basis. In many treatment
plants, backwash water treatment facilities are installed to recycle backwash water to the
head of the plant.

22.3.6.2 Plant flow diagrams. After establishing plant operating modes, more detailed
flow diagrams are developed by the designer. The diagrams normally start with possible
valving and gating arrangements and are then expanded with tentative valve, sluice gate,
pipeline, and conduit sizes.
Valving arrangements are designed to enable any of the major operational units (e.g.,
sedimentation basin, ozone contact chamber) to be removed from service. The arrange-
ment may include design of temporary flow stop devices, such as stop logs (sectional bar-
riers which were originally constructed of logs but are now commonly metal plates). The
arrangement should be designed to permit maintenance work on major valves and sluice
gates while minimizing the impact on plant process. Major channel sections should be
designed so they can be removed from service and dewatered while minimizing impacts
on the rest of the plant.
The designer should distinguish between units taken out of service frequently (such
as filters), periodically (such as sedimentation basins), or rarely (such as conduits).
Filter backwashing occurs so frequently that the rated treatment capacity can be met
with one filter out for backwashing. Sedimentation basins may be removed from service
once or twice per year for equipment maintenance. Since the basins outages occur at
widely scattered intervals, it is reasonable to design the units to be removed from ser-
vice during lower flow periods. Conduits and pipelines are rarely removed from service,
but the hydraulic impacts can be significant. Depending on the conduit location,
removal of a conduit can remove a portion of the plant from service. Effective design
will provide redundant conduits so that a portion of the plant can remain in service dur-
ing conduit dewatering.
The focus of this section has been on the main plant hydraulics, but the hydraulic
designer must also design for hydraulic subsystems. An important group of these subsys-
tems include dewatering of all basins and conduits. Where plant elevations will allow,
gravity dewatering is recommended. In most cases, dewatering pumps are necessary.
These pumps may be located in the unit being dewatered or may be located in a separate
structure connected to the process unit by dewatering pipelines.

22.3.6.3 Hydraulic Profile. One of the most important tools in the hydraulic design of a
water treatment plant is the development of a hydraulic profile. The hydraulic profile is a
diagram showing the energy grade line (EGL) at each unit process. For open tanks with
flows at minimal velocities, which is the case in most water treatment plants, the velocity
head is negligible and the hydraulic grade line (HGL) or water surface elevation (WSEL)
provide an adequate representation of the EGL. Profiles normally include critical struc-
tural elevations of processes and conduits. The profile may also include ground surface
profiles and other site information.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.19

Hydraulic profiles are developed for each of the design flows. In the case of water
treatment plants, the design flows may include rated treatment capacity, hydraulic capac-
ity, average flow, and minimum flow. Hydraulic profiles should also take into considera-
tion unit processes or conduits which may be taken out of service. Hydraulic profiles are
valuable design and operational tools to assist in scheduling routine maintenance activi-
ties and for evaluating the impact to the treatment plant capacity during outages of process
units or conduits.
Computations of hydraulic profiles begin at control points where there is a definite
relationship between the plant flow and water surface depth. For gravity flow plants, the
most common forms of control points are weirs and tank water surface elevations (e.g.,
clear well water surface elevations), but other types of control points may be used. From
each control point, head losses associated with local losses, plant piping, and open chan-
nel flow are added to the control water surface. Since flows in water treatment plants are
mostly in the subcritical regime (Froude number  1), most hydraulic designers will work
upstream from the control point. For pressure plants, control points are typically pressure
regulating or pressure control points, frequently in the service area distribution system.
From these control points and knowledge of the flow velocity, both the EGL and HGL
may be computed back to the treatment facilities.
Hydraulic profiles are valuable design tools to identify overall losses through the plant.
Profiles are also valuable to identify units with excessive losses. Since total head available
is normally limited, units with excessive losses should be considered for redesign to
reduce local loss coefficients or to reduce velocities.
Figure 22.3 is an example hydraulic profile for a gravity surface water treatment plant
with conventional treatment processes. The method of computing headlosses is presented
in Section 22.3.7.

22.3.7 Water Treatment Plant Process Hydraulics

In this section calculations required to establish the WSEL through a medium-sized water
treatment plant will be presented. A schematic of the water treatment plant is shown in
Fig. 22.10. Notice that future growth has been considered in the initial design. Three
examples are included which illustrate typical hydraulic calculations. The first example
calculates the WSEL from the sedimentation basin effluent chamber back through the
flocculation/sedimentation basins to the Raw Water Control Chamber. The second follows
the flow from the clear well back through the filters. Filter hydraulics are illustrated in the
third example. All examples are presented in a spreadsheet format which is designed to
facilitate calculating the EGL, HGL, and WSEL at various points through the treatment
process and for multiple flow rates (i.e., minimum, daily average, peak hour, future
conditions).

22.3.7.1 Coagulation. Process criteria and key hydraulic design parameters. The coag-
ulation process, used to reduce particulates and turbidity, is carried out in three steps: mix-
ing (often referred to as rapid or flash mixing), flocculation, and sedimentation. Each of
these steps is briefly discussed below.
Rapid mixing. The mixing process imparts energy to increase contact between
existing solids and added coagulants. Possible mixer types include turbine, propeller,
pneumatic, and hydraulic. Headloss that occurs in mixing chambers depends on the cho-
sen mixing device. Most mechanical mixers do not create significant head losses. The
headloss coefficient (K)
K associated with a specific mixer can be obtained from the manu-
facturer. Pneumatic mixing, which is not common, has associated losses similar to those

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.20 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.10 Schematiz of a water treatment plant.

for aeration (see table in Section 22.3.2.2, above). Hydraulic mixing takes place using
weirs, swirl chambers, throttled valves, Parshall flumes, or other devices to induce turbu-
lence. Head loss coefficients for these devices can be obtained from the manufacturer.
Important considerations during the initial design of a mixing chamber include:
Velocity gradient. This is mixerspecific information and can be obtained from the
manufacturer. The system should be designed to provide a velocity gradient that is
optimal for the coagulation process taking place.
Dead spots and short circuiting. An ideal mixing system will have minimal dead spots
and short circuiting. These can be avoided with proper sizing and placement of
mixers.
Flocculation. Coagulated particles form larger particles (flocs) during the gentle mix-
ing of flocculation, where the flow travels slowly through a series of flocculator paddles,
baffles, or conduits. Inlets and weirs are designed to provide low turbulence for protection
of the flocs. The energy provided to the system by the flocculators (manufacturer-specif-
ic) or baffling is decreased as the flow approaches the sedimentation basins.
Sedimentation. Gravity sedimentation removes coagulated solids prior to filtration.
There are four zones in a clarifier as shown in Fig. 22.11 and listed below:

Inlet zonewhere upstream flow conditions transition smoothly to uniform flow set-
tling conditions
Sedimentation zonewhere sedimentation takes place
Sludge zonewhere solids collect and are removed
Outlet zonewhere settling conditions smoothly transition to downstream flow
conditions

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.21

FIGURE 22.11 Hypothetical zones in a rectangular sedimentation basin.

Each of the zones is designed to minimize turbulence and avoid short circuiting. The
velocity in the sedimentation zone is limited to 0.3 m/s (1 ft/s) for average flow. Sludge
removal equipment moves slowly so that settling patterns are not disturbed. Because the
process is designed for smooth flow and minimal turbulence, very little head loss occurs
in sedimentation basins. Ports at the inlet and outlet produce the greatest head losses in
this process.
Hydraulic design example. Table 22.5 illustrates the calculation of the WSEL, using
metric units, through the coagulation process at the medium-sized water treatment plant
shown in Fig. 22.10. Figs. 22.12 through 22.14 show plan views and details of the

TABLE 22.5 Hydraulic Calculations of a Typical Coagulation Process, SI Units

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day. Avg. Day Avg Day Max. Hour

1. Plant Flow (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38


Note: For Points 1 through 8, see Fig. 22.12
2. WSEL at Point 1 (Calculation done in Table 22.6) (m) 109.73 109.73 109.74 109.74
3. Point 1 to Point 2
Average flow  21Q/32 (m3/s) 1.44 2.01 2.15 2.87
Flow depth  WSEL @ 1 invert (106.60 m) (m) 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.14
Flow area  5.13 m width  depth (m2) 16.05 16.06 16.07 16.10
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.09 0.13 0.13 0.18
Hydraulic Radius r  A/P
/ (P  w  2d) (m) 1.41 1.41 1.41 1.41
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L (m)
where Mannings n  0.014 and L  28.96 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 2 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.74 109.74
4. Point 2 to Point 3
Average Flow  5Q/16 (m3/s) 0.68 0.96 1.03 1.37
Flow depth  WSEL @ 2  invert (106.60 m) (m) 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.14
Flow area  5.13 m width  depth (m3) 16.05 16.06 16.07 16.10
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.04 0.06 0.06 0.08
r  A/P
/ (P  w  2d) (m) 1.41 1.41 1.41 1.41
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L (m)
where Mannings n  0.014 and L  14.63 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 3 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.74 109.74
5. Point 3 to Point 4
Average flow  Q/8 (m3/s) 0.27 0.38 0.41 0.55
Flow depth  WSEL @ 3invert (106.60 m) (m) 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.14
Flow area  5.13 m width  depth (m3) 16.05 16.06 16.07 16.10

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.22 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day. Avg. Day Avg. Day Max. Hour

Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.03


/ (P  w  2d) (m)
r = A/P 1.41 1.41 1.41 1.41
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)] 2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  21.95 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 4 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.74 109.74
6. Point 4 to Point 5
Flow  Q/32 (m3/s) 0.07 0.10 0.10 0.14
Port area  0.30 m deep  0.76 m wide (m2) 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.29 0.41 0.44 0.59
Submerged entrance loss  0.8 V2/2g (m) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
WSEL at Point 5 (in Sedimentation Tank) (m) 109.73 109.74 109.74 109.76
7. Point 5 to Point 6
Width of sedimentation basin (W)
W (m) 23.16 23.16 23.16 23.16
Flow (Q/4) (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Invert elevation of sedimentation baffles (m) 105.97 105.97 105.97 105.97
Flow depth (H)H (WSEL at Point 5baffle invert) (m) 3.76 3.77 3.77 3.79
Area downstreams of baffle (W  H H) (m2) 87.21 87.36 87.41 87.68
Horizontal openings in baffle, 2.54 cm wide
spaced every 22.86 cm. Area of
openings  A  W  .0254  H/.2286 (m2) 9.69 9.71 9.71 9.74
Velocity of downstream baffle (V downstream) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
(Q/A) (m/s)
Velocity of 2.54 cm opening section (V1) (Q/A / ) (m/s) 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.11
Local losses  sudden expansion (1.0  (V downstream)2/2g)
2
 sudden contraction (0.36  (VI)
V / 2g) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 6 (Upstream of sedimentation baffles) (m) 109.73 109.74 109.74 109.76
8. Point 6 to Point 7
Loss per stage (provided by flocculator manufacturer) (m) 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.05
Total loss (three stages) (m) 0.04 0.04 0.09 0.15
WSEL at Point 7 (m) 109.77 109.78 109.83 109.91
9. Point 7 to Point 8
Flow  Q/24 (m3/s) 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.18
Port area  0.30 m deep  0.46 m wide (m2) 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14
Velocity  flow / area (m/s) 0.65 0.92 0.98 1.31
Entrance loss  1.25 V2/2g (m) 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.11
WSEL at Point 8 (inlet port) (m) 109.80 109.83 109.89 110.02
Note: For Points 8 through 14, see Fig. 22.13
10. Point 8 to Point 9
Average flow  Q/24 (m3/s) 0.09 0.13 0.14 0.18
Flow depth  WSEL @ 8 invert (109.12 m) (m) 0.68 0.72 0.77 0.90
Flow area  0.91 m width  depth (m2) 0.62 0.65 0.71 0.82
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.15 0.19 0.19 0.22
r = A/P (P  w  2d) (m) 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30
Conduit loss [(V  n)/(rr2/3)] 2 L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  3.86 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 9 (m) 109.80 109.83 109.89 110.02
11. Point 9 to Point 10
Average flow  Q/12 (m3/s) 0.18 0.26 0.27 0.36

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.23

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day. Avg. Day Avg. Day Max. Hour

Flow depth  WSEL @ 9 invert (109.12 m) (m) 0.68 0.72 0.77 0.90
Flow area  0.91 m width  depth (m2) 0.62 0.65 0.71 0.82
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.29 0.39 0.39 0.44
/ (P  w  2d) (m)
r = A/P 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  3.86 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 10 (m) 109.80 109.84 109.89 110.02
12. Point 10 to Point 11
Flow  Q/8, m3/s 0.27 0.38 0.41 0.55
Flow depth  WSEL @ 10  invert (109.12 m) (m) 97.34 97.38 97.44 97.56
Flow area  0.91 width  depth (m2) 89.01 89.04 89.09 89.21
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
2
Loss at two 45 bends  2  0.2 V /2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 11 (m) 109.80 109.84 109.89 110.02
13. Point 11 to Point 12
Flow  Q/4 (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Flow depth  WSEL @ 11  invert (109.12 m) (m) 0.68 0.72 0.78 0.90
Flow area  1.52 m width  depth (m2) 1.04 1.09 1.18 1.37
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.52 0.70 0.69 0.80
Loss at two 45 bends  2  0.2 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
/ (P  w  2d) (m)
r = A/P 0.36 0.37 0.38 0.41
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  9.75 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 12 (m) 109.81 109.84 109.90 110.03
14. Point 12 to Point 13
Flow  Q/4, (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Flow depth  WSEL @ 12  invert (109.12 m) (m) 0.69 0.72 0.78 0.91
Inlet area  1.52 m width  depth (m2) 1.05 1.10 1.19 1.38
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.52 0.69 0.69 0.79
Inlet loss  1 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03
WSEL at Point 13 (Mixing Chamber No. 2 outlet) (m) 109.82 109.87 109.92 110.06
15. Point 13 to Point 14
Note: Mixers provide negligible head loss
Flow  Q/4 (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Chamber area  1.83 m  1.83 m (m2) 3.34 3.34 3.34 3.34
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.16 0.23 0.25 0.33
Losses  Mixer (1 V 2/2g)  Sharp bend (1.8 V 2/2g) (m) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02
WSEL at Point 14 (Mixing Chamber No. 2 inlet) (m) 109.82 109.87 109.93 110.07
Note: For Points 14 through 21, see Fig. 22.14
16. Point 14 to Point 15
Flow  Q/2 (m3/s) 1.09 1.53 1.64 2.19
Conduit area  2.29 m wide  1.22 m deep (m2) 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79
Velocity  flow/area ( m/s) 0.39 0.55 0.59 0.78
/ (P  2w  2d) (m)
R = A/P 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V  C  R0.63)] 1/0.54 (m)
where L  47.24 m and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02
Local losses  flow split (0.6 V 2/2g)  contraction
(0.07 V 2/2g)  0.67 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
WSEL at Point 15 (at Mixing Chamber No. 1) (m) 109.83 109.89 109.95 110.11

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.24 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day. Avg. Day Avg. Day Max. Hour

17. The above calculations (for Points 1 through 15) have


been for flow routed through Tank No. 4. When the
flow is routed through Tank No. 1. the WSEL (m) is: 109.82 109.88 109.94 110.08
In reality, the headloss through each basin is equal.
The flow through the basin naturally adusts to
equalize headlosses, i. e. flow through Tank
No. 1 is greater than Q/4 and flow through Tank
No. 4 is less than Q/4. The actual headloss through
each basin can be estimated as the average of: Losses
through Tank Nos. 1 and 4
and the WSEL (m) at Point 15 is: 109.83 109.89 109.95 110.10
18. Point 15 to Point 16
Flow  Q (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38
Conduit area  2.29 m wide  1.22 m deep (m2) 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.78 1.10 1.18 1.57
R  A/P/ (P  2w  2d) (m) 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V  C  R0.63)]
1/0.54 (m) where L  125.58 m and
Hazen-Williams C  120 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.16
WSEL at Point 16 (m) 109.87 109.97 110.04 110.26
19. Point 16 to Point 17
Flow  Q (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38
Conduit area @ 16  2.29 m wide  1.22 m deep (m2) 2.79 2.79 2.79 2.79
Conduit area @ 17  1.68 m wide  1.68 m deep (m2) 2.81 2.81 2.81 2.81
Average area (m2) 2.80 2.80 2.80 2.80
Velocity  flow / Area (m/s) 0.78 1.09 1.17 1.56
R @ 16  A16/ (2  (2.29 m  1.22 m)) (m) 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40
R @ 17  A17/ (2  (1.68 m  1.68 m)) (m) 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Average R, (m) 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V C
R0.63)]1/0.54 (m) where L  9.14 m
and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
WSEL at Point 17 (m) 109.88 109.98 110.05 110.27
20. Point 17 to Point 18
Flow  Q (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38
Conduit area @ 17  1.68 m wide  1.68 m
deep (m2) 2.81 2.81 2.81 2.81
Velocity 17  flow/area 17 (m/s) 0.78 1.09 1.17 1.56
Pipe area @ 18  (D)   (m) where D  1.68 m
2
2.21 2.21 2.21 2.21
4
Velocity 18  flow/area 18 (m) 0.99 1.39 1.49 1.98
Exit losses  V182/2g V172/2g (m/s) 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.8
WSEL at Point 18 (m) 109.90 110.01 110.09 110.35
21. Point 18 to Point 19
/ (P  d  ) (m)
R = A/P 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Local losses  3 elbows (3  0.25V 2/2g) 
entrance (0.5  V 2/2g)  1.25  V 2/2g (m) 0.06 0.12 0.14 0.25
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V C
R0.63)]1/0.54 (m) where L  138.68 m
and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.07 0.13 0.15 0.26
WSEL at Point 19 (exit of Control Chamber) (m) 110.03 110.27 110.39 110.86

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.25

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day. Avg. Day Avg. Day Max. Hour

22. Point 19 to Point 20


Weir elevation (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.73
Depth of flow over weir  (WSEL @
19 weir elevation), (m) 0.30 0.54 0.66 1.13
Length of weir, L, (m) 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74
3/2 0.385
Flow over weir  q  1.71  h3/2  [ 1  (d / n) ]
L
Note: Rather than solve for h, find an h by trial
and error that gives a q equal to the flow
for the given flow scenarios (given in Item 1)
assume h (m)  0.60 0.90 0.95 1.35
then q (m3/s)  1.84 3.14 3.12 4.21
assume h (m)  0.66 0.89 0.97 1.37
then q (m3/s)  2.18 3.07 3.27 4.42
Note: These qs equal the flows for the given
scerios (Item 1)
h (m) 0.66 0.89 0.97 1.37
WSEL at Point 20 (h  WSEL @ Point 19) (m) 110.39 110.62 110.70 111.10
23. Point 20 to Point 21
Flow  Q (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38
Sluice gate area  1.37 m  1.37 m (m2) 1.88 1.88 1.88 1.88
Velocity  Flow/Area (m/s) 1.16 1.63 1.74 2.33
Gate Losses  1.5  V 2/2g (m) 0.10 0.20 0.23 0.41
WSEL at Point 21 (Raw Water Control
Chamber) (m) 110.49 110.82 110.93 111.51
The overflow weir in the Raw Water Control
Chamber is 3.05 m long and is sharp crested
Q = 1.82  L  h3/2 so h  (Q/1.82L)2/3 (m) 0.54 0.67 0.70 0.85
The water surface must not rise above elevation 112.78 m
The overflow weir elevation may be safely set at 111.86 m

hydraulic reaches analyzed in the example. The circled numbers indicate points at which
the WSEL is calculated. Hydraulic calculations start downstream of the sedimentation
basins (Fig. 22.12) and proceed upstream through the mixing chamber (Fig. 22.13) and
the Raw Water Control Chamber (Fig. 22.14). Mechanical mixers and mechanical floccu-
lators are used. Conduit losses between the rapid mix chambers and the Raw Water
Control Chamber are also calculated in the example. Three different flow rates (i.e., min-
imum day, average day, and, maximum hour) are used in the calculations. This is a range
of design flow conditions that a design engineer would typically take into consideration.
The longest path through the flocculation and sedimentation processes, through Basin
No. 4, is followed (Points 1 through 15). Although not shown, losses along the shortest
path have also been calculated. As would be expected, the calculated head loss is smaller
for the shorter path. The actual losses are equal for each path. The flows through each path
naturally adjust to equalize losses. The flow through the longest path is slightly smaller
than the flow through the shortest path. In the example, the WSEL at Point 15 is adjusted
to reflect the average losses through the basins. The WSEL calculations upstream of Point

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.26 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.12 Flocculation/ sedimentation basin

15 are based on the adjusted WSEL. Alternatively the weirs or ports feeding flow into each
basin may be adjusted to create an equal distribution of flows in all basins as discussed in
Sec. 22.2.1.

22.3.7.2.2 Filtration. Process criteria. Suspended solids are removed from the water as
it passes through a porous medium during filtration. Filters operate under either gravity or
pressure. Filters also differ in the type and distribution of the media used (fine, course,
uniformly graded, graded coarse to fine, etc.) and the direction of flow through the media
(upflow, downflow, and biflow). Pressure filter hydraulics information is very product
specific and should be obtained from the manufacturer. The design engineer using pres-
sure filters should then apply this information to the project using projectspecific
hydraulic considerations. This section presents information on gravity filters.

Key hydraulic design parameters. The headloss through a filter increases with use as
the voids become filled with solid particles. When the headloss reaches a certain point
(terminal headloss), the filter is backwashed to remove the solids. The rate of headloss
buildup is dependent on several factors, including how the filter is graded (the arrange-
ment of media particle sizes). The rate of headloss buildup is reduced (and filtration is
more effective) when the flow first goes through the coarse media and then the fine media.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.27

FIGURE 22.13 Mixing chamber

FIGURE 22.14 Raw water control chamber

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.28 Chapter Twenty-Two

However, during backwash, the high rate of flow expands the filter bed and, over time, the
media are regraded so that the more coarsely graded grains are located at the bottom and
the fines are located at the top. To benefit from the coarse-to-fine grading, an upward flow
pattern can be used, but is very uncommon. More often the filter media are selected such
that the fine media have a higher specific gravity than the coarse media to maintain the
course-to-fine gradation during backwash. The most commonly used filter media are nat-
ural silica sand and crushed anthracite coal; however garnet and ilmenite are used in
mixed media beds. Granular carbon is often used if taste and odor control is desired.
The terminal headloss is determined by a combination of factors including filter break-
through (when the filter bed loses its adsorptive capacity), available static head, and out-
let pressure required. The filter should be designed so that the headloss in any level of the
filter bed does not exceed the static pressure. A negative head can result in air binding in
the filter which will, in turn, further increase headloss.
Filter influent piping is sized to limit velocities to about (0.6 m/s). Wash-water and
effluent piping flow velocities are kept below (1.8 m/s) so that hydraulic
transients(waterhammer) and excessive headlosses are minimized and controlled to
within tolerable limits.

Hydraulic design example. Table 22.6 illustrates the calculation of the WSEL from the
clear well back upstream to the Sedimentation Basin effluent at the medium-sized water
treatment plant shown in Fig. 22.10. Figures 22.15 and 22.16 show details of the hydraulic
reaches analyzed in the example. Table 22.7 illustrates the filter hydraulic calculation, the
details of which are shown in Figs. 22.17 and 22.18.

The hydraulic profile of the plant (based on hydraulic calculations done in Tables 22.5,
22.6 and 22.7) is shown in Figure 22.3.

TABLE 22.6 Hydraulic Calculations in a MediumSized Water Treatment Plant from the Filter
Effluent to the Effluent Clearwell

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

1. Flow (m3s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38


Note: for Points 22 through 28, see Figure 22.15
2. Point 22 to Point 23
Maximum water level in Clearwell (Point 22) (m) 105.16 105.16 105.16 105.16
Invert in Clearwell (m) 101.50 101.50 101.50 101.50
Flow  Q/2 (m3/s) 1.09 1.53 1.64 2.19
Stop logs @ A
Flow area (2 openings, 1.52 m wide,
3.66 m deep) (m2) 11.15 11.15 11.15 11.15
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.20 0.27 0.29 0.39
Loss  0.5 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Baffles
Flow area (3.05 m wide, 3.66 m deep) (m2) 11.15 11.15 11.15 11.15
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.20 0.27 0.29 0.39
Loss  1.0 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
Stop logs @ B and C
Same as the losses @ A, times 2 (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.29

TABLE 22.6 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

WSEL at Point 23 (m) 105.16 105.17 105.17 105.18


3. Point 23 to Point 24
Flow  Q/2 (m3/s) 1.09 1.53 1.64 2.19
1.68 (m) diameter pipe
Flow area  d 2/4   (m2) 2.21 2.21 2.21 2.21
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.50 0.69 0.74 0.99
Exit loss @ clearwell  V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05
o
Loss @ 2 - 90 bends  (0.25 V 2/2g)  2 (m) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03
Entrance loss @ Filter Building  0.5 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03
Pipe loss  (3.022  V 1.85  L)/
(C 1.85  D 1.165 ) where C  120 and
L  57.91 m (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 24 (m) 105.19 105.22 105.23 105.28
4. Point 24 to Point 25
Flow  Q/4 (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Flow area  1.52 m  1.52 m2 2.32 2.32 2.32 2.32
Velocity  Q/A (m/s) 0.24 0.33 0.35 0.47
Loss as flows merge  1.0 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(R 2/3 )]2  L (m)
where n  0.013, L  16.76 m and R  A/P/
(P  6.10 m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 25 (m)
5. Point 25 to Point 26
Sluice Gate No. 1 flow area  1.22 m  0.91 m (m2) 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11
Velocity  Q/A
/ (m/s) 0.49 0.69 0.74 0.98
Loss  0.5 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02
WSEL at Point 26 (m) 105.20 105.24 105.24 105.32
6. Point 26 to Point 27
Sluice Gate No. 2 Loss  0.8 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04
WSEL at Point 27 (m) 105.21 105.25 105.27 105.36
7. Point 27 to Point 28
Port to Filter Clearwell: Calculate losses through port
as if were a weir when depth of flow is below top
of port. Port dimmensions  2.74 m wide
by 0.813 m deep. Flow  Q/4 (m3s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Weir (bottom of port) elevation (m) 104.85 104.85 104.85 104.85
Depth of flow over weir 
(WSEL @ 27 weir elevation) (m) 0.36 0.40 0.42 0.51
Flow over submergedweir  q  1.71  h3/2
 [1 - (d/
d h)3/2]0.385  L
Note: Rather than solve for h, find an h, by trial
and error, that gives a q equal to the flow for the
given flow scenario
assume h (m)  0.40 0.45 0.50 0.60
then q (m3/s)  0.59 0.69 0.95 1.23
assume h (m)  0.39 0.46 0.48 0.58
then q (m3/s)  0.52 0.76 0.82 1.09
Note: These qs equal the flows for the given
scenarios
h (m) 0.39 0.46 0.48 0.58

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.30 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.6 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

WSEL at Point 28 (m) 105.24 105.31 105.33 105.43


FiltersSee Filter Hydraulics in Table 22.7
Note: for Points 29 through 33, see Fig. 22.16
8. Point 29
WSEL above filters (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.73
9. Point 29 to Point 30
Entrance to Filter #4
Flow, Q/8 (m3/s) 0.27 0.38 0.41 0.55
Channel velocity = flow/area
(area  1.22 m  1.22 m) (m/s) 0.18 0.26 0.28 0.37
Submerged entrance loss  0.8 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
1.22 m pipe velocity  flow/area
(area  d 2/4  ) (m/s) 0.23 0.33 0.35 0.47
Butterfly valve loss  0.25 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Sudden enlargement loss  0.25 V 2/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL in influent channel (Point 30) (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.74
10. Point 30 to Point 31
Flow depth  WSEL @ 30  invert (107.29 m) (m) 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.45
Flow area  1.83 m width  depth (m2) 4.46 4.47 4.47 4.48
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.06 0.09 0.09 0.12
/ (P  w  2d) (m)
R = A/P 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67
Conduit Loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L
where n  0.014 and L  10.77 m (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 31 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.74
11. Point 31 to Point 32
Flow  Q/4 (m3/s) 0.55 0.77 0.82 1.09
Flow depth  WSEL @ 31 - invert (107.29 m) (m) 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.45
Flow area  1.83 m width  depth (m2) 4.46 4.47 4.47 4.48
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.24
/ (P  w  2d) (m)
R = A/P 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(r 2/3 )]2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  10.77 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 32 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.74
12. Point 32 to Point 33
Flow  3Q/8 (m3/s) 0.82 1.15 1.23 1.64
Flow depth  WSEL @ 32 invert (107.29 m) (m) 2.44 2.44 2.44 2.45
Flow area  1.83 m width  depth (m2) 4.46 4.47 4.47 4.48
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.18 0.26 0.28 0.37
R  A/P/ (P  w  2d) (m) 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(rr2/3)]2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  10.77 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 33 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.74
13. Point 33 to Point 1
Flow  Q/2 (m3/s) 1.09 1.53 1.64 2.19
Flow depth  WSEL @ 33 invert (107.29 m) (m) 2.44 2.44 2.45 2.45
Flow area  1.83 m width  depth (m2) 4.46 4.47 4.47 4.48
Velocity  flow/area (m/s) 0.24 0.34 0.37 0.49
/ (P  w  2d) (m)
R = A/P 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.67
Conduit loss  [(V  n)/(r 2/3 )]2  L (m)
where n  0.014 and L  11.07 m 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 1 (m) 109.73 109.73 109.74 109.74

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.31

FIGURE 22.15 Clearwell to filter effluent

FIGURE 22.16 Filter effluent

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.32 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.7 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Filter

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min. Day Avg. Day. Avg. Day. Max. Hour.

Plant flow (m3/s) 2.19 3.06 3.28 4.38

Filter loading, [(m m)/m ]


3 2 0.083 0.167 0.250 0.334
Filter area per filterseven (7) out of eight (8) 115 115 115 115
filters in operation (m2)
Flow  loading  area (m3/s) 0.16 0.32 0.48 0.64
Losses through filter effluent piping (Fig. 22.17)
0.51 m piping (Q):
Pipe velocity  Q/A / (m/s) 0.79 1.58 2.37 3.16
Local losses  Exit (0.5)  butterfly
o
valves (2  0.25)  90 elbows (2  0.4)
 tee (1.8)  3.6 V /2g (m)
2
0.11 0.46 1.03 1.83
R  A/P /  (d 2/4  p)/(d  p)  dd/4 (m) 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V  C  R0.63)]
1/0.54 where L  6.10 m and Hazen-
Williams C  120 (m) 0.01 0.03 0.06 0.11
0.51 m piping (Q/2):
Pipe velocity  Q/A (m/s) 0.40 0.79 1.19 1.58
Local Losses  Butterfly Valve (0.25) (m) 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03
R  A/P /  (d 2/4  p)/(d  p)  dd/4 (m) 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
Conduit losses  L  [V/(0.849
V  C  R0.63)]
1/0.54 where L  3.05 m and Hazen-
Williams C  120 (m) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02
0.61 m piping (Q/2):
Pipe velocity  Q/A / (m/s) 0.27 0.55 0.82 1.10
Local losses  entrance (1.0)  tee (1.8)
 2.8 V 2/2g (m) 0.01 0.04 0.10 0.17
Filter (clean) and underdrain losses (obtain from
manufacturer) (m) 0.09 0.15 0.23 0.34
Total losses (effluent pipe and clean filters) (m) 0.23 0.70 1.45 2.50
Assume that headloss will be allowed to increase 2.44 m before the filters are backwashed. A rate controller
will be used to maintain a constant flow through the filters. Determine the ranges of available head over
which the rate controller will operate.

Static Head (Fig. 22.18)


WSEL above filters (m) 109.73 109.73 109.73 109.73
WSEL in filter effluent conduit, Point 29
(see Example 22.2) break Maximum (m) 105.61 105.61 105.61 105.61
Minimum (m) 105.16 105.16 105.16 105.16
Static head  WSEL above filtersWSEL at
Point 29 (Filter effluent conduit-2)
Maximum (m) 4.57 4.57 4.57 4.57
Minimum (m) 4.11 4.11 4.11 4.11
Available head  static head 2.44 m
Maximum (m) 2.13 2.13 2.13 2.13
Minimum (m) 1.68 1.68 1.68 1.68

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.33

FIGURE 22.17 Filter effluent piping


Head, meters

FIGURE 22.18 Available head over which filter effluent rate controller operatesmetric units.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.34 Chapter Twenty-Two

22.3.8 Membrane Technology

Membranes are synthetic filtering media manufactured from a variety of materials includ-
ing polypropylene, polyamide, polysulfone, and cellulose acetate. The membrane materi-
al can be arranged in various configurations, including the following:

Spiral wound
Hollow fiber
Tubular
Plate frame

Examples of these configurations are presented in Fig. 22.19. In water and wastewater
treatment applications, the most common configurations are spiral wound and hollow fiber.
In general, there are four classes of membranes: microfilters (MF), ultrafilters (UF),
nanofilters (NF), and hyperfilters. Treatment through hyperfilters is referred to as hyper-
filtration, or reverse osmosis (RO).
The hydraulics associated with membranes are membrane-specific and can be obtained
from the manufacturer. This section presents general considerations pertinent to flow
through membranes.
As with natural particle media filters, clean membranes have a specific headloss and,
over time, as the membranes become covered with a cake buildup, the effectiveness of the
membrane decreases and headloss increases. Fouling (excessive buildup) may damage the
membrane.
The need for pretreatment ahead of membranes is determined by the raw water qual-
ity and the membrane type. In general, microfilters and ultrafilters do not require pre-
treatment for treating surface or groundwater. Nanofilters and reverse osmosis mem-
branes may require pretreatment depending on the type of fouling. Membrane fouling
can result from particulate blocking, chemical scaling, and biological growth within the
membranes.
An estimate of particulate blocking can be made using indices such as the Silt Density
Index (SDI) and the Modified Fouling Index (MFI). These fouling indices are determined
from simple bench membrane tests using 0.45 micron Millipore filters and monitoring
flow through the filter at a given pressure, usually 30 psig. Approximate values of suitable
SDIs for nanofiltration are 03 units, and for reverse osmosis, 02 units. Corresponding
values of MFI are, for nanofiltration 0 to 10 s/L2, and for RO, 02 s/L2.
Scaling control is essential in RO and nanofilter membrane filtration, especially when
the filtration provides water softening. Controlling precipitation or scaling within the
membrane element requires identification of limiting salt, acid addition for prevention of
calcium carbonate precipitation within the membrane, and/or the addition of an
antiscalant. The amount of antiscalant or acid addition is determined by the limiting salt.
A diffusion controlled membrane process will naturally concentrate salts on the feed side
of the membrane. As water is passed through the membrane, this concentration process
will continue until a salt precipitates and scaling occurs. Scaling will reduce membrane
productivity and, consequently, recovery is limited by the allowable recovery just before
the limiting salt precipitates. The limiting salt can be determined from the solubility prod-
ucts of potential limiting salts and the actual feed stream water quality. Ionic strength must
also be considered in these calculations as the natural concentration of the feed stream
during the membrane process increases the ionic strength, allowable solubility and recov-
ery. Calcium carbonate scaling is commonly controlled by sulfuric acid addition, although
sulfate salts, such as barium sulfate and strontium sulfate, are often the limiting salt.
Commercially available antiscalants can be used to control scaling by complexing the

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.35

FIGURE 22.19 Membrane configurations. (a) Spiral wound, (b) hollow fiber, (c) tubular, (d) plate
and frame.

metal ions in the feed stream and preventing precipitation. Equilibrium constants for these
antiscalants are not available which prohibits direct calculation. However, some manufac-
turers provide computer programs for estimating the required antiscalant dose for a given
recovery, water quality, and membrane.
Biological fouling is controlled with some membranes such, as cellulose acetate, by
maintaining a free chlorine residual of not more than 1 mg/L. Other membranes, such as
the thin-film composites, are not chlorine tolerant and must rely on upstream disinfection
by, for example, ultraviolet disinfection or chlorination-dechlorination. The extent of foul-
ing for a specific application and its influence in the design of nanofiltration and RO mem-
brane systems is best determined by pilot studies.
It has been suggested that some buildup on the membrane may be beneficial to treat-
ment by providing an additional filtering layer. At facilities operated by the Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California (MWD), removal rates of 1.72.9 logs were

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.36 Chapter Twenty-Two

observed for seeded virus MS2 bacteriophage through microfilters that had a pore size an
order of magnitude larger than the nominal size of MS2 (1).
The microfiltration system used by MWD utilizes an air backwash procedure where-
by compressed air at 90100 psig is introduced into the filtrate side of the hollow fiber
membranes. Accumulated particulates dislodged by the compressed air are swept away
by raw water introduced to the feed side of the membranes. The backwash sequence is
carried out automatically at preset time intervals. MWD found the best interval to be
every 18 minutes. The total volume of backwash represents approximately 57 percent
of influent flow.
The difference between influent and effluent pressure across the membrane is termed
the transmembrane pressure (TMP). Despite the frequent air and water backwashes, the
TMP gradually increases over time. Generally, when the TMP reaches approximately
15 psig, chemical cleaning of the membranes is carried out. If the TMP is allowed
to increase beyond 15 psig, particulates can become deeply lodged within the lattice struc-
ture of the membranes and will not be removed, even by chemical cleaning. Chemical
cleaning typically lasts 23 hours and involves circulating a solution of sodium hydroxide
and a surfactant through the membranes, and soaking them in the solution.
The membranes at the MWD microfilter plants have a surface loading rate of 4067
ft2. The lower flux rate of 40 ft2 has the advantage that the rate of increase of TMP is
reduced and the interval between chemical cleanings is increased. A possible explanation
for this is that particulates are not forced as deeply into the lattice structure of the mem-
branes, thereby allowing the air-water backwash to clean the membranes more effective-
ly. By reducing the flux rate from 6740 ft2, the interval between chemical cleanings was
increased from 2 to 3 weeks to almost 20 weeks. However, MWD has instituted a maxi-
mum run time of 3 months between chemical cleanings to ensure the long-term integrity
of the membranes.
Nanofiltration is widely used for softening groundwaters in Florida. A typical nanofil-
tration plant would include antiscalant for scale control added to the raw water. Cartridge
filters, usually rated at 5 microns, remove particles that may foul the membrane system.
Feed water pumps boost the pretreated water pressure to about 90130 pounds per square
inch (psi) before entering the membrane system. The membranes typically are spiral
wound nanofiltration membranes generally with molecular weight cutoff values in the
200500 dalton range.

22.4 WASTEWATER TREATMENT


Many factors and considerations influence the hydraulic design of a wastewater treatment
plant. This section describes typical phases of wastewater treatment planning required for
design of new plants or additions to existing plants, and then presents typical unit process
hydraulic computations.

22.4.1 Wastewater Treatment Planning

Hydraulic decision making for a new wastewater treatment plant or expansion of an exist-
ing plant involves several planning phases. Typical planning phases are presented below
in their common order of consideration.

22.4.1.1 Service area and flows. More than 15,000 municipal wastewater treatment plants
are in operation in the United States today. The plants are designed to treat a total of about

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.37

140 million m3 of flow each day. Flow quantities requiring treatment change over time based
on a number of factors related to service area. These factors include the following:

Changes in service area size. Most often the service area will increase in size during
the wastewater treatment plant service life. However, service area size may decrease, such
as when wastewater in larger metropolitan areas is diverted to an alternate wastewater
treatment plant. Information about anticipated changes in the size of a wastewater treat-
ment plant service area can sometimes be found in regional planning documents.
Changes in service area land use. Changes in the type of land use in the service
area, such as from residential to industrial, will impact the flow rates to be served by
the treatment plant. Also, the development of impervious areas within the wastewater
treatment plant service area will reduce infiltration and increase runoff volume and rate.
If this runoff then enters the sewer system it will impact the flow rate to the plant. A
combined sewer system will be more susceptible to this type of change than a separate
sewer system.
Changes in service area density. Wastewater treatment plant flows are a function of
the number of inhabitants and industries which generate the wastewater. An understand-
ing of the regional planning issues which may affect the wastewater treatment plant ser-
vice area assists in estimating future increases in flow and making appropriate provisions
for future plant expansions. Such flow increases will likely be partially offset by increased
water conservation in water-limited areas.
Changes in service area infiltration/inflow. Most often the rates of infiltration/inflow
will increase as the collection system becomes older. Such flow increases can generally
be offset by periodic sewer rehabilitation, manhole rehabilitation, and enforcement of
inflow control ordinances.
The quantity of wastewater to be handled by a wastewater treatment plant is affected
primarily by the type of wastewater produced in the service area and type of wastewater
collection system used. The four types of wastewater which may be produced in a given
sewer system service area include sanitary wastewater, industrial wastewater, stormwater,
and infiltration/inflow. The three types of sewer systems used to collect some or all of
these flow types include sanitary, storm, and combined-sewer systems. The types of
wastewater are defined as follows:

Sanitary flow. Wastewater discharged from residences and from institutional, com-
mercial and similar facilities. Quantities of sanitary flow can be estimated on a per capita
basis for each type and size of residence or facility producing the flow.
Industrial flow. Wastewater discharged from industrial facilities. In a heavily industri-
alized area, industrial flow can make up a majority of a wastewater plants influent flow.
Industrial wastewater quantities produced by a given facility can be estimated based on
facility type, size, and rate of production.
Stormwater. Stormwater is precipitation runoff. Stormwater enters storm or combined
collection systems as surface or subsurface inflow. The rate of stormwater entering a
storm or combined sewer system as inflow mirrors the intensity and quantity of the pre-
cipitation event, although if the precipitation is frozen the runoff will be delayed until
melting occurs.
Infiltration Water (including stormwater) that seeps into a wastewater collection sys-
tem through the ground, usually through cracks or leaks in the collection system.
Accordingly, infiltration rates typically vary both annually and seasonally. The age of the

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.38 Chapter Twenty-Two

collection system should be considered when estimating infiltration rates because older
collection systems are prone to higher infiltration rates. If the amount of infiltration is sig-
nificant enough to affect plant influent water quality, the treatment processes must be
selected accordingly.
Inflow. Surface and subsurface stormwater discharging directly into a wastewater
collection system. Precipitation events significantly impact inflow rates and can also
impact infiltration rates by surcharging the groundwater table. The elevation of the
groundwater table relative to the sewer elevation directly affects the infiltration flow rate.
The types of sewer systems include sanitary-sewer systems which collect sanitary
wastewater, industrial wastewater (if present in service area), and infiltration/inflow.
Storm-sewer systems collect stormwater and infiltration/inflow, and combined-sewer sys-
tems collect sanitary wastewater, industrial wastewater (if present in service area),
stormwater, and infiltration/inflow. Flows to wastewater treatment plants are conveyed by
separate-sewer systems and, in some older systems, combined-sewer systems. Hydraulic
design guidelines for sanitary-sewer systems have been compiled by the American Society
of Civil Engineers and the Water Environment Federation (1982).

22.4.1.2 Effluent requirements. Treated wastewater can be discharged to rivers, lakes,


oceans, and groundwater. There is also increasing re-use of wastewater for nonpotable
applications, such as irrigation and industrial processing. Effluent quality requirements for
wastewater treatment plants are generally established by regulatory agencies in the plants
NPDES permit. Those minimum acceptable effluent characteristics and the anticipated
influent characteristics determine what level of treatment is required and, thereby, deter-
mines to some degree what treatment processes are needed. Because each process type
requires a different amount of head, the influent characteristics and effluent requirements
also indirectly affect the plant head requirements.
22.4.1.3 Process selection. Each unit process in a wastewater treatment plant flow train
treats the wastewater physically, chemically or biologically, or in some combination there-
of. Because various combinations of unit processes are generally available to produce the
desired effluent quality, the designer must choose among the options to select the opti-
mum combination. In anticipation of future requirements, potential changes in effluent
requirements and corresponding treatment train modifications should also be considered.
Typical unit treatment processes for new wastewater treatment plants include screening,
grit removal, primary sedimentation, aeration, secondary sedimentation, granular media
filtration, disinfection, dechlorination, and postaeration. Figure 22.20 is a flow diagram
showing how the typical processes are interconnected.
Unless only one treatment process combination is capable of adequately treating the
wastewater, pertinent factors must be used to select the process train. Typical factors
include capital and operating costs, environmental impacts, aesthetics, and public accep-
tance. Process head requirements can directly affect capital costs, as those processes with
higher head requirements are more likely to necessitate costly pumping facilities and deep
structure excavation.

22.4.1.4 Hydraulic bases for design. Flow rates for the wastewater treatment plant must
be established for the hydraulic design. Design year flow projections are often based on
estimated conditions 1520 years in the future. Providing sufficient treatment capacity to
accommodate new development can be an important municipal commodity for expanding
the municipal tax base. The design should also provide allowances for the initial plant
operation when flow may be significantly less than the design flow, as well as expansion
or rehabilitation to handle flows reasonably anticipated beyond the design year.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.39

Peak flow is used for hydraulic design, whereas average flow is used for treatment
process design. Peak flow is defined as the maximum hour flow experienced by the waste-
water treatment plant throughout its service life. The maximum hour flow is generally two
to five times the average daily flow. Plants serving combined collection systems can expe-
rience even greater flow variations. Treatment plant unit processes must convey the max-
imum flow unless this flow would cause a hydraulic washout of the treatment plant. In this
situation, the designer should consider the use of equalization basins to minimize negative
impact on the treatment process. In addition, the plant must also be able to fully process
minimum flow without undesirable settling of solids throughout the treatment train. Plants
normally encounter diurnal fluctuation of pollutant loadings, as well as flow loadings.
Fluctuation in pollutant loadings may impact treatment process selection and consequent-
ly impact process hydraulics.

22.4.1.5 Flow diagram. A flow diagram should be prepared to depict the results of
process selection and hydraulic bases of design. Details in a flow diagram should include
the type of unit processes, number of basins for process redundancy, flow distribution and
junction chambers, piping, and conduits for interconnecting the unit processes and major
recycle streams such as return-activated sludge (RAS). Figure 22.20, which was men-
tioned above, shows a typical flow diagram.

22.4.1.6 Plant siting. Several factors affect the plant site selection process, including site
elevation, topography, geology, and hydrology; site access; utility availability; seismic
activity; surrounding land use and future availability; noise, odor and air quality require-
ments at and near the site; existing collection system and receiving water proximity; and
other environmental considerations.
A sites hydraulic suitability for a wastewater treatment plant is determined primarily
by site elevation and topography. The typical site elevation is low-lying, which facilitates
the flow of wastewater from the service area by gravity and minimizes costly pumping in
the collection system. Such a site, however, may require flood protection. The difference
in head between the plant influent sewer and the receiving water body is the head avail-
able for the treatment plant. If available head does not exceed the plants head require-
ments, additional head can be provided by pumping the wastewater. Selecting processes
with lower head requirements can also reduce the need for pumping. Pumping of waste-
water, especially untreated wastewater, should be avoided when possible due to potential
operational difficulties of handling the associated rags, grit, stringy material and other
large solids. A mild, continuous slope usually provides optimal gravity flow conditions.
Relatively flat sites often necessitate higher pumping heads. Sites on a severe, uneven
slope or slopes can require costly hydraulic and structural features, and should be avoid-
ed when possible.

22.4.1.7 Plant layout. The selected treatment processes establish the major space and
hydraulic requirements needed to develop initial plant layouts. Also, provisions for future
unit process additions and plant capacity expansions should be included both spatially and
hydraulically. Support facilities, such as maintenance, laboratory and administrative
facilities, must also be considered.
Arranging process elevations to generally follow plant site topography minimizes the
amount of structural excavation. Site geology constraints may limit the practical depth and
elevation of the processes. In such cases, additional pumping facilities may be necessary
to provide sufficient head for the required water surface elevation.
When arranging treatment processes, a preliminary hydraulic profile should be devel-
oped as discussed below. The plant hydraulic profile and site topography and geology
information together determine the location having the optimal elevation for each process.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.40 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.20 Schematic flow diagram of typical wastewater treatment plant.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.41

Other objectives when developing a plant layout at a selected site include: close proxim-
ity of processes to associated facilities; structure grouping according to process;
transportation equipment and staff traffic pattern efficiency; minimization of process
piping; and safe, isolated hazardous chemical and material locations.
When preparing layouts for addition of a new process to an existing plant, the existing
plant hydraulic profile should be consulted to determine the amount of head available for
the new process. If adequate hydraulic head is not available for the new process, new
pumping facilities will be necessary.

22.4.1.8 Hydraulic profile and calculations. A hydraulic profile should be prepared for
the flow train to graphically depict the results of hydraulic calculations and site layouts.
Details in a profile should include free water surface elevations throughout the flow train,
including unit treatment processes, interconnecting piping and channels, junction cham-
bers, flowmeters and flow control devices, as well as structural profiles. Figure 22.21
shows a typical hydraulic profile. Both high and low water levels are shown to illustrate
the range of liquid levels anticipated at each structure. Sufficient freeboard must be pro-
vided to prevent liquid or floating material from splashing over the sides under conditions
of high water level. Low water levels are important when designing devices requiring a
mimimum amount of submergence, such as surface skimmers or baffles.
In addition to normal high and low water levels, hydraulic calculations should address
other potential conditions. For example, for each process having redundant structures, the
largest capacity unit should be assumed to be out of service during maximum flow for
consideration of a worst case. The process structure should always be hydraulically
capable of accommodating the change in elevation due to the worst case. head require-
ments without liquid overtopping the walls.
The process head requirement is the amount of head lost by the wastewater as it pass-
es through a process at maximum flow. The head requirement for a specific process can
vary with flow rate, influent water quality, process equipment size, process equipment lay-
out, process equipment components included, and process equipment manufacturer.

22.4.2 Typical Unit Process Hydraulics

22.4.2.1 Bar screens. Process criteria. The first unit operation typically encountered in
a wastewater treatment plant is screening. A schematic diagram of a typical bar screen sys-
tem is shown in Fig. 22.22. A screen is comprised of a screening element with circular or
rectangular openings designed to retain coarse sewage solids. The screens are designated
as hand cleaned or mechanically cleaned based on the method of cleaning. Based on the
size of the openings, screens are designated as coarse or fine. The general dividing line
between coarse and fine screens is an opening size of 6 mm (1/4 in). A bar screen is a
coarse screen designed to remove large solids or trash that could otherwise damage or
interfere with the downstream operations of treatment equipment, such as pumps, valves,
mechanical aerators, and biological filters. The bar screens are oriented vertically or at a
slope varying from 30 80 with the horizontal.

Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for bar
screens include the approach channel, effective bar opening, and operating head loss.
Approach channel. Velocity distribution in the approach channel is an important fac-
tor in successful bar screen operation. A straight channel ahead of the channel provides
good velocity distribution across the screen and promotes effectiveness of the device. Use
of a configuration other than a straight approach channel has often resulted in uneven flow

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.42 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.21 Typical hydraulic profile for wastewater treatment plant.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.43

distribution within the channel and accumulation of debris on one side of the screen. The
velocity in the approach channel should be maintained at a self-cleaning value to dislodge
deposits of grit or screenings. Ideally, the velocity in the screen chamber should exceed
0.4 m/s (1.3 ft/s) at minimum flows to avoid grit deposition if grit chambers follow bar
screens. However, this is not always practical with the typical diurnal and seasonal fluc-
tuation in wastewater flows. In general, common design practice provides velocities of
0.61.2 m/s (24 ft/s) for mechanically cleaned bar screens and 0.30.6 m/s
(12 ft/s) with a velocity of 0.9 m/s (3 ft/s) at peak instantaneous velocity for manually
cleaned bar screens.
Effective bar opening. Various types of bar screens, including trash racks, manual
screens and mechanically cleaned bar screens, employ a wide range of openings from
6 to 150 mm (146 in). The smaller screen openings collect larger quantities of screenings
and generally produce higher head losses. The effective area of the screen openings equals
the sum of the vertical projections of the screen openings.
Operating head loss. As the screenings are collected, the openings in the screen
become partially clogged and head losses increase. The maximum design allowance for
headloss through the clogged screens is generally limited to 0.8 m (2.5 ft). Curves and
tables for head loss through the screening device are usually available from the equipment
manufacturer. To prevent flooding of the screening area caused by severe blinding of the
screen during a power failure or similar disruption to cleaning, the design should provide
for an overflow weir or gate and a parallel channel allowing overflows to flow around
the screen.
Hydraulic design example. The wastewater influent transported through the inlet
sewer passes the bar screens prior to discharge into the pump well. Three bar screens are
provided to handle hydraulic loadings varying from 1.0 m3/s (23 mgd) for minimum day
flow during initial operation to 3.2 m3/s (73 mgd) for maximum hour flow during design
operation. Sluice gates and stop logs are provided as part of the bar screen design so that
any bar screen can be isolated for maintenance as required.

Design hydraulic calculations for the bar screens are shown in Table 22.8. The WSEL
at the pump well provides a downstream control point for the bar screens and channels.
The WSEL at the pump well normally fluctuates between the pump control high water
level and low water level. A high water level (HWL) of 100.60 m at the pump well is
assumed. The channel bottom elevation of 99.50 m is determined to provide channel flow
velocities in a range of 0.21.3 m/s for the flow range between the minimum and maxi-
mum day flow rates. The head requirements for the sample bar screen system is in the
range of 0.170.36 m (0.561.2 ft) when the pump wet well level is at the maximum ele-
vation of 100.60.

22.4.2.2 Grit tanks. Process criteria. Grit, consisting of sand, gravel, cinders, and other
heavy solid materials, is present in wastewater conveyed by either separate or combined
sewer systems, with far more in the latter. Grit removal prevents unnecessary abrasion and
wear of mechanical equipment, grit deposition in pipelines and channels, and accumula-
tion of grit in primary sedimentation basins or aeration basins and anaerobic digesters.
Traditionally removal of 95 percent of grit particles larger than 0.21 mm (0.008 in or 65
mesh) has been the target of grit equipment design. Modern designs are now capable of
removing up to 75 percent of 0.15 mm (0.006 in or 100 mesh) to avoid adverse effects on
downstream processes.
A variety of grit removal devices have been applied over the years. The basic types of
grit removal processes include aerated grit chambers, vortex-type, detritus tank, horizon-
tal flow type and hydroclone. Vortex systems are increasingly being selected. Detritus

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.44 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.22 Schematic diagram of bar screen system.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.45

tanks and aerated grit chambers are still popular. Depending on the type of grit removal
process used, the removed grit is often further concentrated in a cyclone, classified, and
then washed to remove light organic material captured with the grit.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for grit tanks
include the inlet channel or inlet baffle, and effluent weir.
Inlet channel/inlet baffle. For aerated grit chambers, the tank inlet and outlet should be
positioned so that the flow through the tank is perpendicular to the roll pattern created by the
diffused air. Inlet and outlet baffles serve to dissipate energy and minimize short circuiting.
For vortex tanks, the flow into the vortex tank should be straight, smooth and stream-
lined. As a good practice, the straight inlet channel length should be seven times the width
of the inlet channel or 15 ft, whichever is greater. The ideal velocity in the influent chan-
nel ranges from 0.6 to 0.9 m/s (23 ft/s) and should be used for flows between 40 and 80
percent of the peak flow. The minimum acceptable velocity for low flow is 0.15 m/s (0.5
ft/s). A baffle, located at the entrance, helps control the flow system in the tank and also
forces the grit downward as it enters the tank.
For detritus tanks, the performance relies on well-distributed flow into the settling
basin. Allowances for inlet and outlet turbulence, as well as short circuiting, are necessary
to determine the total tank area required.
For horizontal flow grit chambers, velocity control throughout the chamber at approx-
imately 0.3 m/s (1 ft/s) is important. An allowance for inlet and outlet turbulence is nec-
essary to determine the actual length of the channel.

TABLE 22.8 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Bar Screen System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Max Hour

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.2 3.2


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
Bar screens
Total number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 2 2 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 1 1 1
Flow rate per screen in operation, q (m3/s) 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.6
Width of each bar screen, w (m) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
2. At point 8
Pump wetwell HGL at high water level, HGL7 (m) 100.60 100.60 100.60 100.60 100.60
(pump starts at EL 100.60 and stops at EL 100.00)
Pump well bottom EL (m) 99.00 99.00 99.00 99.00 99.00
Critical depth in a rectangular channel,
Yc=(q2/g/w2)1/3 0.16 0.22 0.25 0.26 0.35
Bar screen channel depth= 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10
pump WW HGL - channel bottom EL (m)
(Water level at pump well controls upstream
hydraulics if bar screen channel depth is higher
than Yc)
Is bar screen channel depth higher than Yc? yes yes yes yes yes
3. Point 8 to point 7
Channel bottom EL (m) 99.50 99.50 99.50 99.50 99.50

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.46 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.8 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Max Hour

Depth in channel, y7 (m) 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10


Velocity, V7 (m/s) 0.18 0.29 0.36 0.39 0.58
Exit loss from channel to pump well
Exit loss coeficient, Kexit 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hle7=K Kexit. V772/2g (m) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02
HGL at point 7, HGL7  HGL8+Hle7 (m) 100.60 100.60 100.61 100.61 100.62
4. Point 7 to Point 6
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L6 (m) 7 7 7 7 7
Mannings number for concrete channel, n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Channel width, w6 (m) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Water depth, h6 (m) 1.10 1.10 1.11 1.11 1.12
Velocity, V6 (m/s) 0.18 0.29 0.36 0.39 0.57
Hydraulic radius, R6  (h6  w6)/(2  h6  w6) 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59
Headloss, Hlf6  (V6  n/r662/3)2  L6 (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  HGL7 + Hlf6 (m) 100.60 100.60 100.61 100.61 100.62
5. Point 6 to Point 5
Bar width (m) 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010
Bar shape factor, bsf 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42
Cross-sectional width of bars, w (m) 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89
Clear spacing of bars, b (m) 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61 1.61
Upstream velocity head, h (m) 0.0041 0.0104 0.0163 0.0186 0.0418
Angle of bar screen with horizontal, p (degrees) 60 60 60 60 60
(Kirschmers eq),. Hls  bsf  w/b
1.33  h  sin p (m) 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06
Allow 0.15 m head for blinding
by screenings, Ha (m) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15
HGL upstream of bar screen, HGL5 
HGL6  Hls  Ha (m) 100.76 100.77 100.78 100.79 100.83
6. Point 5 to Point 4
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L4 (m) 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Mannings number for concrete channel n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Channel width, w4 (m) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Channel bottom elevation (m) 99.65 99.65 99.65 99.65 99.65
Water depth, h4 (m) 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.18
Channel velocity, VV4 (m/s) 0.18 0.29 0.35 0.38 0.54
Hydraulic radius R4  h4 
w4/(2  h4  w4) 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.60 0.61
f  (V4*
Headloss , Hlf4 V n/R/ 4 (2/3)
2 L4 (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 4, HGL4  HGL5 + Hlf4
f (m) 100.76 100.77 100.78 100.79 100.83
7. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss at sluice gate contraction
Kgate 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (m) 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Sluice gate height (m) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
Velocity through sluice gate, Vs (m/s) 0.38 0.59 0.74 0.78 1.13

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.47

TABLE 22.8 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Max Hour

Sluice gate headloss,


Hls  Kgate  Vs2 /2g (m) 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06
HGL at Point 3, HGL3 (m) 100.77 100.79 100.81 100.82 100.90
8. Point 3 to Point 2
Water depth at point 2, h2 (m) 1.12 1.14 1.16 1.17 1.25
Channel width, w2 (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Channel velocity, VV2 (m/s) 0.22 0.35 0.43 0.46 0.64
Fitting headloss through 45 bend Kbend  0.2 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Headloss, Hlb2 = Kbend  V 2 2/2g (m) 0.0005 0.0013 0.0019 0.0021 0.0042
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L2 (m) 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00 4.00
Mannings, number for concrete channel n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius
R2  h2  w2/(2  f2 f w2) (m) 0.53 0.53 0.54 0.54 0.56
Headloss Hlf2f  (V2
V  n/R/ 2(2/3)
2  L2, (m) 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006
Entrance loss
Kent  0.5 n 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hle2 = Kent  V 2 2/2g(m) 0.0013 0.0031 0.0047 0.0053 0.0105
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  HGL3 
Hlb2 Hlf2f  Hle2 (m) 100.77 100.79 100.82 100.83 100.91
9. Point 2 to Point 1
HGL at point 1, HGL 1  HGL2 (m) 100.77 100.79 100.82 100.83 100.91
Invert EL of inlet sewer, INV1 (m) 99.50 99.50 99.50 99.50 99.50
Crown EL of inlet sewer, CWN1 (m) 101.65 101.65 101.65 101.65 101.65
Surcharge to inlet sewer? No No No No No

Effluent weir. The effluent weir of the grit chamber provides the hydraulic control
point of this process. With a free fall at the weir, critical depth occurs upstream near the
weir and it affects the water surface profile upstream if the flow is subcritical. The efflu-
ent weir should be designed to keep the velocity below 0.3 m/s (1 ft/s) and to minimize
turbulence in the outlet.
Hydraulic design example. A schematic diagram of a typical vortex grit tank system
is shown in Fig. 22.23. The effluent from the bar screen is pumped to the grit tank influ-
ent channel. The influent is distributed to three grit tanks. The hydraulic loading
conditions are the same as those for the bar screens.
Design hydraulic calculations for the vortex grit tank system is shown in Table 22.9.
The head requirements for the sample grit tank system are in the range of 0.300.69 m
(1.02.3 ft).
22.4.2.3 Sedimentation tanks. Process criteria. A typical municipal wastewater treat-
ment system consists of primary sedimentation and secondary (or final) sedimentation
tanks. The purpose of both type of sedimentation tanks is to separate the settleable solids
from the liquid stream by gravity settling.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.48 Chapter Twenty-Two

The primary sedimentation tank receives the wastewater passed through bar screens
and/or grit tanks. The objectives of primary sedimentation are to produce a liquid effluent
suitable for downstream biological treatment and to achieve solids separation. The solids
result in a sludge that can be conveniently and economically treated before ultimate
disposal. On an average basis, the primary sedimentation tank removes approximately
60 and 30 percent of influent total suspended solids (TSS) and 5-day biological oxygen
demand (BOD5), respectively.
The secondary sedimentation tank receives mixed liquor from the aeration tank. Mixed
liquor is a suspended biological growth stream containing microorganisms and treated
wastewater. The microorganisms settle with other settleable solids and the clear water is dis-
charged from the sedimentation tank as an effluent. The sedimentation process also thickens
the settled solids, a major part of which is returned to the aeration tank and the remainder is
wasted as secondary sludge. Sedimentation tank performance is critical for meeting effluent
limits for TSS and BOD5. The secondary sedimentation effluents are usually designed to
produce 30 mg/L or lower for TSS or BOD5, depending on the effluent requirement.
Both primary and secondary sedimentation tanks are commonly arranged in either
rectangular or circular shape. Key design parameters include surface overflow rate (SOR),
tank water depth, hydraulic detention time, and weir loading rate. Solids loading rate is anoth-
er important parameter for the secondary sedimentation tank. A properly designed sedimen-
tation tank will provide similar performance for both rectangular and circular shapes. Choice
of the shape depends on the site constraints, construction cost, and designer preference.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for sedimen-
tation tanks include the inlet conditions, inlet channel, inlet flow distribution, inlet baffle,
outlet conditions, overflow weir, and effluent launder.
Inlet conditions. Inlets should be designed to dissipate the inlet port velocity, distrib-
ute flow and solids equally across the cross-sectional area of the tank, and prevent short
circuiting in the sedimentation tank. The minimum distance between the inlet and outlet
should be 3 m (10 ft) unless the tank includes special provisions to prevent short
circuiting.
Inlet channel. Inlet channels should be designed to maintain velocities high enough to
prevent solids deposition. The minimum channel velocity is typically 0.3 m/s (1 ft/s).
Alternatively, inlet channel aeration or water jet nozzles can be designed to prevent solids
deposition.
Inlet flow distribution. Inlet flow can be distributed by inlet weirs, submerged ports,
or orifices with velocities between 0.05 and 0.15 m/s (0.150.5 ft/s), and sluice gates or
gate valves. Uniform flow to the sedimentation tanks can be achieved by locating inlet
ports away from sides, adding partitions or baffles in the inlet zone to redirect the influ-
ent, and creating a higher head loss in the inlet ports relative to that in the inlet channel.
Alternatively, splitter boxes are used for equally splitting the flow as well as solids con-
tained in the liquid into multiple sedimentation tanks.
Inlet baffle. Inlet baffles are designed to dissipate the energy of the inlet velocities.
Baffles are usually installed 0.60.9 m (23 ft) downstream of the inlet port and
submerged 0.450.6 (1.52 ft), depending on tank depth. The top of the baffle should be
far enough below the water surface to allow scum to pass over the top. Circular tanks typ-
ically have a feed well with a diameter 15 to 20 percent of the tank diameter. The
submergence varies depending on the manufacturer.
Outlet conditions. Effluent should be uniformly withdrawn to prevent localized high
velocity zones and short circuiting. Typically, effluent is withdrawn from a sedimentation

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.49

FIGURE 22.23 Schematic diagram of vortex grit tank system.

TABLE 22.9 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Vortex Grit Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.2 3.2


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
2. Vortex grit tanks
Total number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 2 3 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 1 0 1
Flow rate per vortex grit tank in
operation (m3/s) 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.6
Control point is located at Point 8
(effluent channel weir)
Hydraulic calculations upstream of control point
3. At Point 8
Headloss over sharp-crested weir
Sharp-crested weir EL, weir EL (m) 106.00 106.00 106.00 106.00 106.00
Effluent channel bottom EL (m) 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00
Flow rate over weir, q (m3/s) 0.5 0.8 1.0 1.1 1.6

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.50 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.9 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Length of weir, L (m) 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00


Head over end contracted weir,
He (assumed) 0.20 0.28 0.32 0.34 0.45
Headloss, He8  (q/1.84 (L 0.2He)(2/3) (m) 0.20 0.28 0.32 0.34 0.45
Hle8 He (must be zero) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 8, HGL8  weir
EL  Hle8 (m) 106.20 106.28 106.32 106.34 106.45
4. Point 8 to Point 7
Channel width, w7 (m) 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Channel bottom EL (m) 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00
Water depth, h7 (m) 1.20 1.28 1.32 1.34 1.45
Velocity, V 7 (m/s)
Exit headloss from channel to effluent weir
Exit headloss coefficient Kexit  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hle7  Kexit  V72/2g (m) 0.0010 0.0022 0.0032 0.0036 0.0069
HGL at Point 7, HGL7  HGL8  Hle7 (m) 106.20 106.28 106.33 106.34 106.45
5. Point 7 to Point 6
Channel width, w6 (m) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Channel bottom EL (m) 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00 105.00
Water depth, h6 (m) 1.20 1.28 1.33 1.34 1.45
Velocity, V
V6 (m/s) 0.17 0.25 0.30 0.32 0.44
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L6 (m) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Mannings number for concrete channel n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R6  (h6  w6)/
(2 x h6  w6) (m) 0.61 0.63 0.64 0.65 0.67
2
Headloss Hlf6f [(V6
V n/R / 6 (2/3)] L6(m)0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0003 0.0006
Fitting headloss through 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient
Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hlb6  Kbend  V6 V 2/2g(m) 0.0014 0.0032 0.0046 0.0051 0.0099
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  HGL7 
f  Hlb6 (m)
Hlf6 106.21 106.28 106.33 106.35 106.46
6. Point 6 to Point 5
Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss coefficient
Kgate  1.0 1.0 1..0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (m) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Sluice gate height (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Water depth, h5 (m) 1.20 1.28 1.33 1.34 1.45
Sluice gate height or h5,
whichever is smaller (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Velocity through sluice gate,
V5 (m/s)
V 0.33 0.53 0.67 0.71 1.07

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.51

TABLE 22.9 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Headloss, Hls5  Kgate  V5


V 2/2g (m) 0.0057 0.0145 0.0227 0.0258 0.0580
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
HGL6  Hls5 (m) 106.21 106.30 106.36 106.37 106.52
7. Point 5 to Point 4
Channel width, w4 (m) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Bottom of channel EL (m) 105.20 105.20 105.20 105.20 105.20
Water depth, h4 (m) 1.01 1.01 1.16 1.17 1.32
Channel velocity, VV4 (m/s) 0.20 0.29 0.35 0.36 0.48
Fitting headloss through a 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient
Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hlb4  Kbend  V4 V 2/2g (m) 0.0020 0.0043 0.0061 0.0067 0.0120
Friction headloss through channel
Length of channel, L4 (m) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R4  h4  w4/
(2  h4  w4) (m) 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.61 0.64
f  [(V4
Headloss, Hlf4 V n/R / 4(2/3)]2 L4 (m)0.0001 0.0003 0.0004 0.0004 0.0007
HGL at Point 4, HGL4  HGL5 
Hlb4  Hlf4 f (m) 106.21 106.30 106.36 106.38 106.54
8. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss across vortex grit
tank, Hltank (m) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
(per manufacturer recommendations)
HGL at Point 3, HGL3  HGL4 
Hltank (m) 106.27 106.36 106.42 106.44 106.60
9. Point 3 to Point 2
Channel width, w2 (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Bottom of channel EL (m) 105.60 105.60 105.60 105.60 105.60
Water depth, h2 (m) 0.67 0.76 0.82 0.84 1.00
Channel velocity, V V2 (m/s) 0.37 0.52 0.61 0.63 0.80
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel,
L2 (m) 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R2  h2  w2/
(2  h2  w2) (m) 0.40 0.43 0.45 0.46 0.50
2
Headloss, Hlf2 f  [(V2
V  n/R/ 2(2/3)]
 L2 (m) 0.0011 0.0020 0.0025 0.0027 0.0039
Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss coefficient
Kgate  1.0 1.0 1..0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (m) 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5
Sluice gate height (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.52 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.9 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Water depth, h2 (m) 0.67 0.76 0.82 0.84 1.00


Sluice gate height or h2,
whichever is smaller 0.67 0.76 0.82 0.84 1.00
Velocity through sluice gate,V
V2 (m/s) 0.49 0.70 0.81 0.85 1.07
Headloss, Hls2  Kgate V2V 2/2g (m) 0.0125 0.0249 0.0335 0.0364 0.0586
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  HGL3 
f  Hls2 (m)
Hlf2 106.29 106.39 106.46 106.48 106.66
10. Point 2 to Point 1
Channel width, w1 (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Bottom of channel EL (m) 105.65 105.65 105.65 105.65 105.65
Water depth, h1 (m) 0.64 0.74 0.81 0.83 1.01
Channel velocity, V1 (m/s) 0.39 0.54 0.62 0.64 0.79
Fitting headloss through a 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient
Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hlb1  Kbend 
2
V1 /2g (m) 0.0078 0.0149 0.0195 0.0210 0.0322
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L1 (m) 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R1  h1  w1/
(2  h1  w1) (m) 0.39 0.43 0.45 0.45 0.50
(2/3)2
f  (V1  n/R
Headloss, Hlf1 / 1
 L1 (m) 0.0005 0.0008 0.0009 0.0010 0.0013
(Influent channel may be aerated
using diffused air to prevent solids
settling or odor problem)
HGL at Point 1, HGL1  HGL2 
Hlc1  Hlf1f (m) 106.30 106.41 106.48 106.50 106.69

tank over an effluent weir into a trough and/or effluent channel. Clarifier performance can
often be improved by installation of interior baffles. For circular tanks, particularly for
secondary sedimentation tanks, a baffle mounted on the wall beneath the effluent weir can
deflect solids rising along the wall. Alternatively, mid-radius baffles supported by the
sludge removal mechanism are also available.
Overflow weir. The overflow weir must be level to promote uniform effluent with-
drawal. Weirs may be either straight edged or V-notched. V-notched weirs have high-
er headloss, but provide better lateral distribution than straight-edged weirs that are imper-
fectly leveled.
Effluent launder (or trough). Effluent launders may be designed with submerged ori-
fices or free discharge into the collection chamber or channel from which the effluent
flows to the effluent pipe. Disadvantage of the submerged launder is that it is not effective

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.53

in varying flow rates. Disadvantage of the free fall launder is potential release of odorous
gases. Two principal approaches to weir and launder design are the long-launder and
short-launder options. Long launders control the head loss over the weir within a narrow
range. In cold regions, fluctuating water levels with short launders would minimize ice
attachment to launders and basin walls.
Hydraulic design example for primary sedimentation. A schematic diagram of typical cir-
cular primary sedimentation tank system is shown in Fig. 22.24. The primary sedimenta-
tion tanks receive the grit tank effluent and hydraulic loading conditions are the same as
those of the grit tanks. A single primary sedimentation tank is shown for simplicity.
Design hydraulic calculations for the primary sedimentation tank system is shown in
Table 22.10. Note that the design locates Points 5 and 6 at elevations such that down-
stream flow conditions will not impact flow conditions in the effluent channel or overflow
weir. The head requirements for the sample primary sedimentation tanks are in the range
of 1.11.5 m (3.64.9 ft).
Hydraulic design example for secondary sedimentation. A schematic diagram of typical
rectangular secondary sedimentation tank system is shown in Figure 22.25. The secondary
sedimentation tanks receive flows from the aeration tanks and hydraulic loading condi-
tions are same as those of the aeration tanks. A single secondary sedimentation tank is
shown for simplicity. Design hydraulic calculations for the secondary sedimentation tank
system is shown in Table 22.11. The head requirements for the sample secondary sedi-
mentation tanks are in the range of 1.61.7 m (5.26.2 ft).

22.4.2.4 Aeration tanks Process criteria. The most common aerobic suspended
growth treatment system for municipal wastewater is the activated sludge system.
Wastewater and biological solids (mixedliquor suspended solids or MLSS) are com-
bined, mixed, and aerated in the aeration tank. The biological MLSS solids take up the
organics and nutrients contained in the wastewater and convert them into more biosolids
and gaseous by-products. After sufficient time for biological reactions, the mixed liquor
is transferred to the following secondary sedimentation tanks where biosolids are separat-
ed from the wastewater. The separated wastewater is discharged as an effluent. The sepa-
rated biosolids are returned to the aeration tank (return activated sludge or RAS) while a
predetermined amount of the separated biosolids is wasted as waste activated sludge
(WAS).
Factors that must be considered in the design of the activated sludge process include
loading criteria, selection of reactor type, sludge production, oxygen requirements and
transfer, nutrient requirements, environmental requirements, solid-liquid separation, and
effluent characteristics.
Sizing of aeration basins is based on two key factors: providing sufficient time for
oxidation of organics or ammonia nitrogen; and maintaining of a flocculent, well-set-
tling MLSS that can be effectively removed by gravity settling. Solids residence time
(SRT) or mean cell residence time (MCRT) is often used to relate substrate removal
time requirements to biological growth and biosolids production. Once an SRT is select-
ed, calculation of aeration tank volume requires an estimation of biosolids production
and selection of proper MLSS concentration. The selected MLSS concentration along
with the solids settling characteristics is important to the final sedimentation tank per-
formance. Therefore, sizing of the aeration tank is always optimized with the final sed-
imentation tank design.
The aeration tank should be provided with sufficient oxygen required for the biologi-
cal reaction and sufficient power required for thorough mixing of the biomass with the
incoming wastewater stream. Although a variety of diffused aeration and mechanical aer-
ation systems are available, diffused aeration systems are more popular in the municipal
wastewater treatment.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.54 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.24 Schematic diagram of primary sedimentation tank (PST) system.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.55

Aeration basin configurations.. Common aeration basins include various process con-
figurations, physical configurations and designs for process selectors. A schematic dia-
gram of a typical rectangular aeration tank system is shown in Fig. 22.26.
Process configuration Various aeration process configurations can be used depending
on the range of loading conditions, design effluent quality, aeration system design require-
ments and flexibility of operation. Configurations often encountered include complete
mix, plug flow, oxidation ditch, and a combination of these. For smaller plants, oxidation

TABLE 22.10 Example Hydraulic Calculations of a Typical Primary Sedimentation


Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.20 3.20


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
2. Primary sedimentation tanks (PSTs)
Total number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 3 3 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 0 0 1
Flow rate per PTS in
operation, q (m3/s) 0.5 0.8 0.7 1.1 1.6
Control points are located at Points
5 and 6 so that back up from
down stream does not flood effluent
channel or overflow weir.
Hydraulic Calculations beginning
at Point 7
1. At Point 7
HGL7 must be equal to HGL1 of
aeration tank (m) 104.46 104.46 104.46 104.46 104.46
2. At Point 6
Allowance of 0.10 m from HGL at
pipe entrance to bottom of PST
effluent trough at discharge end (m) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Elevation of PTS trough bottom
at discharge end, ELdcb (m) 104.56 104.56 104.56 104.56 104.56
Calculation of water depth in
PST effluent trough
Tank diameter, Dt (m) 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0
Number of channels per tank, nc 2 2 2 2 2
Total flow through tank, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Flow per channel, qc  q/nc (m3/s) 0.25 0.40 0.33 0.53 0.80
Channel slope, Sc, (selected
to prevent solids settling) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Channel width, w6 (m) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Channel length, Lc  3.14 
(Dt  (w6/2))/nc (m) 69.87 69.87 69.87 69.87 69.87
Change in channel EL,
EL dif  Sc  Lc (m) 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.14

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.56 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Critical depth, yc  (qc2/(g  w62)0.33 (m) 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.31 0.41
Water depth at upstream end
of channel, yu  2  (yc)2  (yc 
L 2]0.5  (2  Sc  L
(S*L/3) L/3) (m) 0.21 0.33 0.28 0.42 0.58
Channel bottom El at upstream
end of trough, 104.70 104.70 104.70 104.70 104.70
ELucb  ELdcb  ELdif (m)
HGL at trough downstream,
HGL6d  ELdcb  yc (m) 104.75 104.82 104.79 104.87 104.97
HGL at trough upstream,
HGL6u  ELucb  yu (m) 104.91 105.03 104.98 105.12 105.28
3. Point 6 to Point 5
Allowance to Weir from
high trough HGL (m) 0.10 0.10 0.10 .010 0.10
Weir elevation, Elwe, max.
HGL6u  allowance (m) 105.38 105.38 105.38 105.38 105.38
Headloss over VVnotch weirs
Number of weirs per tank, Nw 1 1 1 1 1
Tank diameter, Dt, (m) 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
Weir length, Lw  (Dt)  3.14 (m) 141.30 141.30 141.30 141.30 141.30
Hydraulic load, So  q/Lw
/ , [(m3/s)/m] 0.0035 0.0057 0.0047 0.0075 0.0113
Weir angle, A, (degrees) 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00
V-notch height, Vh (m) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
V-notch width, Vw  2 
(TAN(A( /2)  Vh (m) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Space between notches, Esv (m) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Number of notches per weir,
nv  Lw/(Ew  Esv) 614 614 614 614 614
Flow per notch, Qcw  q/nv (m3/s) 0.0008 0.0013 0.0011 0.0017 0.0026
Weir coefficient for 90 notch, Cw 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34
Water depth over the weir, hle5
 (Qcw/Cw)(1/2.48) 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.08
hle5 < Vh? (If not, need to
readjust calculations) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
ELwe  hle5 (m) 105.44 105.45 105.44 105.45 105.47
4. Point 5 to Point 4
Headloss through primary
sedimentation tanks
Number of tanks, Nt 2 2 3 3 2
Flow per tank, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Tank diameter, Dt (m) 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00
Side water depth, Dsw (m) 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30 4.30
Tank bottom elevation,
ELt  HGL5  Dsw (m) 101.14 101.14 101.14 101.14 101.14
Tank floor slope, St (%) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.57

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Minimum floor tank elevation, ELtf 99.27 99.27 99.27 99.27 99.27
 0.0833  (Dt/2)
t  EL (m)
Headloss through tank, hlt4
t (m) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
(available from equipment
manufacturer)
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
HGL5  hlt4t (m) 105.49 105.50 105.49 105.50 105.52
5. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss through PST influent pier
Pier diameter, Dp  1.07 m 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07
Pier length, Lp (m) 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50 6.50
V  Q/(3.14 
Velocity, V3
(Dp/2)2) (m/s) 0.56 0.89 0.74 1.19 1.78
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (m) 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.27
Slope, Sp  [V3/(0.85
V  Cp  Rp(0.63)](1/0.54)
(%) 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.12 0.26
Headloss, Hlf3f  Lp  Sp (m) 0.0020 0.0047 0.0033 0.0079 0.0168
Exit headloss from pier
Exit headloss coefficient
Kexit  1.0 1 1 1 1 1
Headloss, hle3  K  V3V 2/2g (m) 0.0158 0.0404 0.0281 0.0719 0.1617
HGL at Point 3, HGL3 
HGL4  Hlf3 f  hle3 (m) 105.50 105.54 105.52 105.58 105.69
6. Point 3 to Point 2
Total number of pipes 3 3 3 3 3
Number of pipes per primary
sedimentation tank 1 1 1 1 1
Pipe diameter, Dp (m) 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
Flow per pipe, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Velocity, VV2 0.44 0.71 0.59 0.94 1.42
Friction headloss through primary
sedimentation tank influent pipe
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (m) 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
Length of pipe, Lp (m) 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0 70.0
Slope, Sp  [V2/(0.85
V  Cp  Rp(0.63)](1/0.54)
(%) 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.15
f  Lp  Sp (m)
Headloss, hlf2 0.0120 0.0287 0.0205 0.0490 0.1037
Fitting headloss through two 45 bends
Fitting headloss coefficient
Kbend  0.5 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Headloss, hlb2  K  V2 V 2/2g (m) 0.0050 0.0128 0.0089 0.0227 0.0511
HGL at Point 2, HGL2 
HGL3  hlb2  hlf2f (m) 105.52 105.58 105.55 105.65 105.85
7. At Point 1

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.58 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Entrance headloss from


primary sedimentation
tank influent distribution box
to influent pipe
Pipe diameter, Dp (m) 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
Flow per pipe, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Velocity, V1 (m/s) 0.44 0.71 0.59 0.94 1.42
Entrance headloss coefficient
Kentrance  0.5 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hle1 
Kentrance  V12/2g (m) 0.0050 0.0128 0.0089 0.0227 0.0511
HGL at Point 1, HGL1 
HGL2  Hle1 (m) 105.52 105.60 105.56 105.68 105.90
Allowance to grit tank
effluent weir from maximum 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
HGL1, Hall (m)
Grit tank effluent elevation, ELgr 
HGL1  Hall (m) 106.00 106.00 106.00 106.00 106.00

ditches are more popular and for larger plants, plug flow is favored. Various modifications
of plug flow systems include conventional, tapered aeration, step aeration, modified aera-
tion, and contact stabilization.
Physical configuration. Various physical configurations are used in the aeration tank
design, including rectangular, circular, oval, and octagonal shapes.
Selector design. Selectors are small compartments for aerobic, anoxic or anaerobic
processing usually located in the front end of the aeration tank. The purpose of the selec-
tors is to promote the growth of floc-forming microorganisms by providing a favorable
food to microorganisms (F:M) ratio while suppressing filamentous growth. Typically
selectors are designed with low HRTs and high F:M ratio.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for aeration
tanks include the distribution box, inlet channel, inlet flow distribution, inlet baffles, aer-
ation equipment, RAS, effluent weir, and effluent channel.
Distribution box. Sluice gates, weirs, gate valves or orifices installed in a distribution
box are often used to distribute the upstream flow to multiple aeration tanks and to a sec-
ondary treatment bypass line. Design should provide the desired rate of flow distribution
at all flow conditions with minimum headloss. Provisions to minimize solids deposition
in the distribution box and appurtenances should be considered.
Inlet channel. Inlet channels should be designed to maintain velocities high enough to
prevent solids deposition but low enough to minimize headloss. A velocity of 0.3 m/s
(1 ft/s) is typically used to keep organic solids in suspension. Alternatively, inlet channel
aeration with diffused air, fed at a rate of 0.50.8 m3/min (2030 scfm), is often used.
Inlet flow distribution. Inlet flow can be distributed by inlet weirs, submerged ports or
orifices, and sluice gates or gate valves. Return activated sludge may be introduced prior

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.59

FIGURE 22.25 Schematic diagram of final sedimentation tank.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.60 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.11 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Final Sedimentation Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.2 3.2


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
RAS flow, Qras (% of average day flow) 20 50 50 100 100
RAS flow, Qras
/100, (m3/s) 0.32 0.80 1.00 2.00 2.00
Final sedimentation tank influent
flow, Qin, (m3/s) 1.32 2.40 3.00 5.20 5.20
Final sedimentation tank effluent
flow, Qeff,
f (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Final sedimentation tanks
Total number of units 4 4 4 4 4
Number of units in operation 3 3 3 4 3
Number of units on standby 1 1 1 0 1
Tank width (m) 16 16 16 16 16
Influent per operating tank,
qin, (m3/s) 0.44 0.80 1.00 1.30 1.73
Effluent per operating tank,
qeff,
f (m3/s) 0.33 0.53 0.67 0.80 1.07
2. Select control point at Point 3
(where effluent wiers are located)
Hydraulic calculations downstream
of control point
At Point 3
V-notch weir
Number per tank, Nw 20 20 20 20 20
Individual weir length, Lw (m) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Total weir length, Lwt  Lw  Nw (m) 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0 140.0
Weir angle, A degrees 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0
V-notch height, Vh (m) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
V-notch width, Vw  2 
N(A/2)  Vh (m)
(TAN( 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Space between notches, Esv (m) 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Total number of notches per
tank, nv  Lwt/(
t Vw  Esv) 608 608 608 608 608
Flow per notch, Qcw  qeff/ f nv 0.0005 0.0009 0.0011 0.0013 0.0018
Weir coefficient for 90 notch, Cw 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34
Water depth over the weir,
hle3  (Qcw/Cw)(1/2.48) (m) 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.07
hle3  Vh? (If not, need to
readjust calculations) yes yes yes yes yes
Weir EL (m) (Select weir
elevation so that HGL1 103.37 103.37 103.37 103.37 103.37
equals aeration tanks HGL6)
EGL at Point 3, EGL3 
Weir EL  hle3 (m) 103.41 103.42 103.43 103.43 103.44
Velocity head, HV3  0
V  0) (m)
(assume V3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.61

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)

Initial Operation Initial Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

HGL at point 3, HGL3 


Weir EL  hle3 (m) 103.41 103.42 103.43 103.43 103.44
3. Point 3 to Point 4
Effluent troughs
Number of troughs, nt 10 10 10 10 10
Flow per trough, qt  qeff/f nt (m3/s) 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.08 0.11
Trough slope, St (%) (select
to prevent solids settling) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Trough width, w6 (m) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5
Approximate trough length, Lt (m) 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Change in trough EL due to slope
difEL4  St* Lt (m) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
Critical depth at downstream end, yc 
(qt2/(gw62)0.33 (m) 0.08 0.11 0.12 0.14 0.17
Water depth at upstream end
of trough for free fall 0.12 0.17 0.20 0.23 0.28
from trough into final
effluent channel
yu4  [2  (yc)2  (yc  (S*L/3) L 2].5
 (2  S  L L/3) (m)
Max water EL downstream of weir
(occurring at max. hourly flow 103.27
with one tank out of service)
Elmax4  weir EL  0.1 (m)
(see Point 3 for weirEL)
Trough bottom EL at upstream
end of trough, TbuEL4 (m) 102.99 102.99 102.99 102.99 102.99
Tbu EL4  EL max4  yu for max
hour flow with one tank out of service
HGL at upstream end,
HGL4u  Tbu EL4  yu4 (m) 103.11 103.16 103.19 103.22 103.27
V u0
Velocity head, HV4
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at upstream end, EGL4u 
HGL4u  HV4 V u (m) 103.11 103.16 103.19 103.22 103.27
Trough bottom EL at downstream
end of trough 102.97 102.97 102.97 102.97 102.97
Tbd EL4 Tbu EL4  dif EL4 (m)
HGL at point 4, HGL4 
TbdEL4  yc (m) 103.05 103.08 103.10 103.11 103.14
V d  Vc2/2g (m)
Velocity head, HV4 0.04 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.62 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

EGL at downstream end,


EGL4d  HGL4d  HV4 V d (m) 103.09 103.13 103.16 103.18 103.22
4. Point 4 to Point 5
Effluent channel upstream
Max. water surface level at upstream
end of effluent channel, ELmax5 
TbdEL4  0.1 (m) 102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87
HGL maximum at Point 5, HGL5ELmax5(m)102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87
V 0
Velocity head, HV5
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL maximum at Point 5,
EGL5m  HGL5m  HV5 V (m) 102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87 102.87
5. Point 5 to Point 6
Effluent channel downstream
Flow through channel, Qeff (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Channel slope, Sc (%) (select
to prevent solids settling) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Channel width, w6 (m) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Approximate channel length, Lch (m) 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0 64.0
Change in channel EL,
difEL6  Sc  Lch (m) 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.13
Critical depth, yc 
(q2/(gw62)0.33 (m) 0.23 0.31 0.36 0.49 0.49
Water depth at upstream end of channel, 0.29 0.43 0.52 0.74 0.74
yu6  [2  (yc)2  (yc  (S  L/3)
L 2].5
 (2  S  L L/3) (m)
Channel bottom EL at upstream
end of channel, 102.13 102.13 102.13 102.13 102.13
cbuEL6  HGL5- maximum yu6 (m)
HGL at upstream end of channel,
HGL5  cbuEL6  yu6 (m) 102.42 102.56 102.65 102.87 102.87
V 0
Velocity head, HV5
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at upstream end of channel,
EGL5  HGL5  HV5 V (m) 102.42 102.56 102.65 102.87 102.87
Channel bottom EL at
downstream end of channel, 102.00 102.00 102.00 102.00 102.00
cbdEL6  cbuEL6  difEL6 (m)
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  cbdEL6 yc (m) 102.23 102.31 102.36 102.50 102.50
V  Vc2/2g (m)
Velocity head, HV6 0.11 0.15 0.17 0.24 0.24

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.63

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

EGL at Point 6, EGL6 


HGL6  HV6 V (m) 102.34 102.47 102.54 102.74 102.74
6. At Point 7
Max water EL downstream of
channel end free-fall 101.90 101.90 101.90 101.90 101.90
HGL at Point 7, HGL7  cbdEL6  0.1 (m)
(This must be the same as
maximum elevation at Point 1
of multimedia filter)
Hydraulic Calculations Upstream
of Control Point
7. At Point 2
Final sedimentation tanks (Gould type)
Number of tanks in operation, nt 3 3 3 4 3
Flow per tank upstream of sludge
collection, qin (m3/s) 0.44 0.80 1.00 1.30 1.73
Tank width, Wt (m) 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0
Tank length, Lt (m) 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0 120.0
Tank bottom elevation at
influent end (m) 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2 99.2
Side water depth (m) 4.24 4.25 4.26 4.26 4.27
Assume friction losses, Hlf2,
f
through tank are negligible 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
EGL at Point 2, EGL2 
EGL3  Hlf2 f (m) 103.41 103.42 103.43 103.43 103.44
V 0
Velocity head, HV2
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 2, HGL2 
EGL3  HV2 V (m) 103.41 103.42 103.43 103.43 103.44
8. Point 2 to Point 1
Tank influent sluice gates
Height (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Width, Ws (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Area (m2) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Number of sluice gates per tank, Nsg 4 4 4 4 4
Flow per sluice gate,
qsg  qin/Nsg
/ (m3/s) 0.11 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.43
Upstream head over weir, Du 
(select so Qsub  qsg  D) (m) 0.21 0.31 0.36 0.44 0.53
Effective sluice gate width, Ws'  1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9
Ws  (0.1)(2 contractions)(Dd) (m)
Downstream head over weir,
Dd  (qsg/1.84/Ws')(2/3) (m) 0.16 0.24 0.27 0.33 0.40
Freefall flow, Qfree  1.84 
Ws'  Du(3/2), (m3/s) 0.17 0.31 0.38 0.49 0.66
Submerged flow, Qsub  Qfree
(1  (Dd/d/Du)3/2)0.385 (m3/s) 0.11 0.20 0.25 0.33 0.44

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.64 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg.Day Avg.Day Max Hour Peak

Difference, (Qsub  qsg) (m3/s)


(should be zero) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Head difference between tank
and channel, Hl 1  Du  Dd (m) 0.051 0.077 0.090 0.106 0.130
Top of sluice gate set elevation,
Els  HGL2  Dd (m) 103.26 103.19 103.15 103.10 103.04
HGL at Point 1 (upstream of sluice
gate), HGL1  HGL2 Hl1 (m) 103.46 103.50 103.52 103.54 103.57
Velocity head, HV1  0
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at Point 1, EGL1  HGL1  HV1 (m) 103.46 103.50 103.52 103.54 103.57
Maximum HGL1 (m) 103.57
Max HGL1 should equal HGL6
for aeration tank

to or after the inlet flow distribution. Good mixing should be provided to promote uniform
distribution of the influent flow and RAS flow. Wastewater flow split inlet design with a
relatively high headloss is often used to provide reasonably equal distribution of flow to
multiple aeration tanks or to multiple inlets in each aeration tank operating in a step feed
mode. Sometimes influent distribution piping which is extended to and having an inlet
port at each step feed point is used.
Inlet baffles. Depending on the aeration tank configuration, inlet baffles are used to
dissipate the energy from the inlet velocities. Inlet baffles are designed to direct uniform
distribution of MLSS along the width of the aeration tank.
Aeration equipment. Diffused aeration systems are predominantly used in the munic-
ipal treatment plants. Although the air bubbles dispersed in the wastewater occupy approx-
imately 1 percent of the volume, no allowance is made in aeration tank sizing. The vol-
ume occupied by submerged piping and diffusers is usually negligible. If spiral-flow mix-
ing with coarse bubble diffusers is used, the width-to-depth ratios vary from 1:1 to 2.2:1.
The tank depth, most commonly 45 m (1316 ft), is usually determined by desired oxy-
gen transfer efficiency of various aeration equipment. Freeboard from 0.3 to 0.6 m (1 to 2
ft) above the water surface is normally provided. If surface mechanical aerators are used,
a freeboard of more than 0.6 m (2 ft) may be required depending on the power input for
the aeration and mixing. Freezing during the winter due to the mist should also be con-
sidered in the design.
Return activated sludge (RAS). The rate of RAS is normally 30 to 50 percent of the
wastewater flow. Peak rate of RAS may go up to 100 percent of the wastewater flow for
large plants and up to 150 percent of the wastewater flow for small plants. Design should
provide adequate mixing, hydraulic capacity, and uniform distribution where RAS is
introduced to the incoming wastewater.
Effluent weir. The effluent weir provides a fixed control elevation of hydraulics in the
aeration tank. Sometimes effluent ports instead of effluent weir are used to minimize
headloss.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.65

FIGURE 22.26 Schematic diagram of aeration tank system. (AT = aeration tank; PST = primary
sedimentation tank).

Effluent channel. The design considerations described in the inlet channel also apply
to the design of the effluent channel. Often the effluent channel from the aeration tanks is
the same as the influent to the final sedimentation tanks.
Hydraulic design example. The aeration tanks receive the primary sedimentation tank
effluent and hydraulic loading conditions are the same as those of the primary sedimenta-
tion tanks. Design hydraulic calculations for the aeration tank system is shown in Table
22.12. The head requirements for the sample aeration tanks are in the range of 0.41.0 m
(1.33.3 ft).

22.4.2.5 Granular media filter. Process criteria. Granular media filtration is usually
used where the plant suspended solids effluent limit is equal to or less than 10 mg/L. It
may also be applied following secondary biological treatment to remove particulate car-
bonaceous BOD5 and residual insolubilized phosphorus. The degree of suspended solids

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.66 Chapter Twenty-Two

removal when filtering secondary effluents without the use of chemical coagulation
depends on the degree of bioflocculation achieved during secondary treatment. The pres-
ence of significant amounts of algae impedes filtration of lagoon effluents. Pretreatment
with a coagulant is considered to be a good practice for such cases.
There are many types of proprietary granular filters available. However, granular
media filters are generally classified according to direction of flow, type, and number of
media comprising the bed, the driving force, and method of flow control. Most wastewater
filters are downflow units while some proprietary filters use various combinations of
upflow and downflow. The driving force for filtration may be either gravity or pressure.
Gravity filters are commonly used in large municipal treatment plants while pressure fil-
ters are often used in smaller plants.
Gravity filters are generally sized for a filtration rate of 1.44 L/(m2s)/ (26
gal/(ft2min) and terminal headlosses of 2.43.0 m (810 ft). Multiple units are used to
allow continuous filtration during backwash or maintenance. Typical length to width ratio
of gravity filters vary from 1:1 to 4:1.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for granular
media filters include headlosses, filter operation, collection and distribution systems, and
backwash requirements.
Head losses. The head losses includes the losses associated with piping, valves,
meters, bends, constrictions, filter media, underdrains, and collection systems. All losses
vary with the square of the velocity. Clean water headloss for the filter media is influenced
by media type, size, uniformity, and depth. As filtration rate increases within the terminal
head loss range, less headloss capacity is available for solids storage. The head required
for the filter is the sum of all headlosses including the terminal head loss of the filter
media. If sufficient head is not available, pumping of filter influent is required.
Filter operation. Three basic methods of filter operation are constant pressure, con-
stant rate and variable declining rate. The constant pressure system requires a large
upstream storage and is seldom used with gravity filters. The constant rate system requires
a relatively costly rate control system and true constant-rate filtration is seldom used. In
declining-rate filtration, the filtration rate may be kept constant using influent or effluent
control weirs during the initial period of operation and, thereafter, declining rate of filtra-
tion. Generally, declining-rate filters are the best mode of gravity filter operation unless
the design terminal headloss exceeds 3 m.
Collection and distribution systems. (underdrain). In conventional downflow filters,
the underdrain system serves to both collect the filtrate and distribute the backwash water.
Traditional systems using gravel layers with perforated pipe are no longer commonly
used. More popular underdrain materials include precast channels, poured-in-place con-
crete, or steel pipe with built-in nozzles and orifices. Porous plates made of aluminum
oxide or stainless steel are also available but they are susceptible to clogging.
Backwash requirements. Backwash is the cleaning of the filter by reversing the flow
through the filter media at a controlled flow rate. Backwashing causes an expansion of the
bed, normally no more than 10 percent of the depth, by allowing abrasive action among
particles. The quantity of backwash water will generally be about 30004000 L/m2
(75100 gal/ft2). Bachwashed water is collected in the wash-trough which is located about
0.9 m (3 ft) above the filter media. Biological solids in secondary effluent are strongly
attached to the media and air scour before or during backwash is often required to pro-
mote successful cleaning. Air requirements for the air scour are on the order of
0.0150.025 (m3/m2)/s [35 (ft3ft
2)/min].

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.67

TABLE 22.12 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Final Aeration Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
RAS flow. (% of average flow)
(added downstream of aeration tank 20 50 50 100 100
influent sluice gates)
RAS flow, Qras (m3/s) 0.32 0.80 1.00 2.00 2.00
2. Aeration tanks
Total of nunber of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 3 3 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 0 0 1
Flow rate per aeration tank in
operation, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Flow rate per aeration tank in operation
including RAS flow (downstream
of influent sluice gate), qras (m3/s) 0.66 1.20 1.00 1.73 2.60
Control point is located at Point 5
(aeration tank effluent weir).
3. At Point 6
Set maximum HGL6  effluent
weir elevation  0.10 (m) 103.57 103.57 103.57 103.57 103.57
Hydraulic Calculations Upstream
of Control Point
4. Point 6 to Point 5
Headloss over sharp-crested weir
Sharp-crested weir EL (m) 103.67 103.67 103.67 103.67 103.67
Effluent channel bottom EL (m) 100.67 100.67 100.67 100.67 100.67
Flow rate over weir, qras (m3/s) 0.66 1.20 1.00 1.73 2.60
Length of weir L (m) 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 6.00
Headloss, Hle5  (q/1.84L)(2/3) (m) 0.15 0.23 0.20 0.29 0.38
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
weir EL  Hle5 (m) 103.82 103.90 103.87 103.96 104.05
V  (qras/
Velocity head, HV5
/ 5)2/2g (m)
Wp/Hle 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.07
EGL at Point 5, EGL5 
HGL5  HV5 V (m) 103.85 103.94 103.91 104.01 104.12
5. Point 5 to Point 4
Flow rate per aeration tank in
operation, qras (m3/s) 0.66 1.20 1.00 1.73 2.60
Pass width, Wp (m) 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0
Tank length, Lt (m) 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0 60.0
Tank bottom elevation, ELtb 
Avg. day WSEL - 6 (m) 97.87 97.87 97.87 97.87 97.87
Water depth in tank at design
average flow, Dt (m) 5.95 6.03 6.00 6.09 6.18
Number of passes per tank, Np 5 5 5 5 5

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.68 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

Effective length of tank,


L  (Lt)(Np) (m) 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0
Velocity, VV4 (m/s) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.05 0.07
Critical depth, yc  ((q2/g
/ /
Wp2)(0.333) (m) 0.11 0.16 0.14 0.20 0.27
Friction headloss through aeration
tank channel
Mannings number for concrete channel n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R  (Dt  Wp)/
(2  Dt  Wp) (m) 1.99 2.00 2.00 2.01 2.02
f  (V4
Headloss, Hlf4 V  n/R / (2/3))2
 L (m) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001
Fitting headloss through 90
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Number of bends, Nb 8 8 8 8 8
Headloss, Hlb4  Kbend*
 V4
V 2/2gNb (m) 0.0001 0.0004 0.0003 0.0009 0.0020
Velocity head, Hvsd
(see below at Point 3) 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.16
EGL at Point 4, EGL4 
EGL5  Hlf4 f  Hvsd (m) 103.92 104.03 103.99 104.13 104.28
Velocity head, Hvsd
(see below at Point 3) 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.16
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
EGL4  HV4 V (m) 103.85 103.94 103.91 104.01 104.12
6. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss over aeration tank influent
sluice gates
Sluice gate width, Ws (m) 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Sluice gate height (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Flow per sluice gate, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Upstream head over weir,
Du  (select so Zsub  q  0) (m) 0.52 0.73 0.64 0.91 1.24
Effective sluice gate width, Ws'  Ws
 (0.1)(2 contractions) (Du) (m) 1.10 1.05 1.07 1.02 0.95
Downstream head over weir,
Dd  (q/1.84/Ws') (2/3) (m) 0.39 0.55 0.49 0.69 0.94
Freefall flow, Qfree  1.84 
Ws'Du(3/2), (m3s) 0.76 1.21 1.01 1.62 2.43
Submerged flow, Qsub  Qfree
(1  (Dd/d/Du)3/2)0.385, (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.69

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

Difference, (Qsub  q) (m3/s)


(should be zero) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Head difference between tank
and channel, Hl4  Du  Dd (m) 0.13 0.18 0.16 0.22 0.30
Velocity head downstream of sluice
gate, HVsd  (q/Ws'/Dd
/ )2/2g, (m) 0.07 0.10 0.08 0.12 0.16
Velocity head upstream of sluice
gate, HVsu  (q/Ws'/'/Du)2/2g (m) 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.07 0.09
Top of sluice gate elevation,
Els  HGL4  Dd (m) 103.45 103.38 103.42 103.33 103.18
HGL upstream of sluice gate,
HGLsu  HGL4  Hl4 (m) 103.98 104.12 104.06 104.23 104.42
EGL upstream of sluice gate,
EGLsu  HGLsu  HVsu (m) 104.02 104.17 104.11 104.30 104.51
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #3
Average length of influent
channel per tank, L3 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5 31.5
 Np  Wp  3 tanks1/2 (m)
Influent channel width, W
W3 (m) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Mannings number n for concrete channel n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Influent channel bottom elevation,
Elb  avg. EGLsu  3 (m) 101.1 101.1 101.1 101.1 101.1
Water depth in influent channel,
h3  HGLs  Elb (m) 2.87 3.00 2.95 3.12 3.31
Hydraulic radius, R  (h3  w3)/
(2  h3  w3) (m) 1.18 1.20 1.19 1.22 1.25
V  q/w3/h3 (m/s)
Velocity, V3 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.12
f  (V3
Headloss, Hlf3 V  n/R/ (2/3))2
 L3 (m) 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #2
Flow rate, q2  2  q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 1.33 2.13 3.20
V  q/w2/h2 (m/s)
Velocity, V2 0.09 0.13 0.11 0.17 0.24
f  (V2
Headloss, Hlf2 V  n/R/ (2/3))2
 L3 (m) 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #1
Flow rate, q1  3  q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Velocity, V1  q/w1/h1 (m/s) 0.09 0.13 0.17 0.26 0.24
f  (V1  n/R
Headloss, Hlf1 / (2/3))2
 L3 (m) 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0003 0.0002

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.70 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

HGL at Point 3, HGL3 


HGLs  Hlf3 f  Hlf2
f  Hlf1
f (m) 103.98 104.12 104.06 104.23 104.42
7. Point 3 to Point 2
Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss
coefficient Kgate 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width, WW2 (m) 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
Sluice gate height, Hg (m) 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
Channel water depth, Dc (m) 2.87 3.00 2.95 3.12 3.31
Gate opening depth, Hg or
Dc, whichever is smaller (m) 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80 1.80
Velocity through sluice gate,
V  Q/W2
V5 W (m/s) 0.31 0.49 0.62 0.99 0.99
Headloss, Hls2  Kgate 
V 2/2g (m)
V5 0.0049 0.0124 0.0194 0.0498 0.0498
HGL at Point 2, HGL2 
HGL3  Hls2 (m) 103.98 104.13 104.08 104.28 104.47
8. Point 2 to Point 1
Exit headloss from primary sed. tank effluent
pipe to aeration tank influent channel
Primary effluent pipe diameter, Dp (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
All PST effluent flow, Q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Velocity, V1 (m/s) 0.32 0.51 0.64 1.02 1.02
Exit headloss coefficient Kexit 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Exit headloss, hle1  (V12)/
2g  Kexit (m) 0.0052 0.0132 0.0207 0.0529 0.0529
Friction headloss through PST effluent
pipe section 2
Flow per pipe, q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Pipe diameter, (Dp2) (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Velocity, V12 (m/s) 0.32 0.51 0.64 1.02 1.02
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Hydraulic radius, Rp2  (Dp2)/4 (m) 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Length of pipe, Lp2 (m) 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00
Slope Sp2[V12/(0.85CpRp2(0.63)](1/0.54)
(%) 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0004 0.0004
Headloss, hlf2f  Lp2  Sp2 (m) 0.0026 0.0061 0.0093 0.0221 0.0221
Friction headloss through PST
effluent pipe section 1
Flow per pipe, q (m3/s) 0.50 0.80 0.67 1.07 1.60
Pipe diameter, Dp1 (m) 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50
Velocity, V11 (m/s) 0.28 0.45 0.38 0.61 0.91
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Hydraulic radius, Rp1  (Dp1)/4 (m) 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38
Length of pipe, Lp1 (m) 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00
Slope,Sp1[V11/(0.85CpRp1(0.63)](1/0.54)
(%) 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0005

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.71

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Pipe entrance headloss


Ke 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, hen1  Ke  V112/2g (m) 0.0020 0.0052 0.0037 0.0094 0.0209
HGL at upstream of PST
effluent pipe, HGL1  HGL2 
hle1  hlf2
f  hlf1
f  hen1 (m) 103.99 104.16 104.12 104.38 104.59
HGL7 of PST must be maximum
of HGL1 (m) 104.59 104.59 104.59 104.59 104.59

Hydraulic design example. A schematic diagram of a typical granular media filter sys-
tem is shown in Fig. 22.27. The granular media filters receive the secondary effluent either
before or after chlorination and hydraulic loading conditions are the same as those of the
secondary effluent. A single granular media filter is shown for simplicity. Design
hydraulic calculations for the granular media filter system is shown in Table 22.13.
The head requirements for the granular media filters are in the range of 2.83.2 m
(9.310.6 ft).

22.4.2.6 Mixing and contact chambers. Process criteria. Physical and chemical waste-
water treatment processes involve mixing, coagulation, flocculation, and sedimentation.
Chemical coagulation is often used for enhanced treatment in primary sedimentation and
for tertiary treatment after secondary treatment, and before or after filtration. Advantages
of coagulation include greater removal efficiencies of total suspended solids, organic
materials, phosphorus, and other pollutants. Disadvantages include an increased produc-
tion of chemical sludge and an increased operating cost.

Chemical coagulants are mixed with wastewater during rapid mix which is the first
step of the coagulation process. The coagulants destabilize the colloidal particles which
allows their agglomeration. Velocity gradients (G) or a mixing intensity of 300 (mmm)/s
are generally sufficient for rapid mix. The rapid mix can be accomplished with mechani-
cal mixers, in-line blenders, pumps, or air mixers.
Following the rapid mixing, flocculation takes place through gentle prolonged mixing
which promotes the destabilized particles to grow and agglomerate. Typical detention
times for flocculation range between 20 and 30 minutes. During this period, velocity gra-
dients of 5080 (m mm)/s should be maintained. Following flocculation, the settleable
solids are settled in the following sedimentation tank.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for mixing
and contact chambers include the inlet channel, inlet baffles, mixing equipment, and
outlet channel
Inlet channel. Inlet channels should be designed to maintain velocities high enough to
prevent solids deposition and to promote equal distribution of flow if multiple tanks are
used.
Inlet baffles. Inlet baffles should be designed to dissipate the energy from the veloci-
ties and to prevent short circuiting.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.72 Chapter Twenty-Two

Mixing equipment. A sufficient freeboard should be provided to prevent liquid


spillage over the walls due to intense mixing. Provisions for easily removing the mixing
equipment for repair and maintenance should be considered. Tank geometry should be
configured to minimize areas with inadequate mixing.
Outlet channel. Velocity in the outlet channel which leads to the sedimentation tank
should be high enough to prevent solids from settling but not too high to cause breakdown
of flocculated solids.

22.4.2.7 Cascade aerators Process criteria. Cascade aeration is a physical unit process
typically used for effluent aeration. The system employs a series of steps or weirs over
which the effluent is discharged. The system is configured to maximize turbulence in
order to increase oxygen transfer. The head requirements vary depending on the initial dis-
solved oxygen (DO) and the desired final DO. If the necessary head is not available, efflu-
ent pumping or mechanical aeration is required.
Although cascade aeration is not a new concept, its application to wastewater treatment
is relatively new. Design criteria for an efficient cascade aeration system design include a
fall height at each step equal to or less than 1.2 m (4 ft); a flow rate equal to or less than
235 (m3h)/m
[315(gal/min)/ft] of width; and a pool depth after each fall equal to or less than
0.28 m
(0.9 ft).
Hydraulic design example. A schematic diagram of a typical cascade aeration system
is shown in Figure 22.28. Cascade aerators normally receive the secondary treatment
effluent and hydraulic loading conditions are the same as those of the secondary treatment
effluent. Design hydraulic calculations for the cascade aeration system is shown in Table
22.14. The head requirements for this example of the cascade aerators is 4.6 m (15.1 ft).

22.4.2.8 Effluent outfall. Process Criteria. The treatment plant accomplishes as much
pollutant removal as required to produce effluent meeting the criteria established by the
regulatory agencies. Ultimate disposal of wastewater effluents are by dilution in receiving
waters, by discharge on land, seepage into the ground, or reclamation and reuse. Of these,
disposal into the receiving waters is the most common practice. The receiving waters
include rivers, lakes, estuaries, and oceans.
The outfall size is determined by the velocity, headloss, structural considerations, and
the economics of the situation. Velocities of 0.60.9 m/s (23 ft/s) at average flow are nor-
mally recommended in pipeline design to avoid excessive head loss. If the effluent
received preliminary treatment, lower velocities can be used. However, velocities higher
than 2.43.0 m/s (810 ft/s) should be avoided due to excessive headloss.
Key hydraulic design parameters. The key hydraulic design parameters for effluent
outfalls include available head, mixing and dispersion, submerged discharge, and dif-
fusers.
Available head. Sufficient head for gravity flow from the point of plant effluent
discharge to the receiving stream is not always possible. If sufficient head is not avail-
able, effluent pumping is required to prevent flooding of the plant area. Some plants
require effluent pumping during storm events or where tidal waves cause salt water
intrusion.
Mixing and dispersion. The outfall should be designed to operate at an adequate veloc-
ity to promote rapid dispersion and mixing of the effluent with the receiving stream. This
will minimize localized deposits of settleable solids and stratification of the residual organ-
ics and nutrients in the localized area, which may cause a DO deficit and algae growth.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.73

FIGURE 22.27 Schematic diagram of multimedia filter system. (HWL = .)

Submerged discharge. An effluent discharge pipe terminated at the bank of a stream


usually leads to development of foam under low-flow conditions. The problem of foam
can be overcome simply by submerging the pipe discharge below the low-water level
when physical conditions in the stream allows such an arrangement.
Diffusers. Certain outfalls, such as an ocean disposal, are typically accomplished by
submarine outfall that consists of a long section of pipe to transport effluent and a diffuser
section to dilute the effluent with the receiving stream. When the effluent water is
discharged from a single- or multiport diffuser, the exit velocity will provide turbulent
mixing with the surrounding water.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.74 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.13 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Multimedia Filter System

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.2 3.2


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
2. Multimedia filters
Total number of units 6 6 6 6 6
Number of units in operation 4 5 5 6 5
Number of units on standby 2 1 1 0 1
Flow rate per operating multimedia
filter, q (m3/s) 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.53 0.64
Hydraulic Calculations at Filter Effluent
3. At Point 7
Max. HGL in filtered water
storage tank, HGL7 (m) 98.67 98.67 98.67 98.67 98.67
Velocity in storage tank, V
V7 (m/s) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Max. EGL in storage tank, EGL7 
HGL7  V7 V 2/2g (m) 98.67 98.67 98.67 98.67 97.67
4. At Point 6
Filtered water effluent channel weir
Sharp-crested weir EL, Wel6 
HGL7  0.1 (m) 98.77 98.77 98.77 98.77 97.77
Flow rate over weir  Q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Length of weir (m) 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Headloss, Hlw6  (q/1.84L)(2/3) (m) 0.18 0.25 0.29 0.40 0.40
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  Wel6  Hlw6 (m) 98.95 99.02 99.06 99.17 99.17
Velocity in weir box,
V6 (assume V  0) (m)
V 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at Point 6, EGL6 
HGL6  V6V 2/2g (m) 98.95 99.02 99.06 99.17 99.17
5. Point 6 to Point 5
Loss through effluent concrete conduit
Flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Width of conduit, Wc (m) 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00 3.00
Depth of conduit, Dc (m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00
Length of conduit, Lc (m) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
Velocity, Vc (m/s) 0.17 0.27 0.33 0.53 0.53
Hydraulic radius, R  (Wc  Dc/2)
/(Wc  Dc) (m) 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60 0.60
Mannings n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Headloss, Hlc5  (Vc  n/R / (2/3))2
 Lc (m) 0.0001 00002 0.004 0.0009 0.0009
Exit loss from pipe to concrete conduit
Effluent pipe diameter, Dp (m) 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Pipe flow (for each filter) (m3/s) 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.53 0.64
Velocity, Vp (m/s) 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.68 0.82
Hle5  Vp2/2g for sharp
concrete outlet (m) 0.0052 0.0085 0.0132 0.0236 0.0339
EGL at Point 5, EGL5 
EGL6  Hlc5  Hle6 (m) 98.96 99.03 99.07 99.19 99.20

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.75

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

Velocity head at Point 5,


V  Vp2/2g (m)
HV5 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
EGL5  HV5 V (m) 98.95 99.02 99.06 99.17 99.17
6. Point 5 to Point 4
Filter effluent pipe loss
Pipe diameter, Dp (m) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Max. flow through filter
effluent pipe  q (m3/s) 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.53 0.64
Velocity of flow through
pipe, Vp (m/s) 0.39 0.50 0.63 0.84 1.01
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (m) 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23
Length of pipe, Lp (m) 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00
Slope, Sp[Vp/(0.85  Cp  Rp0.63)](1/0.54)
(%) 0.0193 0.0305 0.0461 0.0785 0.1100
Head loss, Hlf4 f  Lp  Sp (m) 0.0029 0.0046 0.0069 0.0118 0.0165
Headloss through butterfly valve
Kvalve (fully open) 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
Valve diameter (m) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
Headloss, Hval4  Kvalve 
(Vp2/2g) (m) 0.0024 0.0039 0.0061 0.0108 0.0155
Flow rate controller
Venturi throat-to-inlet ratio
for long tube, Krate 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
Inlet velocity, Vi  Vp (m/s) 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.68 0.82
Headloss, hrate = Krate  (Vi2/2g) (m) 0.0062 0.0102 0.0159 0.0283 0.0407
(minimum headloss when control
valve is fully open)
Pipe entrance loss
Kent 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hlent  Kent  (Vp2/2g) (m) 0.0026 0.0042 0.0066 0.0118 0.0170
EGL at Point 4, EGL4  EGL5 
f  Hval4  Hrate  Hlent (m)
Hlf4 98.97 99.05 99.11 99.25 99.29
Velocity head, HV4 V  V4V 2/2g
(assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
EGL4  HV4 V (m) 98.97 99.05 99.11 99.25 99.29
7. Point 4 to Point 3
Dirty filter head requirement,
Hldf (m) (assumed) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
(consult with filter manufacturer)
Dirty filter EGL, EGLdf 
HGL4  Hldf (m) 101.47 101.55 101.61 101.75 101.79
Velocity head, HV3V  0 (m)
(assume V3 V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.76 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

Dirty filter HGL, HGLdf 


EGLdf  HV3 V (m) 101.47 101.55 101.61 101.75 101.79
Clean filter headloss
Filter bed area (m2) 160 160 160 160 160
Flow per filter, q (m3/s) 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.53 0.64
Filter rate, qfilt m3(min m2) 0.094 0.120 0.150 0.200 0.240
Media depth, Dm (m) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Effective media size, Md (mm) 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss through filter,
Hlf  2.32 m loss per m3(min m2)
(consultant with manufacturer) 0.2175 0.2784 0.3480 0.4640 0.5568
Entrance headloss through underdrain
flume, Hlu  0.45 m m3(min m2) 0.0422 0.0540 0.0675 0.0900 0.1080
(consult with filter manufacturer)
Clean filter EGL, EGLcf 
EGL4  Hlf  Hlu (m) 99.23 99.38 99.52 99.81 99.95
Velocity head, HV3 V  0 (assume
V  0) (m)
V3
Clean filter HGL, HGLcf  EGLcf  HV3 V (m)
EGL required at Point 3, EGL3  EGLdf (m) 101.47 101.55 101.61 101.75 101.79
HGL required at Point 3, HGL3  HGLdf (m)101.47 101.55 101.61 101.75 101.79
(Head required for dirty filter controls)
8. Point 3 to Point 2
Filter inlet discharge loss
Keff 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Flow rate, q (m3/s) 0.25 0.32 0.40 0.53 0.64
Pipe diameter, Dp 2 (m) 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9
Velocity, Vp2 (m/s) 0.39 0.50 0.63 0.84 1.01
Headloss, Hld2  Keff  (Vp22/2g) (m) 0.0079 0.0129 0.0202 0.0359 0.0517
EGL at Point 2, EGL2  EGL3  Hld2 (m) 101.48 101.56 101.63 101.79 101.084
Velocity head, HV2 V  Vp22/g / (m) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.04 0.05
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  EGL2 HV2 V (m) 101.47 101.55 101.61 101.75 101.79
9. Point 2 to Point 1
Headloss through butterfly valve
Kval (fully open) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Headloss, Hlv1  Kval  (Vp22/2g) 0.0024 0.0039 0.0061 0.0108 1.0155
Headloss through inlet pipe
Length of pipe, Lp1 (m) 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0 20.0
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp2/4 (m) 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.23
Headloss, Hlf1 f  (Vp2/(0.85  Cp
 Rp1.63)(1/0.54)  Lp (m) 0.0039 0.0061 0.0092 0.0157 0.0220
Headloss through entrance to pipe
Kent 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hlent  Kent  Vp2/2g (m) 0.0039 0.0065 0.0101 0.0179 0.0258

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.77

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

EGL at Point 1, EGL1 


EGL2  Hlv1  Hlf  Hlent (m) 101.49 101.58 101.65 101.83 101.90
Velocity head, HV1  0
(assume V1  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 1, HGL1 
EGL1  HV1 (m) 101.49 101.58 101.65 101.83 101.90
Minimum required control
HGL at Point 1 (m) 101.90 101.90 101.90 101.90 101.90
(Max. HGL1 must equal HGL7
of final sedimentation tank)

22.4.2.9 Slurry and chemical pumping. Sludge solids. Typical needs for sludge pump-
ing involve transporting sludge from primary and secondary clarifiers to and between
thickening, conditioning, digestion or dewatering facilities, and from biological process-
es for recycle or further treatment. Several different types of sludge pumps are used since
various types of sludge require a wide range of service conditions.
The flow characteristics (rheology) of wastewater sludges vary widely from process to
process and from plant to plant. Because rheological properties directly influence pipeline
friction losses of pumped sludges, head loss characteristics of wastewater sludges also
vary extensively. Minimizing pumping distance and applying a conservative multiplier to
headlosses calculated for equivalent flows of water is the traditional approach to the
design of sludge pumping and piping systems. However, this approach is often inade-
quate. As a result of past research of non Newtonian fluid characteristics of sludges,
sludge pumping system design data based on specific measured rheological characteris-

FIGURE 22.28 Schematic diagram of cascade aeration system.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.78 Chapter Twenty-Two

tics of sludge and the characteristics on piping systems are now available. These data are
presented in Section 22.5.
Scum. Scum is collected from the surface of primary sedimentation tank or sec-
ondary sedimentation tank. Scum from the secondary treatment is more dilute and is usu-
ally returned to the head of the treatment plant or thickened prior to combining the thick-
ened scum with that from primary treatment. The scum is collected to a scum wet well
and pumped to another location for processing. Progressive cavity pumps, pneumatic ejec-
tors, and recessed impeller centrifugal pumps are used to pump scum. Key design ele-
ments for the scum collection and handling system include sloping the bottom of the scum

TABLE 22.14 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Cascade Aeration System

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (m3/s) 1.0 1.6 2.0 3.2 3.2


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
2. Cascade aerator
Total number of units 1 1 1 1 1
Flow rate through aerator, Q (m3/s) 1.00 1.60 2.00 3.20 3.20
Optimal flow rate per m width over
step, q (m3/s) 0.0653 0.0653 0.0653 0.0653 0.0653
DO concentration of postaeration
influent, CO (mg/L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Desired DO concentration of postaeration 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
effluent, Cu (mg/L)
Calculation of aerator dimensions
with predetermined weir length
3. Weir length, W (m) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Flow over weir, q  Q/W, W (m3/s) 0.20 0.32 0.40 0.64 0.64
Critical depth at upstream step edge,
hc  (q2/g/ )1/3 (m) 0.160 1.219 0.254 0.347 0.347
Optimal fall height of nappe, h, 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2 1.2
Length of downstream bubble cushion,
Lo  0.0629(h0.134)(q0.666) (m) 5.16 7.05 8.18 11.19 11.19
Length of downstream receiving
channel, L  0.8Lo (m) 4.12 5.64 6.54 8.95 8.95
Optimal tailwater depth,
H'  0.236h (m) for h 1.2 m 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28 0.28
Deficit ratio log at 20 C, In(r20)
 5.39(h1.31)(q0.363)(H
H0.31) 0.42 0.36 0.33 0.28 0.28
Deficit ratio, r20 1.53 1.43 1.39 1.32 1.32
Calculate concentration of dissolved
oxygen downstream of step. If
concentration is less than desired
downstream concentration, add another
step and again calculate DO downstream
concentration. Continue adding steps
until the desired DO concentration is
achieved.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.79

TABLE 22.14 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


PARAMETER Min Day Avg. Day Avg. Day Max Hour Peak

Select cascade aerator dimensions


corresponding to those
calculated for average flow.
4. Calculation of number of steps to obtain desired DO
Desired DO concentration
at average flow, Cu (mg/L) 5.00
Step 1 effluent DO, C1  9.07
(1  (1/r20))  CO/r20) (mg/L) 3.14 2.73 2.55 2.21 2.21
Step 2 effluent DO, C2  9.07
(1  (1/r20))  C1/r20) (mg/L) 4.81 4.51 4.39 4.14 4.14
Step 3 effluent DO, C3  9.07
(1  (1/r20))  C2/r20) (mg/L) 6.01 5.80 5.70 5.52 5.52
In this example, the desired downstream DO
concentration for average flow is achieved
after three steps.
5. Calculation of HGL at each step
Head loss
from filtered water
storage tank to point 1 (m) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Cascade fall height, h (m) 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
HGL at Point 1, HGL1 (m) 97.53 97.53 97.53 97.53 97.53
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  HGL1  h (m) 96.33 96.33 96.33 96.33 96.33
HGL at Point 3, HGL3  HGL2  h (m) 95.13 95.13 95.13 95.13 95.13
HGL at Point 4, HGL4  HGL3  h (m) 93.93 93.93 93.93 93.93 93.93

tank, use of smooth pipe such as glass-lined pipe, providing flushing connections, pigging
stations and cleanouts.
Grit slurry. Removal and conveyance of grit from the grit chamber can be accom-
plished with varying degrees of success by a number of different methods, including
inclined screw or tubular conveyers, chain and bucket elevators, clamshell buckets, and
pumping. Of these methods, pumping of grit from hoppers in the form of slurry offers dis-
tinct advantages over other methods but also has some disadvantages. The advantages
include small space requirement and flexibility of service by any grit pump from any grit
tank to any grit handling system with simple valve operation. A disadvantage is frequent
maintenance required for piping and valves due to the abrasive grit. Considerations to be
given in piping design include minimization of bends, providing cleanouts at critical
bends, providing redundant piping at the location of likely clogging, and maintaining a
velocity of 12 m/s (36 ft/s).
Vortex or recessed impeller pumps and air lift pumps normally handle grit slurries.
Frequent pumping and applying waterjets or compressed air to loosen the compacted grit
in the hopper prior to pumping is a good practice for grit pumping.
Chemical solutions. Chemicals used in municipal treatment plants are received in
either liquid or solid form. The chemicals in solid form generally are converted to solu-

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.80 Chapter Twenty-Two

tion or slurry prior to feeding although dry feeding is also practiced. Design of solution
feed systems mainly depends on liquid volume and viscosity.
Liquid feed units include piston, positive-displacement, and diaphragm pumps, as well
as liquid gravity feeders. The unit best suitable for a particular application depends on the
required head, chemical corrosiveness, application rate, other liquid properties, and the
type of control.

22.5 NON-NEWTONIAN FLOW CONSIDERATIONS


This section addresses pipe transport of mixtures of solids in a liquid media. This is rele-
vant to us for the analysis of wastewater sludge transport. When a fluid motion begins
within a pipe, the velocities of flow at all points along the cross section of the pipe are
equal. Over time, velocity gradients are established, beginning at the wall of the pipe due
to the resistance forces developed at the fluid-solid interface. Eventually the velocity
gradients extend throughout the cross section of the flow. The velocity gradients result
from the relative movement between fluid layers and the resultant shear. Fluids resist
shear and, therefore, shear stresses are caused within a fluid in motion in a pipe. For water
and other newtonian fluids, the shear stress is directly proportional to the velocity
gradient.
Many suspensions behave in non-newtonian fashion, as plastic fluids. In thin suspen-
sions, the suspended particles are not in contact and the suspension will exhibit the new-
tonian properties of water. When the concentration becomes sufficiently great to force the
particles into contact with each other, a measurable stress is needed to produce motion.
Experiments by Bingham (1922) and Babbitt and Caldwell (1939) demonstrated that
sewage sludges exhibit both types of flow characteristics depending on the type of solids
and the moisture content. At low solid concentrations, the solid particles are generally not
in contact with one another. In this case the presence of the solids has negligible impact
on the density and the viscosity of the liquid. As the solids concentration increases, the
suspended particles come into contact with each other and the resultant shearing stress
must be overcome before any movement can start. Under such conditions, the flow
assumes plastic characteristics and the headloss varies almost directly with the reduction
of moisture M. The headlosses associated with the two types of flow are different. The
dividing point between these two is called the limiting moisture content ML, which is
defined as the moisture content in percent where a measurable yield stress, Sy, first occurs.
As described by Chou (1958), below ML, the flow is plastic, and, above it, the flow is in
suspension only.
Furthermore, it is generally recognized that in sludge flow, as in other fluid flow, there
is a critical velocity and, consequently, the Reynolds number, which divides the flow into
laminar and turbulent stages.
With flow in suspension there is no yield stress value and the Reynolds number
takes the form of
V
VD
Re   (22.2)

where Re  Reynolds number  specific weight, V  velocity, D  pipe diameter,
 coefficient of viscosity similar to that for water.
In plastic flow the apparent viscosity decreases with the increase in velocity, as dis-
cussed by Hatfield (1938) and, in a given range, it may be expressed as
16Sy D
   (22.3)
3V

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.81

where Sy  yield stress  coefficient of rigidity and the corresponding Reynolds num-
ber becomes

V
VD 3Dv2
R     (22.4)
3v  16SyD

Using the Babbitt and Caldwell (1939) recommendation, and taking 2000 as the lower
and 3000 as the upper limits of R, the critical velocities are:
For flow in suspension, where M
ML (flow in suspension);
2000
VLC   (22.5)
D
3000
VUC   (22.6)
D

For plastic flow, where M  ML (plastic flow):

1000  103
9
4
2
D2S
y
VLC   D (22.7)

140
1500  127 2
D2S
y
VUC   D (22.8)

where VLC  lower critical velocity VUC  upper critical velocity


The yield stress value Sy, the coefficient of rigidity , and the specific weight are the
basic variables required in computing critical velocities and headlosses. These properties
vary from sludge to sludge depending on characteristics such as moisture M, nature of the
suspended particles, temperature, and extent of turbulence. These factors also influence
each other making it difficult to develop a useful equation for engineering practice. To
resolve this issue, Chou presented an approach using moisture content M as the principal
index of sludge, while placing all other parameters into the general term origin or kind
of sludge, such as primary, digested, and digested from Imhoff tank, and so on.
The following development was presented by Chou (1958). The graphical values were
taken from Babbitt and Caldwell (1938) and Keefer (1940).
G related to M. Specific gravity, G, is primarily used in computing specific weight
as in  62.4 G. Specific gravity for activated sludge was shown to be, G  1.007, at a
typical moisture content of about 98 to 99 percent. Primary sludges are more variable, but
the curve in Fig. 22.29 indicates a reasonable mean. In Figure 22.29, digested sludges
have a cluster of points near G  1.025, but the curve shows the general tendency. The
three points from Imhoff tanks are on a smooth curve.
Sy related to M. Yield stress, Sy, has an important role to play in calculating headloss
and critical velocities. In Fig. 22.30 the two curves marked with Imhoff Tank and Good
Digestion were considered to be representative of true conditions. The Primary values
based on two points are clearly an approximation. The rest of the points varied consider-

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.82 Chapter Twenty-Two

ably and were designated as the curve of Poor Digestion in an attempt to represent the
upper limit of the range. The limiting moisture ML can be determined from Fig. 22.30 as
the point where Sy  0 cuts the curve.
related to M. The experimental determination of the coefficient of rigidity indicat-
ed its variation with moisture M to be less pronounced than Sy. Accordingly, the plots are
more scattered. The two lines (shown in Fig. 22.31) of High and Mean are
suggested for design purposes.
Case 1Suspension/Laminar Stage. For flow in suspension, the solid particles are free
to move past one another and there is consequently no yield value to overcome. Reduction
of moisture content only slightly increases the specific weight (  62.4 G) and the vis-
cosity . Both remain close to the values for water. The yield stress, Sy, is zero for flow in
suspension.
The equation for headloss for laminar stage flow in suspension becomes
H V
  2 (22.9)
L 62.4G D
where G  specific gravity
in which both G and for the corresponding M can be determined from the Figs. 22.29
and 22.31.
Case 2Suspension/Turbulent Stage. Streck (1950) and Winkel (1943) reported the
headloss of turbulent flow in suspension may be computed as follows:

HS  G2HW (22.10)
where HS  the headloss of flow in suspension with moisture M HW  the corresponding
headloss of pure water
G  the specific gravity of the suspension (from Fig. 22.29)

The headloss of flow in suspension for both laminar and turbulent conditions is not sig-
nificantly greater than the corresponding headloss for water.
Case 3Plastic Flow/Laminar Stage. Plastic flow in the laminar stage is the most com-
mon case in sludge flow. As discussed above, the headloss is partly due to yield value and
partly due to coefficient of rigidity, both of which are affected by the moisture M. Babbitt
and Caldwell (1939) reported headloss for this case as follows:
H 16Sy V
    2 (22.11)
L 3D D
in which the values of , Sy, and may be determined from Figs. 22.29, 22.30 and 22.31,
respectively. For any moisture below the limiting value, plastic flow conditions mean Sy

0 and a headloss occurs due to yield value, Sy, alone. As motion begins,
headloss increases with the first power of velocity in the laminar stage. Hence, as soon
as the applied head is greater than Sy, relatively little additional head is required to
accelerate the flow to critical velocity. Therefore, it may be concluded that the most
economical velocity of sludge flow is the critical velocity, above which the headloss
increases rapidly with the velocity.
Case 4Plastic Flow/Turbulent Stage. Published data for turbulent plastic flow headloss
are variable and inconsistent. Due to variation of sludge characteristics, the velocities, the
results are extremely unpredictable.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.83

For fully turbulent flow, it seems reasonable that the headloss results primarily from
kinetics and is proportional to v2/2g and the specific weight and, therefore, will differ
from that of water only slightly by the effect of . This ideal condition of full turbulence
rarely occurs for plastic flows. As the moisture drops below ML, the critical velocities
increase and the thickness of the boundary layers is increased in proportion to moisture
reduction. The velocity distribution in a cross section and the impacts of the boundary lay-
ers are not the same as the regular patterns of homogeneous liquids. Due to the compli-
cated and variable phenomena occurring during turbulent plastic flow, it is difficult, if not
impossible, to accurately anticipate headloss for flow in this condition. Designing for this

SPECIFIC GRAVITY G
FIGURE 22.29 Specific gravity G of sludge (From Chou, 1958)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.84 Chapter Twenty-Two

condition is uncertain and not recommended. However, some experimental data are avail-
able for guidance when turbulent plastic flow is unavoidable. Brisbin (1957) compiled
headloss data for raw, thickened sludge. Thus, from such complicated phenomena, uni-
form results can hardly be expected.
The corresponding C in the Hazen-Williams formula

V 1.318Cr0.63 s0.54 (22.12)


where r  hydraulic radius and s  H/
H/L  hydraulic slope

was computed from the observed headlosses. These C ' values are tabulated in Table 22.15
along with the ratio to water headloss.

Yield Stress, Sy
FIGURE 22.30 Yield value of Sy of sewage sludges (From Chou, 1958)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.85

22.5.1 Headloss Computation

With the source and M of the sludge known or assumed, the first step is to determine if
the flow is a suspension or plastic. Empirically this can be done by the curves in Fig.
22.30. Values for G, Sy and are then chosen from curves in Figs. 22.29, 22.30, and 22.31.

Example. Given primary sludge, M  95. The flow is plastic since M  ML (M


ML  99.8
percent at point in Fig. 22.30 where Sy  0).

From Figs. 22.29, 22.30 and 22.31,


G  1.022,  1.022  62.4  63.77 lb/ft2
Sy  0.065 lb/ft/s
 0.0127 (lbft)/s
Critical velocities


1030 .01513
4
.145
D2
VLC  12.7   (22.13)
63.77D
PERCENTAGE OF MOISTURE BY WEIGHT

FIGURE 22.31 Coefficient of rigidity n of sludge (From Chou, 1958)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.86 Chapter Twenty-Two


1270 .0226
4
.145
D2
VUC  19.1   (22.14)
63.77D

The values are given in Table 22.16.


Laminar stage
H 0.00555 V
    0.000204 2 (22.15)
L D D

The values are tabulated against the pipe diameter D for a range of laminar flow veloc-
ities in Table 22.17.
Turbulent stage: Assume C  100 for M  100, and from a plot of Table 1 C' values,
the corresponding C'  54.7 for M  95.

V  72.09r 0.63s0.54 (22.16)

s  H   V1.85 V1.85


  
L 72.091.85r1.165 Constant

The headlosses are computed in Table 22.18.


It is useful to plot results as shown in Figs. 22.32 and 22.33 with critical velocities
indicated. For laminar flow, values are taken from the left of VLC, and for turbulent flow,
they are taken from right of VLC. It is also useful to tabulate results as shown in Table
22.19, including the minimum headloss to account for Sy as well as the operating
headloss.
Head losscomputations for solids bearing flows are not an exact science. Where the
physical properties of the sludge cannot be measured, use of the data reproduced here in
Figs. 22.29, through 22.31 and the methodology developed by Chou et al. (1958) and
summarized here should provide reasonable results.

TABLE 22.15 C Values for Raw, Thickened Sludge

M C Ratio to Water Headloss


100 1.85
Moisture Content (%) Percentage of C at M  100% 
C

100 100 100


98 80.5 1.49
97
96 62.8 2.37
95
94 50.5 3.54
91.5 37.6 6.11
90 33.6 7.54

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.87

FIGURE 22.32 Results of Headloss computation exampleslaminar flow

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.88 Chapter Twenty-Two

FIGURE 22.33 Head loss for turbulent flow (m  95%)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.89

TABLE 22.16 Example of Critical Velocities

D 8 in 10 in 14 in 20 in

VLC (ft/s) 3.58 3.55 3.45 3.40


VUC (ft/s) 4.52 4.42 4.31 4.23

TABLE 22.17 Example Hydraulic Slope for Laminar Stage

D 8 in 10 in 14 in 20 in
H ft
 0.000458v 0.000293v 0.000149v 0.000073v
L ft
V  0,  H 0.00833 0.00666 0.00476 0.00333
L
V  3, H 0.00970 0.00754 0.00521 0.00355
L
VLC , H 0.00997 0.00770 0.00527 0.00358
L
Varies (see Table 22.16)

TABLE 22.18 Example Hydraulic Slope for Turbulent Stage

D:8 in D:10 in D:14 in D:20 in


1.85 V1.85 V1.85 V1.85 V1.85
V V    
fps 338.9 439.6 650.5 986.5

VUC Varies Table 22.16 0.0481 0.0356 0.0229 0.0146


5 19.64 0.0580 0.0447 0.0302 0.0199
6 27.51 0.0813 0.0625 0.0423 0.0279
7 36.60 0.108 0.0832 0.0562 0.0371
8 46.85 0.138 0.106 0.072 0.0474
9 58.25 0.172 0.133 0.0896 0.0591
10 70.80 0.209 0.161 0.109 0.0718

TABLE 22.19 Summary of Results

Pipes Q Headloss, feet


L ---------- D gal/m ft3/s ft/s Minimum(1) Operating

16 ft ------- 0 in 2000 4.46 8.20 0.11 1.78


5 ft ------- 8 in 2000 4046 12.80 0.04 1.65
11 ft ------- 14 in 4000 8.91 8.36 0.05 0.86
20 ft ------- 20 in 4000 8.91 4.08 0.08 0.28
20 ft ------- 10 in 600 1.34 2.44 0.13 0.15
50 ft ------- 8 in 500 1.11 3.21 0.42 0.49
30 ft ------- 14 in 1600 3.57 3.34 0.14 0.16
40 ft ------- 20 in 3300 7.35 3.37 0.13 0.14

Minimum is the headloss required to overcome Sy and initiate flow.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.90 Chapter Twenty-Two

REFERENCES
American Society of Civil Engineers, and Water Environment Federation, Gravity Sanitary Sewer
Design and Construction, American Society Civil Engineers Manuals and Reports on
Engineering Practice No. 60 and Water Environment Federation Manual of Practice No. FD-5,
1982.
Babbitt, H. E., and Caldwell, David H., Laminar Flow of Sludges in Pipes with Special Reference
to Sewage Sludge, University of Illinois, Bulletin 319, 1939.
Bingham, E. C., Fluidity and Plasticity, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1922.
Brisbin, S. G., Flow of Concentrated Raw Sewage Sludges in Pipes, Proceedings Paper 1274,
American Society Civil Engineers 1957.
Bulletin No. 2552 University of Wisconsin.
Bureau of Reclamation, Design Standards No.3, Water Conveyance Systems, Chapter 11 General
Hydraulic Considerations (Draft), (7-2071) (6-84), Sept. 30, 1992.
Camp, T. R., and Graber, S. D., Dispersion Conduits, Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division,
American Society of Civil Engineer, 94(SA1), February 1968.
Chao, J.L., and Trussell, R. R., Hydraulic Design of Flow in Distribution Channels, Journal of
Environmental Engineering Division, ASCE, 6(EE2), April 1980.
Chou, T.L., Resistance of Sewage Sludge to Flow in Pipes, Journal of Sanitary Engineering
Div., American Society of Civil Engineer, Paper 1780, September 1958.
Committee on Pipeline Planning, Pipeline Division, Pipeline Design for Water and Wastewater,
American Society of Civil Engineers, New York, 1975.
Crane Co., Flow of Fluids Through Valves, Fittings, and Pipe, Technical Paper No. 410-C, 23rd
ed., Banford, Ontario, 1987.
Daugherty, R. L., and J. B. Franzini, Fluid Mechanics with Engineering Applications, 7th ed.,
McGraw-Hill, New York, 1977.
Hatfield, W. D., Viscosity or Psendo-Plastic Properties of Sewage Sludges, Sewage Works
Journal, 10, 1938.
Ito, H., and Imani, K., Energy Losses at 90o Pipe Junctions. Journal of the Hydraulics Division,
American Society of Civil Engineer, HY9, 1973.
Keefer, C. E., Sewage Treatment Works, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1940.
Sanks, R. L., Pumping Station Design, Butterworths, Stoneham, MA, 1989.
Shaw, G. V., and A. W. Loomis, eds., Cameron Hydraulic Data, Ingersoll-Rand Co., Cameron
Pump Division, 14th Ed., 1970.
Simon, A. L., Hydraulics, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1986.
Streck, O., Grund und Wasserbrau in Praktischen Biespielen, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1950.
Ten-State Standards, Recommended Standards for Sewage Works, Great LakesUpper Mississippi
Board of Sanitary Engineers, Health Education Service, Inc., Albany, NY, 1978.
Walski, T. M., Analysis of Water Distribution Systems, Krieger, Malabar, FL, 1992.
Williamson, J. V., and Rhone, T. J., Dividing Flow in Branches and Wyes, Journal of the
Hydraulics Division, American Society of Civil Engineer, No. HY5, 1973.
Winkel, R., Angwandte Hydromechanik im Wasserbau, Ernst & Sohn, Berlin, 1943.
Yao, K. M., Hydraulic Control for Flow Distribution, Journal of the Sanitary Engineering Division,
American Society of Civil Engineer, 98 (SA2), April 1972

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.91

APPENDIX
WATER AND WASTEWATER
TREATMENT PLANT
HYDRAULICS

ENGLISH UNITS EXAMPLES

TABLE 22.5 Hydraulic Calculations of a Typical Coagulation Process

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

1. Plant Flow (mgd) 50 70 75 100


(ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 154.72
Note: For Points 1 through 8, see Fig. 22.12.
2. WSEL at Point 1 (calculation done in Table 22.6) (ft) 360.1 360.01 360.02 360.04
3. Point 1 to Point 2
Average Flow  21Q/32 (ft3/s) 50.77 71.08 76.15 101.54
Flow depth  WSEL @ 1  invert (349 ft 9 in) (ft) 10.26 10.27 10.27 10.29
Flow area  16ft  10in width  depth (ft2) 172.72 172.89 172.94 173.25
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.29 0.41 0.44 0.59
/ (P  w + 2d) (ft)
R = A/P 4.62 4.63 4.63 4.63
2
Condiut loss  [(V  n )/(1.486  R2/3)]  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  95 ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 2 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
4. Point 2 to Point 3
Average flow  5Q/16 (ft3/s) 24.18 33.85 36.26 48.35
Flow depth = WSEL @ 2 invert (349 ft 9 in) (ft) 10.26 10.27 10.27 10.29
Flow area  16 ft 10 in width  depth (ft2) 172.72 172.89 172.94 173.25
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.14 0.20 0.21 0.28
/ (P  w  2d) (ft)
R = A/P 4.62 4.63 4.63 4.63
2
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486b  R2/3) ]  L (ft)
x L where n  0.014 and L  48 ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 3 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
5. Point 3 to Point 4
Average flow  Q/8 (ft3/s) 9.67 13.54 14.51 19.34
Flow depth  WSEL @ 3 invert (349 ft 9 in) (ft) 10.26 10.27 10.27 10.29
Flow area  16 ft 10 in width  depth (ft2) 172.72 172.89 172.94 173.25
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.011
/ (P  w  2d) (ft)
R= A/P 4.62 4.63 4.63 4.63

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.92 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

Condiut Loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R2/3)]2  L (ft)


where n  0.014 and L  72 ft 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 4 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
6. Point 4 to Point 5
Flow  Q/32 (ft3/s) 2.42 3.38 3.63 4.84
Port area  1 ft deep  2.5 ft wide (ft2) 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.97 1.35 1.45 1.93
Submerged entrance loss  0.8 V 2/2g (ft) 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05
WSEL at Point 5 (in sedimentation tank) (ft) 360.02 360.04 360.05 360.09
7. Point 5 to Point 6
Width of sedimentation basin (W) W (ft) 76.00 76.00 76.00 76.00
Flow (Q/4) (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Invert elevation of sedimentation baffles (ft) 347.67 347.67 347.67 347.67
Fow depth (H)H (WSEL at Point 5 baffle invert) (ft) 12.35 12.37 12.38 12.42
Area downstreams of baffle (W  H H) (ft2) 938.77 940.39 940.88 943.83
Horizontal openings in baffles, 1 in
wide, every 9 inches Area of
openings, A  W  H H/ 9 (ft2) 104.31 104.49 104.54 104.87
Velocity of downstream baffle (V downstream)
(Q/A) (ft/s) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04
Velocity of 1 in opening section
(V1) (Q/A
/ ) (ft/s) 0.19 0.26 0.28 0.37
Local losses  Sudden expansion
(1.0  V downstream2/2g)  sudden contraction
(0.36 V12/2g) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 6 (Upstream of
sedimentation baffles) (ft) 360.02 360.04 360.05 360.09
8. Point 6 to Point 7
Loss per stage (provided by flocculator
manufacturer) (ft) 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.17
Total loss (three stages) (ft) 0.13 0.13 0.29 0.50
WSEL at Point 7 (ft) 360.15 360.17 360.34 360.59
9. Point 7 to Point 8
Flow  Q/24 (ft3/s) 3.22 4.51 4.84 6.45
Port area  1 in deep  1 ft 6 in wide (ft2) 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 2.15 3.01 3.22 4.30
Entrance loss  1.25 V 2/2g (ft) 0.09 0.18 0.20 0.36
WSEL at Point 8 (inlet port) (ft) 360.24 360.35 360.54 360.95
Note: For Points 8 through 14, see Fig. 22.13
10. Point 8 to Point 9
Average Flow  Q/24 (ft3/s) 3.22 4.51 4.84 6.45
Flow depth  WSEL @ 8 - invert (358 ft) (ft) 2.24 2.35 2.54 2.95
Flow area  3 ft width  depth (ft2) 6.73 7.05 7.63 8.84
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.48 0.64 0.63 0.73
/ (P  w  2d) (ft)
R = A/P 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.99

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.93

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour
2
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)]  L
where n = 0.014 and L  12 ft 8in (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 9 (ft) 360.24 360.35 360.54 360.95
11. Point 9 to Point 10
Average flow  Q/12 (ft3s) 6.45 9.03 9.67 12.89
Flow depth  WSEL @ 9 invert (358 ft) (ft) 2.24 2.35 2.54 2.95
Flow area  3 ft width  depth (ft2) 6.73 7.05 7.63 8.85
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.96 1.28 1.27 1.46
/ (P  w  2d) (ft)
R = A/P 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.99
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)]2  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  12 ft 8 in (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 10 (ft) 360.24 360.35 360.54 360.95
12. Point 10 to Point 11
Flow  Q/8 (ft3/s) 9.67 13.54 14.51 19.34
Flow depth  WSEL @ 10 invert (358 ft) (ft) 2.24 2.35 2.54 2.95
Flow area  3 ft width  depth (ft2) 6.73 7.06 7.63 8.85
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 1.44 1.92 1.90 2.18
Loss at two 45o bends  2  0.2 V 2/2g (ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.03
WSEL at Point 11 (ft) 360.26 360.38 360.57 360.98
13. Point 11 to Point 12
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Flow depth  WSEL @ 11 invert (358 ft) (ft) 2.26 2.38 2.57 2.98
Flow area  5 ft width  depth (ft2) 11.28 11.88 12.83 14.90
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 1.71 2.28 2.26 2.60
Loss at two 45o bends  2  0.2 V2/2
V g (ft) 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.04
R  A/P/ (P  w  2d) (ft) 1.19 1.22 1.27 1.36
Condiut Loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)]2  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  32 ft 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01
WSEL at Point 12 (ft) 360.28 360.42 360.61 361.04
14. Point 12 to Point 13
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Flow depth  WSEL @ 12 invert (358 ft) (ft) 2.28 2.42 2.61 3.04
Inlet area  5 ft width  depth (ft2) 11.41 12.09 13.05 15.18
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 1.70 2.24 2.22 2.55
Inlet loss  1 V 2/2g (ft) 0.04 0.08 0.08 0.10
WSEL at Point 13 (Mixing chamber No. 2 outlet) (ft) 360.33 360.50 360.69 361.14
15. Point 13 to Point 14
Note: Mixers provide negligible head loss
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Chamber area  6 ft  6 ft (ft2) 36.00 36.00 36.00 36.00
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.54 0.75 0.81 1.07
Losses  Mixer (1 V 2/2g)  Sharp
bend (1.8 V 2/2g) (ft) 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.05
WSEL at Point 14 (Mixing
Chamber No. 2 inlet) (ft) 360.34 360.52 360.71 361.19

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.94 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

Note: For Points 14 through 21, see Fig. 22.14


16. Point 14 to Point 15
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 38.68 54.15 58.02 77.36
Condiut area  7.5 ft wide  4 ft deep (ft3) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 1.29 1.81 1.93 2.58
R  A/P/ (P  2w  2d) (ft) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
Condiut losses  L  [V/(1.318
V 
C  R0.63)]1/0.54 (ft)
where L  155 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.06
Local losses  Flow split (0.6 V 2/2g)  contraction
(0.07 V 2/2g)  0.67 V 2/2g (ft) 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.07
WSEL at Point 15 (at Mixing Chamber No. 1) (ft) 360.37 360.58 360.79 361.31
17. The above calculations (for Points 1 through 15)
have been routed through Tank No. 4
When the flow isrouted through Tank No. 1,
the WSEL (ft) is: 360.31 360.51 360.70 361.17
In reality, the headloss through each basin is
equal. The flow through the basin naturally
adjusts to equalize headlosses, that is flow through
Tank No. 1 is greater than Q/4 and flow
through Tank No. 4 is less than Q/4. The actual
headloss through each basin is the average of
Tank #s 1 and 4 and the WSEL (ft) at Point 15 is: 360.34 360.54 360.74 361.24
18. Point 15 to Point 16
Flow  Q (ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 152.72
Condiut area  7.5 ft wide  4 ft deep (ft2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 2.58 3.61 3.87 5.16
R  A/P/ (P  2w  2d) (ft) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
Condiut losses  L  [V/(1.318
V 
C  R0.63)]1/0.54 (ft)
where L  412 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.15 0.28 0.31 0.53
WSEL at Point 16 (ft) 360.49 360.82 361.06 361.77
19. Point 16 to Point 17
Flow  Q (ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 154.72
Condiut area @ 16  7.5 ft wide  4 ft deep (ft2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00
Condiut area @ 17  5.5 ft wide  5.5 ft deep (ft2) 30.25 30.25 30.25 30.25
Average area (ft2) 30.13 30.13 30.13 30.13
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 2.57 3.60 3.85 5.14
R @ 16  A16/ (2  (7.5 ft  4 ft) (ft) 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30
R @ 17  A17/ (2  (5.5 ft  5.5 ft) (ft) 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38
Average R (ft) 1.34 1.34 1.34 1.34
Condiut Losses  L  [V/(1.318
V 
C  R0.63)]1/0.54 (ft)
where L  30 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04
WSEL at Point 17 (ft) 360.50 360.84 361.08 361.81

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.95

TABLE 22.5 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

20. Point 17 to Point 18


Flow  Q (ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 154.72
Condiut area @ 17  5.5 ft wide  5.5 ft deep (ft2) 30.25 30.25 30.25 30.25
Velocity 17  flow/area 17 (ft/s) 2.56 3.58 3.84 5.11
Pipe area @ 18  5.5 ft2/4   (ft2) 23.76 23.76 23.76 23.76
Velocity 18  flow/area 18 (ft/s) 3.26 4.56 4.88 6.51
Exit Losses  V182/2g  V172/2g (ft) 0.06 0.12 0.14 0.25
WSEL at Point 18 (ft) 360.56 360.96 361.22 362.06
21. Point 18 to Point 19
R  A/P/ (P  d  ) (ft) 1.38 1.38 1.38 1.38
Local losses  3 elbows (3  0.25V 2/2g)
 entrance (0.5  V 2/2g )  1.25  V 2/2g (ft) 0.21 0.40 0.46 0.82
Condiut losses  L  [V/(1.318
V  C  R0.63)]1/0.54
where L  455 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 (ft) 0.24 0.44 0.50 0.85
WSEL at Point 19 (exit of Control Chamber) (ft) 361.00 361.81 362.18 363.74
22. Point 19 to Point 20
Weir elevation (ft) 360.00 360.00 360.00 360.00
Depth of flow over weir  (WSEL @
19 - weir elevation) (ft) 1.00 1.81 2.18 3.74
Length of weir, L (ft) 9.00 9.00 9.00 9.00
Flow over weir  q  3.1  h 3/2 x [1(d/h)3/2]0.385  L
Note: Rather than solve for h, find an h by trial
and error that gives a q equal to the flow
for the given flow scenario (given in Item 1)
First Iteration assume h (ft)  2 3 3 4
then q (ft3/s)  66.63 113.72 99.77 90.40
Second Iteration assume h (ft)  2.17 2.93 3.2 4.5
then q (ft3/s)  77.11 108.41 116.04 154.28
Note: These qs equal the flows for the given
scerios (Item 1)
h (ft) 2.17 2.93 3.2 4.5
WSEL at Point 20 (h + WSEL @ Point 19) (ft) 362.17 362.93 363.20 364.50
23. Point 20 to Point 21
Flow  Q (ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 154.72
Sluice gate area  54 in  54 in (ft2) 20.25 20.25 20.25 20.25
Velocity = flow/area (ft/s) 3.82 5.35 5.73 7.64
Gate losses  1.5  V 2/2g (ft) 0.34 0.67 0.76 1.36
WSEL at Point 21 (Raw Water Control Chamber) (ft) 362.51 363.60 363.96 365.86
The overflow weir in the Raw Water Control Chamber
is 10 ft long and is sharp crested.
Q  3.3  L  h 3/2 so  h  (Q/3.3/L
/ )2/3 (ft) 1.76 2.21 2.31 2.80
The water surface must not rise above
elevation 370 ft 0 in.
The overflow weir elevation may be
safely set at 367 ft 0 in.

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.96 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.6 Hydraulic Calculations in a Medium Sized Water Treatment Plant from the Filter
Effluent to the Effluent Clearwell

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

1. Plant flow (mgd) 50 70 75 100


(ft3/s) 77.36 108.31 116.04 154.72
Note: for Points 22 through 28, see Fig. 22.15
2. Point 22 to Point 23
Maximum water level in clearwell (Point 22) (ft) 345.00 345.00 345.00 345.00
Invert in clearwell, (ft) 333.00 333.00 333.00 333.00
Flow  Q/2 (ft3/s) 38.68 54.15 58.02 77.36
Stop logs @ A
Flow area (2 openings, 5 ft wide, 12 ft deep) (ft2) 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.64 0.90 0.97 1.29
Loss  0.5 V 2/2g (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01
Baffles
Flow area (10 ft wide, 12 ft deep) (ft2) 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.64 0.90 0.97 1.29
Loss  1.0 V2/2g (ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03
Stop logs @ B and C
Same as the losses @ A, times 2 (ft) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03
WSEL at Point 23 (ft) 345.02 345.03 345.04 345.06
3. Point 23 to Point 24
Flow  Q/2 (ft3/s) 38.68 54.15 58.02 77.36
66 inch diameter pipe
Flow area  d 2/4  p (ft2) 23.76 23.76 23.76 23.76
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 1.63 2.28 2.44 3.26
Exit loss @ clearwell  V 2/2g (ft) 0.16
Loss @ 2  90o bends  (0.25 V 2/2g)  2 (ft) 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.08
Entrance loss @ filter building  0.5 V 2/2g (ft) 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.08
Pipe loss  (3.022  V 1.85  L)/
(C 1.85  D1.165) (ft)
where C  120 and L  190 0.03 0.05 0.06 0.10
WSEL at Point 24 (ft) 345.08 345.16 345.19 345.49
4. Point 24 to Point 25
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Flow area  5 ft  5ft (ft2) 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00
Velocity  Q/A
/ (ft/s) 0.77 1.08 1.16 1.55
Loss as flows merge  1.0 V 2/2g (ft) 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.04
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)] 2  L (ft)
where n  0.013, L  55 ft and R  A/P / (P  20) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01
WSEL at Point 25 (ft) 345.10 345.19 345.21 345.54
5. Point 25 to Point 26
Sluice Gate No. 1 flow area  48 in  36 in (ft2) 12 12 12 12
Velocity  Q/A
/ (ft/s) 1.61 2.26 2.42 3.22
Loss  0.5 V 2/2g (ft) 0.02 0.04 0.05 0.08
WSEL at Point 26 (ft) 345.12 345.23 345.26 345.62
6. Point 26 to Point 27
Sluice Gate No. 2 Loss  0.8 V 2/2g (ft) 0.03 0.06 0.07 0.13
WSEL at Point 27 (ft) 345.15 345.29 345.33 345.75

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.97

TABLE 22.6 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

7. Point 27 to Point 28
Port to filter clearwell. Calculate losses through port
as if it were a weir when depth of flow is
below top of port.
Port Dimmensions  9 ft wide by 2 ft 8 in feet deep
Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68
Weir (bottom of port) elevation (ft) 344.00 344.00 344.00 344.00
Depth of flow over weir  (WSEL @ 27
 weir elevation) (ft) 1.15 1.29 1.33 1.75
Flow over submerged weir = q = 3.1  h3/2 
[1  (d/
d h)3/2]0.385  L
Note: Rather than solve for h, find an h
by trial and error that gives a q equal to the
flow for the given flow scenario (given in item 1).
assume h (ft) = 1.3 1.4 1.5 2
then q (ft3s) = 20.8841 20.2379 25.5883 41.0387
assume h (ft) = 1.28 1.49 1.55 1.97
then q (ft3/s) = 19.4646 27.0883 29.232 38.485
Note: These qs equal the flows for the given
scerios (Item 1)
h (feet) 1.28 1.49 1.55 1.97
WSEL at Point 28, (ft) 345.28 345.49 345.55 345.97
FiltersSee Filter Hydraulics in Table 22.7
Note: For Points 29 thruogh 33, see Fig. 22.16
8. Point 29
WSEL above filters (ft) 360.00 360.00 360.00 360.00
9. Point 29 to Point 30
Entrance to Filter #4
Flow  Q/8 (ft3/s) 9.67 13.54 14.51 19.34
Channel Velocity
V  Flow/
F /Area
(area  4 ft  4 ft) (ft/s) 0.60 0.85 0.91 1.21
Submerged entrance loss =
0.8 V 2/2g (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02
48 in Pipe velocity  flow/area
(area  d 2/4  ) (ft/s) 0.77 1.08 1.15 1.54
Butterfly valve loss  0.25 V 2/2g (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
Sudden elargement loss  0.25 V 2/2g (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01
WSEL in influent channel (Point 30) (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
10. Point 30 to Point 31
Flow depth  WSEL @ 30  invert (352 ft) (ft) 8.01 8.02 8.02 8.04
Flow area  6 ft width  depth (ft2) 48.05 48.11 48.12 48.22
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.20 0.28 0.30 0.40
R  A/P/ (P  w  2d) (ft) 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)] 2  L
where n  0.014 and L  35 ft 4 in (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 31 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
11. Point 31 to Point 32

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.98 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.6 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

Flow  Q/4 (ft3/s) 19.34 27.08 29.01 38.68


Flow depth  WSEL @ 31  invert (352 ft) (ft) 8.01 8.02 8.02 8.04
Flow area  6 ft width  depth (ft2) 48.06 48.11 48.12 48.22
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.40 0.56 0.60 0.80
R  A/P
/ (P  w  2d) (ft) 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)] 2  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  35ft 4 in 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 32 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
12. Point 32 to Point 33
Flow  3Q/8 (ft3/s) 29.01 40.61 43.52 58.02
Flow depth  WSEL @ 32  invert (352 ft) (ft) 8.01 8.02 8.02 8.04
Flow area 6 ft width  depth (ft2) 48.06 48.11 48.13 48.22
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.60 0.84 0.90 1.20
R  A/P/ (P  w  2d) (ft) 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/(1.486  R 2/3)] 2  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  35 ft 4 in 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 33 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04
13. Point 33 to Point 1
Flow  Q/2 (ft3/s) 38.68 54.15 58.02 77.36
Flow depth  WSEL @ 33  invert (352 ft) (ft) 8.01 8.02 8.02 8.04
Flow area  6 ft width  depth (ft3) 48.06 48.11 48.13 48.23
V
Velocity  flow/area (ft/s) 0.80 1.13 1.21 1.60
R  A/P/ (P  w  2d) (ft) 2.18 2.18 2.18 2.18
Condiut loss  [(V  n)/1.486  R 2/3)] 2  L (ft)
where n  0.014 and L  36 ft 4 in 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
WSEL at Point 1 (ft) 360.01 360.02 360.02 360.04

TABLE 22.7 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Filter

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

Plant Flow (mgd) 50 70 75 100


Filter loading, gpm/ft2 2 4 6 8
Filter area per filter 7 out of 8 Filters in Operation (ft2) 1240 1240 1240 1240
Flow = loading  area
(gal/min) 2480 4960 7440 9920
(mgd) 3.57 7.14 10.71 14.29
(ft3/s) 5.53 11.05 16.58 22.10
Losses through filter effluent piping (Fig. 22.17)
20 in piping (Q):
Pipe velocity  Q/A / (ft/s) 2.53 5.07 7.60 10.13
Local losses  Exit (0.5)  butterfly valves (2  0.25)
+ 90o Elbows (2  0.4)  tee (1.8)  3.6 V 2/2g (ft) 0.36 1.43 3.23 5.74
R  A/P/  (d 2/4  )/(d  )  dd/4 (ft) 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Condiut losses  L  [V/(1.318
V  C  R 0.63)]1/0.54
where L  20 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 (ft) 0.03 0.09 0.20 0.34
20 in piping (Q/2):

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.99

TABLE 22.7 (Continued)


Initial Operation Design Operation
Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour

Pipe velocity  Q/A (ft/s) 1.27 2.53 3.80 5.07


Local losses  butterfly valve (0.25) (ft) 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.10
R  A/P/  (d 2/4  )/(d  )  dd/4 (ft) 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Condiut losses  L  [V/(1.318
V  C  R 0.63)]1/0.54
where L  10 ft and Hazen-Williams C  120 (ft) 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.05
24 in piping (Q/2):
Pipe velocity  Q/A, (ft/s) 0.88 1.76 2.64 3.52
Local losses  entrance (1.0)  Tee (1.8)
 2.8 V 2/2g (ft) 0.03 0.13 0.30 0.54
Filter (clean) and underdrain losses
(obtain from manufacturer) (ft) 0.30 0.50 0.75 1.10
Total losses (effluent pipe and clean filters) (ft) 0.73 2.20 4.57 7.87
Assume that headloss will be allowed to incrase eight ft before the filters are backwashed. A rate controller will
be used to maintain a constant flow through the filter. Determine the ranges of available head over which the rate
controller will operate.
Static head see figure 2.18
WSEL above filters (ft) 360.00 360.00 360.00 360.00
WSEL in filter effluent conduit,
Point 29 (see Example 222)
Maximum (ft) 346.50 346.50 346.50 346.50
Minimum (ft) 345.00 345.00 345.00 345.00
Static head  WSEL above filters WSEL in filter
effluent condiut
Maximum (ft) 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00
Minimum (ft) 13.50 13.50 13.50 13.50
Available head  static head  8 ft
Maximum (ft) 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Minimum (ft) 5.50 5.50 5.50 5.50

TABLE 22.8 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Bar Screen System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Max Hour

1. Wastewater flow rate (ft3/s) 35.3 56.5 70.6 113.0 113.0


(mgd) 23 37 46 73 73
Bar screens
Total of number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 2 3 3
Number of units in standby 1 1 1 0 1
Flow rate per screen in operation, q (ft3/s) 17.1 28.3 35.3 37.7 56.5
Width of each bar screen, w (ft) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2
2. At Point 8
Pump wetwell HGL at high
water level, HGL7 (ft) 330.05 330.05 330.05 330.05 330.05

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.100 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.8 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Max Hour

(pump starts at EL 330.05 ft and


stops at EL 328.08 (ft))
Pump well bottom EL (ft) 324.80 324.80 324.80 324.80 324.80
Check for critical depth in bar
screen channel: Critical depth in
a rectangular channel
Yc  (q2/g
/ /w2)(1/3) (ft) 0.52 0.72 0.83 0.87 1.14
Bar screen channel depth  3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61
pump WW HGL  channel bottom ELl (ft)
(water level at pump well controls
upstream hydraulics if normal depth
is higher than Yc)
Io bar screen channel depth higher than yc yes yes yes yes yes
3. Point 8 to Point 7
Channel bottom EL (ft) 326.44 326.44 326.44 326.44 326.44
Depth in channel, y7 (ft) 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61 3.61
Velocity, V
V7 (ft/s) 0.60 0.95 1.19 1.27 1.91
Exit loss from channel to pump well
Exit loss coefficient Kexit  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss  Kexit  V7
V 2/2g, Hle7 (ft) 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.06
HGL at Point 7, HGL7= HGL8  le(ft) 330.06 330.07 330.07 330.08 330.11
4. Point 7 to Point 6
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L6 (ft) 23 23 23 23 23
Manning's number n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Channel width, w6 (ft) 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20
Water depth, h6 (ft) 3.61 3.62 3.63 3.63 3.67
Velocity, V
V6 (fps) 0.60 0.95 1.19 1.26 1.88
Hydraulic radius, R6 
(h6  w6)/(2  h6w6) (ft) 1.92 1.92 1.93 1.93 1.94
Headloss  (V6V xn/1.486  R6 (2/3))2
 L6, Hlf6
f (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  HGL7  Hlf6
f (ft) 330.06 330.07 330.08 330.08 330.11
5. Point 6 to Point 5
Calculate headloss through bar screen
Space between bars (ft) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Bar width (ft) 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033
Bar shape factor, bsf 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42
Cross sectional width of bars, w (ft) 2.93 2.93 2.93 2.93 2.93
Clear spacing of bars, b (ft) 5.27 5.27 5.27 5.27 5.27
Upstream velocity head, h (ft) 0.0134 0.0342 0.0535 0.0608 0.1369
Angle of bar screen with
horizontal, p (degrees) 60 60 60 60 60
Kirschmers eq. Hls  bsf 
w/b  1.33  h  sin p (ft) 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.09 0.21
Allow 6 in head for blinding
by screenings, Ha (ft) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.101

TABLE 22.8 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Max Hour

HGL upstream of bar screen,


HGL5  HGL6  HlsHa (ft) 330.58 330.62 330.66 330.67 330.82
6. Point 5 to Point 4
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L4 (ft) 22.97 22.97 22.97 22.97 22.97
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Channel width, w4 (ft) 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20
Channel bottom elevation (ft) 326.94 326.94 326.94 326.94 326.94
Water depth, h4 (ft) 3.64 3.68 3.72 3.74 3.89
Channel velocity, VV4 (ft/s) 0.59 0.93 1.16 1.23 1.77
Hydraulic radius R4h4w4/(2h4w4) 1.93 1.94 1.95 1.96 2.00
Headloss  (V4V  n/1.486  R4(2/3) )2
 L4, Hlf4
f (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
HGL5  Hlf4,f ft 330.58 330.62 330.66 330.67 330.83
7. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss at sluice gate contraction
Kgate 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (ft) 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94
Sluice gate heigth (ft) 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95
Velocity through sluice gate, Vs (ft/s) 1.23 1.95 2.41 2.56 3.69
Sluice gate headloss, Hls 
Kgate  Vs 2/2g (ft) 0.02 0.06 0.09 0.10 0.21
HGL at Point 3, HGL3 (ft) 330.60 330.68 330.75 330.75 331.04
8. Point 3 to Point 2
Water depth at Point 2, h2 (ft) 3.67 3.74 3.81 3.84 4.10
Channel width, w2 (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
Channel velocity, VV2 (ft/s) 0.73 1.15 1.41 1.49 2.10
Fitting headloss through a 45 bend,
Kbend  0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Headloss  Kbend  V2V 2/2g, Hlb2 (ft) 0.0017 0.0041 0.0062 0.0069 0.0137
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L2 (ft) 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12 13.12
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius R2  h2  w2/
(2  f 2  w2) (ft) 1.73 1.75 1.76 1.77 1.82
Headloss  (V  n/1.486  R2(2/3))2
 L2, Hlf2
f (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Entrance loss
Kent  0.5 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
2
Headloss  Kent  V 2 /2g, Hle2 (ft) 0.0042 0.0103 0.0155 0.0174 0.0342
HGL at point 2, HGL2 
HGL3  Hlb2  Hlf2 f  Hle2 (ft) 330.61 330.69 330.77 330.80 331.09
9. Point 2 to Point 1
HGL at Point 1, HGL 1 
HGL2 (ft) 330.61 330.69 330.77 330.80 331.09
Invert EL of inlet sewer, INV1 (ft) 326.44 326.44 326.44 326.44 326.44
Crown EL of inlet sewer, CWN1 (ft) 333.50 333.50 333.50 333.50 333.50
Surcharge to inlet sewer? No No No No No

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.102 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.9 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Vortex Grit Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (cfs) 35.3 56.5 70.6 113.0 113.0


(mgd) 23 36 46 73 73
2. Vortex grit tanks
total number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 2 3 2
Number of units in standby 1 1 1 0 1
Flow rate per vortex grit tank
in operation, q (cfs) 17.7 28.3 35.3 37.7 56.5
Control point is located at
channel weir
Hydraulic Calculations Upstream of
Control point
3. At Point 8
Headloss over sharp-crested weir
Sharp-crested weir EL, weir EL (ft) 347.79 347.79 347.79 347.79 347.79
Effluent channel bottom EL (ft) 344.51 344.51 344.51 344.51 344.50
Flow rate over weir, q (ft3/s) 17.7 28.3 35.3 37.7 56.5
Length of weir, L (ft) 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84
Head over end contracted
weir, He (assumed) 0.67 0.92 1.06 1.11 1.46
[q/ 33.3(L0.2
L He)](2/3) (ft) 0.67 0.92 1.06 1.11 1.46
Hle8 He (must be zero) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 8, HGL8 
weir EL  Hle8 (ft) 348.45 348.70 348.85 348.90 349.25
4. Point 8 to Point 7
Channel width, w7 (ft) 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84
Channel bottom EL (ft) 344.49 344.49 344.49 344.49 344.49
Water depth, h7 (ft) 3.96 4.21 4.36 4.41 4.46
Velocity, V
V7 (ft/s) 0.45 0.68 0.82 0.87 1.21
Exit headloss from channel to effluent weir
Exit headloss coefficient Kexit  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hle7  Kexit  V 7 /2g (ft)
2
0.0032 0.0072 0.0105 0.0117 0.0226
HGL at Point 7, HGL7 
HGL8  Hle7 (ft) 348.46 348.71 348.86 348.91 349.27
5. Point 7 to Point 6
Channel width, w6 (ft) 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20
Channel bottom EL (ft) 344.49 344.49 344.49 344.49 344.49
Water depth, h6 (ft) 3.97 4.22 4.37 4.42 4.78
Velocity, VV6 (ft/s) 0.54 0.82 0.98 1.04 1.44
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L6 (ft) 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R6  (h6  w6)/
(2  h6  w6) (ft) 2.02 2.08 2.12 2.13 2.21
V  n/R
2
Headloss  (V6 / 6(2/3))
 L6, Hlf6f (ft) 0.0003 0.0006 0.0009 0.0010 0.0018
Fitting headloss through 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.103

TABLE 22.9 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Headloss  Kbend  V6 2
V /2g, Hlb6 (ft) 0.0046 0.0103 0.0151 0.0168 0.0322
HGL at Point 6, HGL6 
HGL7  Hlf6 f  Hlb6 (ft) 348.46 348.72 348.88 348.93 349.31
6. Point 6 to Point 5
Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss coefficient
Kgate  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (ft) 4.92 4.92 4.92 4.92 4.92
Sluice gate height (ft) 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28
Water depth, h5 (ft) 3.97 4.22 4.37 4.42 4.78
Sluice gate height or h5,
whichever smaller 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28
Velocity through sluice gate, V
V5 (ft/s) 1.09 1.75 2.19 2.33 3.50
Headloss, Hls5  Kgate  V5 /2g (ft)
2
0.0186 0.0475 0.0743 0.0845 0.1902
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
HGL6  Hls5 (ft) 348.48 348.77 348.95 349.01 349.50
7. Point 5 to Point 4
Channel width, w4 (ft) 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20 8.20
Bottom of channel EL (ft) 345.14 345.14 345.14 345.14 345.14
Water depth, h4 (ft) 3.34 3.62 3.81 3.87 4.35
Channel velocity, VV4 (ft/s) 0.65 0.95 1.13 1.19 1.58
Fitting headloss through a 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hlb4  Kbend  V4 V 2/2g (ft) 0.0065 0.0140 0.0199 0.0219 0.0389
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L4, (ft) 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius R4  h4  w4/
(2  h4  w4) (ft) 1.84 1.92 1.97 1.99 2.11
Headloss, Hlf4f  (V4
V  n/1.486  R4(2/3))2
 L4 (ft) 0.0005 0.0009 0.0013 0.0014 0.0023
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
HGL5  Hlb4  Hlf4 f (ft) 348.49 348.78 348.97 349.04 349.54
8. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss across vortex grit tank, H1tank (ft) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
(per manufacturer recommendations)
HGL at Point 3, HGL3  HGL4  H1tank (ft) 348.68 348.98 349.17 349.23 349.73
9. Point 3 to Point 2
Channel width, w2, (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
Bottom of channel EL (ft) 346.46 346.46 346.46 346.46 346.46
Water depth, h2 (ft) 2.23 2.52 2.71 2.78 3.28
Channel velocity, VV2 (ft/s) 1.21 1.71 1.98 2.07 2.63
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L2 (ft) 45.93 45.93 45.93 45.93 45.93
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius R2  h2R4(2/3))2
w2/(2*h2  w2) (ft) 1.33 1.43 1.48 1.50 1.64

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.104 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.9 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Headloss, Hlf2f  (V2*


V n/1.486  R ) (2/3) 2

 L2 (ft) 0.0035 0.0064 0.0082 0.0087 0.0125


Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss coefficient
Kgate  1.0 1.0 1..0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Sluice gate width (ft) 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9
Sluice gate height (ft) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3
Water depth, h2 (ft) 2.23 2.52 2.71 2.78 3.28
Sluice gate height or h2, whichever smaller (ft) 2.23 2.52 2.71 2.78 3.28
Velocity through sluice gate (ft/s) 1.61 2.28 2.65 2.76 3.50
2
Headloss, Hls2  Kgate  V2V /2g (ft) 0.0403 0.0804 0.1087 0.1181 0.1905
HGL at point 2, HGL2 
HGL3  Hlf2 f  Hls2 (ft) 348.73 349.07 349.29 349.36 349.94
10. Point 2 to Point 1
Channel width, w1 (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
Bottom of channel EL (ft) 346.62 346.62 346.62 346.62 346.62
Water depth, h1 (ft) 2.11 2.44 2.67 2.74 3.32
Channel velocity, V1 (ft/s) 1.28 1.76 2.02 2.10 2.60
Fitting headloss through a 90 deg bend
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Headloss, Hlb1  Kbend  V12/2g (ft) 0.0253 0.0482 0.0633 0.0683 0.1046
Friction headloss through channel
Length of approach channel, L1 (ft) 16.40 16.40 16.40 16.40 16.40
Mannings n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius R1 
h1  w1/(2  h1  w1) (ft) 1.28 1.40 1.47 1.49 1.65
Headloss, Hlf1f  (V1  n/1.486  R1(2/3) )2
 L1 (ft) 0.0015 0.0025 0.0031 0.0032 0.0043
(Influent channel may be aerated using
diffused air to prevent solids settling
or odor problem)
HGL at Point 1, HGL1 
HGL2  Hlb1  Hlf1f (ft) 348.75 349.12 349.35 349.43 350.05

TABLE 22.10 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Primary Sedimentation Tank System
Initial Operation Design Operation

Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.3 56.5 70.6 113.0 113.0


(mgd) 23 37 46 73 73
2. Primary sedimentation tanks (PSTs)
Total number of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 3 3 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 0 0 1
Flow rate per PTS in operation, q (ft3/s) 17.7 28.3 23.5 37.7 56.5

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.105

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Control points are located at Points 5 and 6


so that back up from down stream does
not flood effluent channel or overflow weir.
Hydraulic Calculations beginning
at Point 7
3. At Point 7
HGL7 must be equal to HGL1
of aeration tank (ft) 342.73 342.73 342.73 342.73 342.73
4. At Point 6
Allowance of 0.33 ft from HGL at
pipe entrance to bottom 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
of PST effluent trough at
discharge end (ft)
Elevation of PTS trough bottom
at discharge end, 343.06 343.06 343.06 343.06 343.06
EL dcb (ft)
Calculation of water depth in
PST effluent trough
Tank diameter, Dt (ft) 147.6 147.6 147.6 147.6 147.6
Number of channels per tank nc 2 2 2 2 2
Total flow through tank, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Flow per channel, qc  q/nc (ft3/s) 8.83 14.13 11.77 18.83 28.25
Channel slope, Sc (selected to
prevent solids setting) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Channel width, w6 (ft) 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28
Channel length, Lc  3.14 
(Dt-(w6/2))/nc (ft) 229.23 229.23 229.23 229.23 229.23
Change in channel EL, ELdif  Sc  Lc (ft) 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46 0.46
Critical depth, yc  (qc2/(g  w62))0.33 (ft) 0.62 0.84 0.75 1.02 1.33
Water depth at upstream end of channel, yu 0.69 1.07 0.91 1.38 1.92
 [2  (yc)2  (yc  (S  L/3)
L 2 ]0.5
 (2  S  L
L/3) (ft)
Channel bottom El at upstream
end of trough, 343.52 343.52 343.52 343.52 343.52
ELucb  ELdcb  ELdif (ft)
HGL at trough downstream,
HGL6d  ELdcb  yc (ft) 343.68 343.91 343.81 344.08 344.39
HGL at trough upstream,
HGL6u  ELucb  yu (ft) 344.21 344.59 344.43 344.90 345.44
5. Point 6 to Point 5
Allowance to Weir from
high trough HGL (ft) 0.33 0.33 0.33 .033 0.33

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.106 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Weir elevation, Elwe, max.


HGL6u  allowance (ft) 345.77 345.77 345.77 345.77 345.77
Headloss over Vnotch weirs
Number of weirs per tank, Nw 1 1 1 1 1
Tank diameter, Dt (ft) 147.64 147.64 147.64 147.64 147.64
Weir length, Lw  (Dt)  3.14 (ft) 463.58 463.58 463.58 463.58 463.58
Hydraulic load, So  q/Lw / ,(ft3/s/s/ft) 0.0381 0.0609 0.0508 0.0813 0.1219
Weir angle, A () 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00 90.00
Vnotch height, Vh (ft) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Vnotch width, Vw  2 
(TAN(A ( /2))  Vh (ft) 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66
Space between notches, Esv (ft) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Number of notches per
weir, nv  Lw/(Ew  Esv) 614 614 614 614 614
Flow per notch, Qcw  q/nv 0.0288 0.0460 0.0383 0.0614 0.0920
Weir coefficient for 90 notch, Cw 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43
Water depth over the weir, hle5 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.23 0.27
 (Qcw/Cw)(1/2.48) (ft)
hle5  Vh? (if not, need to
readjust calculations) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
HGL at point 5, HGL5 
ELwe  hle5, (ft) 345.93 345.97 345.95 345.99 346.03
6. Point 5 to Point 4
Headloss through primary
sedimentation tanks
Number of tanks, Nt 2 2 3 3 2
Flow per tank, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Tank diameter, Dt (ft) 147.64 147.64 147.64 147.64 147.64
Side water depth, Dsw (ft) 14.11 14.11 14.11 14.11 14.11
Tank bottom elevation, ELt  HGL5
 Dsw (ft) 331.85 331.85 331.85 331.85 331.85
Tank floor slope, St (%) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33
Minimum floor tank elevation, Eltf 325.70 325.70 325.70 325.70 325.70
 0.0833  (Dt/2)
t  ELt (ft)
Headloss through tank, hlt4
t (ft) 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16 0.16
(Available from equipment
manufacturer)
HGL at point 4, HGL4 
HGL5  hlt4
t (ft) 346.10 346.13 346.12 346.16 346.20
7. Point 4 to Point3
Headloss through PST influent pier
Pier diameter, Dp  42 in 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51 3.51
Pier length, Lp (ft) 21.33 21.33 21.33 21.33 21.33
V  Qt/(3.14
Velocity, V3 t  (Dp/2)2 ) (ft/s) 1.83 2.92 2.43 3.89 5.84
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (ft) 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.107

TABLE 22.10 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Slope, Sp  [V3/(1.318
V  Cp 
Rp(0.63))](1/0.54) (%) 0.03 0.07 0.05 0.12 0.26
Headloss, Hlf3 f  Lp  Sp (ft) 0.0064 0.0153 0.0109 0.0261 0.0552
Exit headloss from pier
Exit headloss coefficient Kexit  1.0 1 1 1 1 1
2
Headloss, hle3  K  V3 V /2g (ft) 0.0517 0.1324 0.0920 0.2354 0.5297
HGL at Point 3, HGL3 
HGL4  Hlf3 f  hle3 (ft) 346.16 346.28 346.22 346.42 346.78
8. Point 3 to Point 2
Total number of pipes 3 3 3 3 3
Number of pipes per primary
sedimentation tank 1 1 1 1 1
Pipe diameter, Dp (ft) 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94
Flow per pipe, q (cfs) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Velocity, VV2 1.45 2.32 1.93 3.10 4.64
Friction headloss through primary
sedimentation tank influent pipe
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (ft) 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.98
Length of pipe, Lp (ft) 229.7 229.7 229.7 229.7 229.7
Slope, Sp  [V2/(1.318
V  Cp 
(1/0.54)
Rp (0.63))] (%) 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.15
Headloss, hlf2 f  Lp  Sp (ft) 0.0395 0.0942 0.0672 0.1605 0.3402
Fitting headloss through two 45 bends
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend  0.5 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Headloss, hlb2  K  V2 V 2/2g (ft) 0.0164 0.0419 0.0291 0.0744 0.1674
HGL at Point 2, HGL2 
HGL3  hlb2  hlf2f (ft) 346.21 346.42 346.32 346.65 347.29
9. At Point 1
Entrance headloss from primary
sedimentation tank influent
distribution box to influent pipe
Pipe diameter, Dp (ft) 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94
Flow per pipe, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Velocity, V1 (ft3/s) 1.45 2.32 1.93 3.10 4.64
Entrance headloss coefficient
Kentrance  0.5 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hle1  Kentrance  V12/2g (ft) 0.0164 0.0419 0.0291 0.0744 0.1674
HGL at point 1, HGL1  HGL2  Hle1 (ft) 346.23 346.46 346.35 346.73 347.46
Allowance to grit tank effluent weir
from maximum 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
HGL1, Hall (ft)
Grit tank effluent elevation,
ELgr  HGL1  Hall (ft) 347.79 347.79 347.79 347.79 347.79

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.108 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.11 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Final Sedimentation Tank

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01


(mdg) 23 37 46 73 73
RAS flow, % of average day flow 20 50 50 100 100
RAS flow, Qras  Q  RAS flow/100 (ft3/s) 11.30 28.25 35.31 70.63 70.63
Final sedimentation tank
influent flow, Qin (ft3/s) 46.62 84.76 105.94 183.64 183.64
Final sedimentation tank effluent
flow, Qeff (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Final sedimentation tanks
Total number of units 4 4 4 4 4
Number of units in operation 3 3 3 4 3
Number of units on standby 1 1 1 0 1
Tank width (ft) 52 52 52 52 52
Influent per operating tank, qin (ft3/s) 15.54 28.25 35.31 45.91 61.21
Effluent per operating tank, qeff (ft3/s) 11.77 18.83 23.54 28.25 37.67
2. Select control Point at Point 3
(where effluent wiers are located)
Hydraulic calculations downstream
of control point
At Point 3
V-notch weir
Number per tank, Nw 20 20 20 20 20
Individual weir length, Lw (ft) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0
Total weir length, Lwt  Lw  Nw (ft) 459.3 459.3 459.3 459.3 459.3
Weir angle, A 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0 90.0
V-notch height, Vh (ft) 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
V-notch width, Vw  2 
(TAN(A( /2))  Vh (ft) 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66 0.66
Space between notches, Esv (ft) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Total number of notches per
tank, nv  Lwt/(
t Vw  Esv) 608 608 608 608 608
Flow per notch, Qcw  qeff /nv 0.0194 0.0310 0.0387 0.0465 0.0620
Weir coefficient for 90 notch, Cw 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43 2.43
Water depth over the weir,
hle3  (Qcw/Cw)(1/2.48) (ft) 0.14 0.17 0.19 0.20 0.23
hle3  Vh? (if not, need
to readjust calculations) Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Weir EL (ft) (select weir
elevation so that HGL1 339.16 339.16 339.16 339.16 339.16
equals aeration tanks HGL6)
HGL at Point 3, EGL3 
Weir EL  hle3 (ft) 339.30 339.33 339.35 339.36 339.38
Velocity head, HV  0
V  0) (ft)
(assume V3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at point 3, HGL3 
weir EL  hle3 (ft) 339.30 339.33 339.35 339.36 339.38

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.109

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)


Initial Operation Design Operation
Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

3. Point 3 to Point 4
Effluent troughs
Number of troughs, nt 10 10 10 10 10
Flow per trough, qt  qeff /nt 1.18 1.88 2.35 2.83 3.77
Trough slope, St (%) (select to
prevent solids settling) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Trough width, w6 (ft) 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6
Approximate trough length, Lt (ft) 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0 23.0
Change in trough EL, difEL4  St  Lt (ft) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
Critical depth, yc  (qt 2/(gw62)0.33 (ft) 0.26 0.35 0.41 0.46 0.56
Water depth at upstream end of trough
for free fall 0.41 0.57 0.67 0.76 0.93
from trough into final effluent channel
yu4  [2  (yc)2  (yc-(S  L/3))
L 2]0.5
 (2  S  L L/3) (ft)
Max water EL downstream of weir (occuring
at max, hour flow with one 338.83
tank out of service),
Elmax4  weir EL-0.33 ft
(see Point 3 for weirEL)
Trough bottom EL at upstream
end of trough, TbuEL4 ft 337.90 337.90 337.90 337.90 337.90
TbuEL4  ELmax4  yu for max hour
flow with one tank out of service
HGL at upstream end, HGL4u  TbuEL4
 yu4 (ft) 338.31 338.47 338.57 338.66 338.83
V u0
Velocity head, HV4
(assume V  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at upstream end,
EGL4u  HGL4u  HV4 V u (ft) 338.31 338.47 338.57 338.66 338.83
Trough bottom EL at
downstream end of trough 337.86 337.86 337.86 337.86 337.86
Tbd EL4  TbuEL4  dif EL4 (ft)
HGL at Point 4, HGL4  TbdEL4  yc (ft) 338.12 338.21 338.27 338.32 338.41
Velocity head, HV4
V d = Vc2/ 2g (ft) 0.39 0.54 0.63 0.71 0.87
EGL at upstream end, EGL4u 
HGL4u  HV4 V u, ft 338.51 338.75 338.90 339.03 339.28
4. Point 4 to Point 5
Effluent channel upstream
Max. water surface level at upstream end of
effluent channel,
ELmax5 = TbdEL4-0.33 (ft) 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53
HGL at Point 5, HGL5  ELmax5 (ft) 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53
V  0 (assume V  0) (ft)
Velocity head, HV5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL maximum at point 5,
EGL5m  HGL5m  HV5 V (ft) 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53 337.53
5. Point 5 to Point 6
Effluent channel downstream
Flow through channel, Qeff (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.110 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)


Initial Operation Design Operation
Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Channel slope, Sc (%) (select


to prevent solids settling) 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
Channel width, w6 (ft) 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8 9.8
Approximate channel length, Lch (ft) 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0 210.0
Change in channel EL, difEL6  Sc  Lch (ft) 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42 0.42
Critical depth, yc  (q2/(gw62)0.33 (ft) 0.75 1.02 1.18 1.61 1.61
Water depth at upstream end of channel, 0.94 1.41 1.69 2.43 2.43
yu6  [2  (yc)2  (yc  (S  L/3))2]0.5
 (2  S  L/3), ft
Channel bottom EL at upstream
end of channel, 335.10 335.10 335.10 335.10 335.10
cbuEL6  HGL5- maximum yu6 (ft)
HGL at upstream end of channel,
HGL5  cbuEL6  yu6 (ft) 336.04 336.51 336.79 337.53 337.53
V 0
Velocity head, HV5
(assume V  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at upstream end of channel,
EGL5  HGL5  HV5 V (ft) 336.04 336.51 336.79 337.53 337.53
Channel bottom EL at downstream end
of channel, 334.68 334.68 334.68 334.68 334.68
cbdEL6  cbuEL6  difEL6 (ft)
HGL at Point 6, HGL6  cbdEL6  yc (ft) 335.42 335.70 335.86 336.29 336.29
V  Vc2/2g (ft)
Velocity head, HV6 1.17 1.62 1.88 2.59 2.59
EGL at Point 6, EGL6  HGL6  HV6
V (ft) 336.60 337.31 337.74 338.88 338.88
6. At Point 7
Max. water EL downstream of
channel end free-fall 334.35 334.35 334.35 334.35 334.35
HGL at Point 7, HGL7  cbdEL6 
0.33 (ft) (This must be the same as
maximum elevation at Point 1 of
multi-media filter.)
Hydraulic calculations upstream
of control point
7. At Point 2
Final sedimentation tanks (Gould type)
Number of tanks in operation, nt 3 3 3 4 3
Flow per tank upstream of sludge
collection, qin (ft3/s) 15.54 28.25 35.31 45.91 61.21
Tank width, Wt (ft) 52.5 52.5 52.5 52.5 52.5
Tank length, Lt (ft) 393.7 393.7 393.7 393.7 393.7
Tank bottom elevation at influent end (ft) 325.4 325.4 325.4 325.4 325.4
Side water depth (ft) 13.92 13.95 13.97 13.98 14.01
Assume friction losses, Hlf2,f
through tank are negligible 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
EGL at Point 2, EGL2  EGL3  Hlf2
f (ft) 339.30 339.33 339.35 333.36 339.38
V  0 (assume V  0) (ft)
Velocity head, HV2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  EGL3  HV2V (ft) 339.30 339.33 339.35 333.36 339.38
8. Point 2 to Point 1

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.111

TABLE 22.11 (Continued)


Initial Operation Design Operation
Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Tank influent sluice gates


Height (ft) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3
Width, Ws (ft) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3
Area (ft2) 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8 10.8
Number of sluice gates per tank, Nsg 4 4 4 4 4
Flow per sluice gate,
qsg  qin /Nsg
/ , (ft3/s) 3.88 7.06 8.83 11.48 15.30
Upstream head over weir,
Du  (select so
Qsub  qsg  0) (ft) 0.67 1.02 1.19 1.43 1.76
Downstream head over weir,
Dd  (qsg/3.33/Ws')(2/3) (ft) 0.51 0.77 0.90 1.09 1.33
Effective sluice gate width, Ws'  3.2 3.1 3.1 3.0 3.0
Ws  (0.1)(2 contractions)(Dd) (ft)
Free fall flow, Qfree  3.34 
Ws'  Du (3/2) (ft3/s) 5.89 10.70 13.38 17.39 23.18
Submerged flow, Qsub  Qfree
(1  (Dd/ d/Du)3/2 )0.385 (ft3/s) 3.89 7.07 8.83 11.48 15.30
Difference, (Qsub  qsg), ft3/s 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Head difference between tank
and channel, Hl 1  Du  Dd (ft) 0.163 0.246 0.287 0.347 0.426
Top of sluice gate set elevation,
Els  HGL2  Dd (ft) 338.79 338.56 338.45 338.27 338.05
339.46
HGL at Point 1 (upstream of sluice gate),
HGL1  HGL2  Hll (ft) 339.46 339.58 339.63 339.71 339.81
Velocity head, HV1=0 (assume V  0) (m) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at point 1, EGL1   HV1 (m) 339.46 339.58 339.63 339.71 339.81
Maximum HGL1 (ft) 339.81
Max HGL1 should equal HGL
6 for aeration tank.

TABLE 22.12 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Aereation Tank System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01


(mgd) 23 37 46 73 73
RAS flow, % of average flow
(added downstream of 20 50 50 100 100
aeration tank influent sluice gates)
RAS flow, Qras  Q  RAS flow/100 (ft3/s) 11.30 28.25 35.31 70.63 70.63
2. Aeration tanks
Total of nunber of units 3 3 3 3 3
Number of units in operation 2 2 3 3 2
Number of units on standby 1 1 0 0 1

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.112 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Flow rate per aeration tank


in operation, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Flow rate per aeration tank in
operation including RAS 23.31 42.38 35.31 61.21 91.82
flow (downstream of influent
sluice gate), qras, (ft3/s)
Control point is located at Point 5
(aeration tank effluent weir).
3. At Point 6
Set maximum HGL6  effluent
weir elevation0.33 (ft) 339.79 339.79 339.79 337.79 339.79
Hydraulic calculations upstream
of control point
4. Point 6 to Point 5
Headloss over sharp-crested weir
Sharp-crested weir EL (ft) 340.12 340.12 340.12 340.12 340.12
Effluent channel bottom EL (ft) 330.28 330.28 330.28 330.28 330.28
Flow rate over weir, qras (ft3/s) 23.31 42.38 35.31 61.21 91.82
Length of weir (ft) 19.69 19.69 19.69 19.69 19.69
headloss, Hle5 
(q/3.33L)(2/3) (ft) 0.50 0.75 0.66 0.95 1.25
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
weir EL  Hle5 (ft) 340.63 340.87 340.79 341.08 341.37
V 
Velocity head, HV5
/ 5)2/2g (ft)
(gras/Wp/Hle 0.09 0.13 0.11 0.17 0.22
EGL at Point 5, EGL5 
HGL5  HV5 V (ft) 340.71 341.00 340.90 341.24 341.59
5. Point 5 to Point 4
Flow rate per aeration tank
in operation, qras (ft3/s) 23.31 42.38 35.31 61.21 91.82
Pass width, Wp (ft) 19.7 19.7 19.7 19.7 19.7
Tank length, Lt (ft) 196.9 196.9 196.9 196.9 196.9
Tank bottom elevation, ELtb 
avg. day WSEL  19.69 (ft) 320.94 320.94 320.94 320.94 320.94
Water depth in tank at design
average flow, Dt (ft) 19.69 19.94 19.85 20.14 20.44
Number of passes per tank, Np 5 5 5 5 5
Effective length of tank, L  Lt  Np (ft) 984.3 984.3 984.3 984.3 984.3
Velocity, V
V4 (ft/s) 0.06 0.11 0.09 0.15 0.23
Critical depth, yc 
/ /Wp2 ))(0.333) (ft)
((q2/g 0.35 0.52 0.46 0.67 0.88
Friction headloss thruogh
aeration tank channel
Manning's n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Hydraulic radius, R 
(Dt  Wp)/(2  Dt  Wp) (ft) 6.56 6.59 6.58 6.61 6.64
Headloss, Hlf4f  (V4 V  n/

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.113

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1.486  R (2/3))2  L (ft) 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.0003


Fitting headloss through a 90 bend
Fitting headloss coefficient Kbend  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Number of bends, Nb 8 8 8 8 8
Headloss, Hlb4  Kbend 
V 2/2g (ft)
V4 0.0004 0.0014 0.0010 0.0030 0.0065
Velocity head, Hvsd
(see below at Point 3) 0.74 1.03 0.90 1.28 1.76
RAS flow, % of average flow
EGL at Point 4, EGL4 
EGL5  Hlf4 f  Hvsd (ft) 341.45 342.03 341.81 342.53 343.35
Velocity head, Hvsd (see below at point 3) 0.74 1.03 0.90 1.28 1.76
HGL at point 4, HGL4  EGL4  HV4 (ft) 340.71 341.00 340.90 341.25 341.60
6. Point 4 to Point 3
Headloss over aeration tank influent
sluice gates
Sluice gate width, Ws (ft) 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
Sluice gate heigth (ft) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3
Flow per sluice gate, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.50
Upstream head over weir,
Du  (select so Zsub  q  0) (ft) 1.71 2.39 2.10 2.97 4.07
Downstream head over weir,
Dd  (q/3.33/Ws')(2/3) (ft) 1.29 1.82 1.59 2.25 3.08
Effective sluice gate width, Ws' 
Ws  (0.33)(2 contractions)(Du) (ft) 3.60 3.46 3.52 3.34 3.12
Free fall flow, Qfree 
3.34  Ws'Du (3/2) (ft3/s) 26.75 42.80 35.67 57.07 85.61
Submerged flow, Qsub  Qfree
(1-(Dd/
d/Du)0.385 (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.54 37.67 56.51
Difference, (Qsub  q), ft3/s (should de zero) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Head difference between tank
and channel, Hl4  Du  Dd (ft) 0.41 0.58 0.51 0.72 0.98
Velocity head downstream of sluice
gate, HVsd  (q/ Ws'/Dd / )2/2g, 0.22 0.31 0.28 0.39 0.53
Velocity head upstream of sluice
gate, HVsu  (q/ Ws'/Du / )2/2g (ft) 0.13 0.18 0.16 0.22 0.31
Top of sluice gate elevation,
Els  HGL4  Dd (ft) 339.42 339.19 339.31 339.00 338.51
HGL upstream of sluice gate,
HGLsu  HGL4  Hl4 (ft) 341.13 341.58 341.41 341.96 342.58
EGL upstream of sluice gate,
EGLsu  HGLsu  HVsu (ft) 341.25 341.76 341.57 342.19 342.89
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #3
Average length of influent
channel per tank, L3 103.3 103.3 103.3 103.3 103.3
 Np  Wp  3 tanks1/2 (ft)
Influent channel width, W
W3 (ft) 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1 13.1

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.114 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Manning's n for concrete channel 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013


Influent channel bottom elevation,
Elb  ave.EGLsu  9.84 (ft) 331.7 331.7 331.7 331.7 331.7
Water depth in influent channel,
h3  HGLs  Elb (ft) 9.40 9.86 9.68 10.24 10.86
Hydraulic radius, R 
(h3  w3)/(2  h3  w3) (ft) 3.86 3.94 3.91 4.00 4.09
Velocity, V3 V  q/w3/h3 (ft/s) 0.14 0.22 0.19 0.28 0.40
Headloss, Hlf3 f  (V3
V  n/1.486 
R (2/3) )2  L3 (ft) 0.0000 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.0002
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #2
Flow rate, q2  2  q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 47.09 75.34 113.01
Velocity, V2 V  q/w2/h2 (ft/s) 0.29 0.44 0.37 0.56 0.79
Headloss, Hlf2  (V2  n/1.486 
R(2/3) )2  L3, m 0.0001 0.0002 0.00020. 0004 0.0008
Friction headloss through influent
channel to tank #1
Flow rate, q1  3  q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Velocity, V1  q/w1/h1 (ft/s) 0.29 0.44 0.56 0.84 0.79
Headloss, Hlf1 f  (V1  n/1.486 
R(2/3))2  L3 (ft) 0.0001 0.0002 0.0004 0.0009 0.0008
HGL at Point 3, HGL3 
HGLs  Hlf3 f  Hlf2
f  Hlf1
f (ft) 341.13 341.58 341.41 341.97 342.58
7. Point 3 to Point 2
Headloss through sluice gate
Sluice gate headloss coefficient
Kgate  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
RAS flow, % of average flow (added
downstream of 20 50 50 100 100
aeration tank influent sluice gates)
RAS flow, Qras  Q  RAS flow/100, cfs 11.30 28.25 35.31 70.63 70.63
Sluice gate width, W
W2 (ft) 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91
Sluice gate heigth, Hg (ft) 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91
Channel water depth, Dc (ft) 9.40 9.86 9.69 10.24 10.86
Gate opening depth, Hg or
Dc whichever is smaller (ft) 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91 5.91
Velocity through sluice
V  Q/W2
gate, V5 W (ft/s) 1.01 1.62 2.03 3.24 3.24
Headloss, Hls2  Kgate
 V5
V 2/2g (ft) 0.0159 0.0408 0.0637 0.1630 0.1630
HGL at point 2, HGL2  HGL3  Hls2 (ft) 341.14 341.62 341.47 342.13 342.75
8. Point 2 to Point1
Allowance
Exit headloss from primary sed, tank
effluent pipe to aeration tank
influent channel
Primary effluent pipe diameter, Dp (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
All PST effluent flow, Q 9 (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.115

TABLE 22.12 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Velocity, V1 (ft/s) 1.04 1.67 2.09 3.34 3.34


Exit headloss coefficient Kexit  1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Exit headloss, hle1 
/  Kexit (ft)
(V12)/2/g 0.0169 0.0434 0.0677 0.1734 0.1734
Friction headloss through PST
effluent pipe section 2
Flow per pipe, Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Pipe diameter, Dp2 (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
Velocity, V12 (ft/s) 1.04 1.67 2.09 3.34 3.34
HazenWilliams coefficient, Cp 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Hydraulic radius, Rp2  Dp2/4 (ft) 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64 1.64
Length of pipe, Lp2 (ft) 164.04 164.04 164.04 164.04 164.04
Slope, Sp2  [v12/(1.318  Cp 
Rp2(0.63))](1/0.54) (%) 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0004 0.0004
Headloss, hlf2 f  Lp2  Sp2 (ft) 0.0084 0.0202 0.0305 0.0728 0.0728
Friction headloss through PST
effluent pipe section 1
Flow per pipe, q (ft3/s) 17.66 28.25 23.66 37.79 56.50
Pipr diameter, Dp1 (ft) 4.92 4.92 4.92 4.92 4.92
Velocity, V11 (ft/s) 0.93 1.49 1.24 1.99 2.97
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00 120.00
Hydraulic radius, Rp1  Dp1/4 (ft) 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23 1.23
Length of pipe, Lp1 (ft) 164.04 164.04 164.04 164.04 164.04
Slope, Sp1  [v11/(1.318  Cp 
Rp1(0.63))](1/0.54) (%) 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0005
Headloss, hlf1 f  Lp1  Sp1 (ft) 0.0095 0.0227 0.0163 0.0389 0.0819
Pipe entrance head loss
Ke 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Head loss, hen1  Ke  V112/2g (ft) 0.0067 0.0171 0.0120 0.0306 0.0685
HGL at upstream of PST
effluent pipe, HGL1  341.18 341.73 341.60 342.44 343.14
HGL2  hle1  hlf2f  hlf1
f  hen1 (ft)
HGL7 of PST must be maximum
of HGL1 (ft) 343.14 343.14 343.14 343.14 343.14

TABLE 22.13 Example Hydraulic Calculations of a Typical Multimedia Filter System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.3 56.5 70.6 113.0 113.0


(mgd) 23 37 46 73 73
2. Multimedia filters
Total number of units 6 6 6 6 6
Number of units in operation 4 5 5 6 5
Number of units on standby 2 1 1 0 1
Flow rate per operating
multimedia filter, q (ft3/s) 8.83 11.30 14.13 18.83 22.60

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.116 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Hydraulic calculations at
filter effluent
3. At Point 7
Max HGL in filtered water
storage tank, HGL7 (ft) 323.72 323.72 323.72 323.72 323.72
Velocity in storage tank, V
V7 (ft/s) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Max EGL in storage tank,
EGL7  HGL7  V7 V 2/2g (ft) 323.72 323.72 323.72 323.72 323.72
4. At Point 6
Filtered water effluent channel weir
Sharp-crested weir EL,
Wel6  HGL7  0.33 (ft) 324.05 324.05 324.05 324.05 324.05
Flow rate over weir  Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Length of weir (ft) 22.97 22.97 22.97 22.97 22.97
Headloss, Hlw6  (q/3.33L)(2/3) (ft) 0.60 0.82 0.95 1.30 1.30
HGL at Point 6, HGL6 
Wel6  Hlw6 (ft) 324.65 324.87 325.00 325.35 325.35
Velocity in weir box, V
V6, m
(assume V  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
EGL at Point 6, EGL6 
HGL6  V6 2/2g (ft) 324.65 324.87 325.00 325.35 325.35
5. Point 6 to Point 5
Loss through effluent concrete condiut
Flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Width of condiut, Wc (ft) 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84 9.84
Depth of condiut, Dc (ft) 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56 6.56
Length of condiut, Lc (ft) 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81 32.81
Velocity, Vc (ft/s) 0.55 0.87 1.09 1.75 1.75
Hydraulic radius,
R  Wc  Dc/2/(Wc  Dc) (ft) 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.97
Manning's n 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013
Headloss, Hlc5  (Vc  n/1.486 
R(2/3) )2  Lc (ft) 0.0003 0.0008 0.0012 0.0031 0.0031
Exit loss from pipe to concrete conduit
Effluent pipe diameter, Dp (ft) 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.3
Pipe flow (for each filter) (ft3/s) 8.83 11.30 14.13 18.83 22.60
Velocity, Vp (ft/s) 1.04 1.34 1.67 2.23 2.67
Hle5  Vp 2/2g for sharp
concrete outlet (ft) 0.0170 0.0278 0.0434 0.0772 0.1111
EGL at Point 5, EGL5 
EGL6  Hlc5  Hle6 (ft) 324.66 324.89 325.04 325.43 325.46
Velocity head at Point 5,
V  Vp2/2g (ft)
HV5 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.08 0.11
HGL at Point 5, HGL5 
EGL5  HV5 V (ft) 324.65 324.87 325.00 325.35 325.35
6. Point 5 to Point 4
Filter effluent pipe loss
Pipe diameter, Dp (ft) 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.117

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Max flow through filter


effluent pipe  q (ft3/s) 8.83 11.30 14.13 18.83 22.60
Velocity of flow through
pipe, Vp (ft/s) 1.29 1.65 2.06 2.75 3.30
Hazen-Williams coefficient, Cp 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp/4 (ft) 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Length of pipe, Lp (ft) 49.21 49.21 49.21 49.21 49.21
Slope, Sp  [Vp/(1.318  Cp 
Rp0.63)](1/0.54) (%) 0.0193 0.0305 0.0461 0.0786 0.1102
Head loss, Hlf4 f  Lp  Sp (ft) 0.0095 0.0150 0.0227 0.0387 0.0542
Headloss through butterfly valve
Kvalve (fully open) 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
Valve diameter (ft) 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95 2.95
Headloss, hval4  Kvalve  (Vp2/2g) (ft) 0.0078 0.0127 0.0198 0.0353 0.0508
Flow rate controller
Venturi throat-to-inlet ration
for long tube, Krate 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20 1.20
Inlet velocity, Vi V  Vp (ft/s) 1.04 1.34 1.67 2.23 2.67
Headloss, hrate  Krate  (Vi 2/2g) (ft) 0.0203 0.0333 0.0521 0.0926 0.1333
(minimum headloss when control
valve is fully open)
Pipe entrance loss
Kent 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hlent  Kent  (Vp2/2g) (ft) 0.0085 0.0139 0.0217 0.0386 0.0555
EGL at Point 4, EGL4  EGL5 
f  Hval4  Hrate  Hlent (ft)
Hlf4 324.71 324.97 325.16 325.63 325.75
V 
Velocity head, HV4
V 2/2g, (assume V  0) (ft)
V4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at Point 4, HGL4 
EGL4  HV4 V (ft) 324.71 324.97 325.16 325.63 325.75
7. Point 4 to Point3
Dirty filter head requirement,
Hldf,
f (ft) (assumed) 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2
(consult with filter manufacturer)
Dirty filter HGL, HGLdf 
HGL4  Hldf (ft) 332.91 33.17 333.36 333.83 333.96
Velocity head, HV3V 0
(assume V3 V  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Dirty filter HGL, HGLdf 
EGLdf  HV3 V (ft) 332.91 33.17 333.36 333.83 333.96
Clean filter headloss
Filter bed area (ft2) 1722 1722 1722 1722 1722
Flow per filter, q (ft3/s) 8.83 11.30 14.13 18.83 22.60
Filter rate, qfilt, (ft3/ min/ft2) 0.308 0.394 0.492 0.656 0.787
Media depth, Dm (ft) 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28
Effective media size, Md (in) 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Headloss through filter,
Hlf  2.32 ft loss per
(ft3/ min/ft2)(consultant with
manufacturer) 0.7136 0.9134 1.1417 1.5223 1.8268

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.118 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.13 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Entrance headloss through


underdrain flume, Hlu  0.45 ft lossper
(ft3/ min/ft2) (ft)(consult with 0.1384 0.1772 0.2215 0.2953 0.3543
filter manufacturer)
Clean filter EGL, EGLcf 
EGL4  Hlf+ f Hlu (ft) 325.56 326.06 326.52 327.45 327.94
Velocity head, HV3V  0 (m)
(assume V3V  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Clean filter HGL, HGLcf 
EGLcf  HV3 V (ft) 325.56 326.06 326.52 327.45 327.94
EGL requierd at Point 3,
EGL3  EGLdf (ft) 332.91 33.17 333.36 333.83 333.96
HGL requierd at Point 3,
HGL3  HGLdf (ft) 332.91 33.17 333.36 333.83 333.96
(Head requierd for dirty filter controls)
8. Point 3 to Point 2
Filter inlet discharge loss
Keff 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Flow rate, q (ft3/s) 8.83 11.30 14.13 18.83 22.60
Pipe diameter, Dp2 (ft) 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Velocity, Vp2 (ft/s) 1.29 1.65 2.06 2.75 3.30
2
headloss, Hld2  Keff  (Vp2 /2g) (ft) 0.0258 0.0423 0.0661 0.1176 0.1693
EGLat Point 2, EGL2  EGL3  Hld2 (ft) 332.94 333.21 333.43 333.95 333.13
V  Vp22/g
Velocity head, HV2 / (ft) 0.03 0.04 0.07 0.12 0.17
HGL at Point 2
HGL2  EGL2  HV2 V (ft) 332.91 333.17 333.36 333.83 333.96
9. Point 2 to Point 1
Head loss through butterfly valve
Kval (fully open) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
Headloss, Hlv1  Kval  (Vp2 2/2g) 0.0078 0.0127 0.0198 0.0353 1.0508
Headloss through inlet pipe
Length of pipe, Lp1 (ft) 65.6 65.6 65.6 65.6 65.6
Hazen-Williams coefficient (Cp) 120 120 120 120 120
Hydraulic radius, Rp  Dp2/4 (ft) 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.74
Headloss, Hlf1f  (Vp2/(1.318  Cp
 Rp1.63))(1/0.54)  Lp (ft) 0.0127 0.0200 0.0303 0.0516 0.0723
Headloss through entrance to pipe
Kent 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50
Headloss, Hlent  Kent  Vp 2/2g (ft) 0.0129 0.0212 0.0331 0.0588 0.0847
EGL at Point 1, EGL1 
EGL2  Hlv1  Hlf  Hlent (ft) 332.97 333.27 333.51 334.10 334.33
Velocity head, HV1  0
(assume V1  0) (ft) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
HGL at point 1, HGL  EGL1  HV1 (ft) 332.97 333.27 333.51 334.10 334.33
Minimum required control
HGL at Point 1 (ft) 334.33 334.33 334.33 334.33 334.33
(max. HGL1 must equal HGL7
of final sedimentation tank)

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

Water and Wastewater Treatment Plant Hydraulics 22.119

TABLE 22.14 Example Hydraulic Calculation of a Typical Cascade Aeration System

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

1. Wastewater flow rate, Q (ft3/s) 35.3 56.5 70.6 113.0 113.0


(mgd) 23 37 46 73 73
2. Cascade aerator
Total number of units 1 1 1 1 1
Flow rate through aerator, Q (ft3/s) 35.31 56.50 70.63 113.01 113.01
Optimal flow rate per ft width
over step, q (ft2/s) 0.7029 0.7029 0.7029 0.7029 0.7029
DO concentration of postaeration
influent, Co (mg/L) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Desired DO concentration of postaeration 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
effluent, Cu (mg/l)
Calculation of aerator dimensions with
with predetermined weir length
3. Weir length, W (ft) 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4 16.4
Flow over weir, q  Q/W (ft3/s/ft) 2.15 3.44 4.31 6.89 6.89
Critical depth at upstream step
edge, hc  (q2/g)1/3 (ft) 0.524 0.717 0.832 1.138 1.138
Optimal fall height of nappe, h (ft) 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.9
Length of downstream bubble cushion, Lo
 0.0629(h0.134)(q0.666) (ft) 16.93 23.16 26.87 36.74 36.74
Length of downstream receiving
channel, L  0.8Lo (ft) 13.55 18.53 21.49 29.39 29.39
Optimal tailwater depth,
H'  0.236 h, ft for h 3.9 ft 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93
Deficit ratio log at 68 F, Inr68
 1.86(h1.31)(q0.363)(H
H0.31) 0.42 0.36 0.33 0.28 0.28
Deficit ratio, r20 1.53 1.43 1.39 1.32 1.32
Calculate concentration of dissolved
oxygen downstream of step. If
concentration is less than desired
concentration, add another step
and again calculate DO downstream
concentration. Continue adding steps
until the desired DO oncentration
is achieved.
Select cascade aerator dimension
corresponding to those calculated
for average flow.
4. Calculation of number steps to
obtain desired DO
Desired DO concentration at
average flow, Cu (mg/L) 5.00
Step 1 effluent DO, C1 
9.07(1 (1/r20))  Co/r20) (mg/L) 3.13 2.73 2.55 2.20 2.20
Step 2 effluent DO, C2 
9.07  (1 (1/r20))  Co/r20) (mg/L) 4.80 4.51 4.38 4.13 4.13

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.
WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT HYDRAULICS

22.120 Chapter Twenty-Two

TABLE 22.14 (Continued)

Initial Operation Design Operation


Parameter Min Day Avg Day Avg Day Max Hour Peak

Step 3 effluent DO, C3  9.07 


(1 (1/r20))  Co/r20) (mg/L) 6.00 5.79 5.70 5.52 5.52
In this example, the desired downstream
DO concentration for average flow is
achieved after three steps.
5. Calculation of HGL at each step
Head loss from filtered water storage
tank to point 1 (ft) 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28 3.28
Cascade fall height, h (ft) 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94 3.94
HGL at Point 1, HGL1 (ft) 319.98 319.98 319.98 319.98 319.98
HGL at Point 2, HGL2  HGL1  h (ft) 316.04 316.04 316.04 316.04 316.04
HGL at Point 3, HGL3  HGL2  h (ft) 312.11 312.11 312.11 312.11 312.11
HGL at Point 4, HGL4  HGL3  h (ft) 308.17 308.17 308.17 308.17 308.17

Downloaded from Digital Engineering Library @ McGraw-Hill (www.digitalengineeringlibrary.com)


Copyright 2004 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved.
Any use is subject to the Terms of Use as given at the website.