CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.

1 GENERAL Vaigai River originates from periyar plateau, flows through kambam valley, varshanadu hills and empties in Palk Strait is 258km long. Madurai is the largest city in this region and is situated on the bank of the river. In the recent years Vaigai is mostly polluted in Madurai. This is mainly due to disposal of untreated sewage and fabric dying on banks. This is because of inefficiency in sewage treatment in the city. The surface water is polluted completely and the ground water is also getting affected. Hence the study is done in the sewage pipelines, pumping station and sewage treatment plant. Then the treated water can be left into the river Vaigai at various points of the river and also to its nearby tributaries. The project serves as solution for the two major problems in the city- problem in sewage treatment plant and pollution in the river. Thereby making Madurai as a pollution free prosperous city. Presently more than 85% of an estimated domestic wastewater generated in the country is being discharged into the environment without any treatment. STP based on tradition methods have been in operation since for a very long time. With the development of technology and instrumentation sophistications, the cost of treatment and space requirement for STPs has reduced drastically. The main objective of sewage treatment is to treat the sewage so that the disposal of the treated sewage can takes place in accordance with the rules set by legislative bodies without causing on adverse impact on the ecosystem of the receiving body. The objectives of sewage treatment will always include the 1

reduction of the concentration of the four most important constituents of sewage: suspended solids, nutrients, organic material and pathogenic organisms. The sewage treatment process includes primary treatment, secondary treatment and advanced treatment. The primary treatment includes screening, grit removal and sedimentation process. The secondary treatment reduces the BOD, COD, and harmful parameters. It can be obtained by any of the process like stabilization ponds, aerated lagoons, activated sludge process, trickling filters, up flow anaerobic sludge blanket (UASB), and anaerobic lagoons.

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT To make the river Vaigai and its tributaries pollution free by suggesting alternative.

1.3 CONSTITUENTS OF SEWAGE The constituents making up the sewage water are solid matter, faeces, and a liquid matter, and are essentially an organic compound like carbon, nitrogen, phosphorous, sulphur and hydrogen. Also present are fats, carbohydrates, enzymes, proteins, trace elements, pathogens and many different bacteria.

1.4 NECESSITY FOR TREATMENT It is necessary to treat human waste or excreta for many reasons, but the most important reason is to preserve health. Untreated human excrement contains a variety of pathogenic organisms, which include protozoa, bacteria, viruses and eggs of helminthes that are disease-causing organisms. The presence of these in the environment transmits various types of diseases. They could be: Water borne where pathogens are present in water supplies Soilbased where the excreted organism is spread through the soil Insect-vector borne where the pathogen is spread by insects that feed or breed in water e.g. flies and mosquitoes. 1.5 SEWAGE TREATMENT The term treatment means separation of solids and stabilization of pollutants. In turn stabilization means the degradation of organic matter until the point at which chemical or biological reactions stop. Treatment can also mean the removal of toxic or otherwise dangerous substances (for e.g. heavy metals or phosphorous) which are likely to distort sustainable biological cycles, even after stabilization of the organic matter. General Parameters to measure organic pollution are COD is said to be the most general parameter to measure organic pollution. COD describes how much oxygen is required to oxidize all organic and inorganic matter found in the wastewater sample. BOD describes what can be oxidized biologically, with the help of bacteria and is always a fraction of COD. Usually BOD is measured as BOD5 meaning that it describes the amount of oxygen consumed over a five-day measurement period. It is a direct measurement of the amount of oxygen consumed by organisms removing the organic matter in the waste. Suspended Solids describes how much of the 3

organic or inorganic matter is not dissolved in water and contains settleable solids that sink to the bottom in a short time and non-settleable suspended solids. It is an important parameter because Suspended Solids causes turbidity in the water causing clogging of filters etc. The mentioned parameters are measured in 'mg/l'. 1.6 ORGANISATION OF THE PROJECT The project is organized as follows Chapter 1 is the introduction of the project. Chapter 2 describes the related literature review of the project. Chapter 3 deals with the analysis of the data. The quantity of untreated sewage left into the lagoon is calculated. Chapter 4 describes the design of the mobile sewage treatment plant with different secondary and tertiary treatment process. Chapter 5 deals with cost analysis of the three schemes. The civil cost is accounted and the material used is fiber reinforced plastic. Chapter 6 describes the model made and its test report. Chapter 7 deals the results and discussions of the project. The suitable scheme is selected based on the size and civil cost. Chapter 8 derives the conclusion for the project. Chapter 9 presents the future studies of the project.

1.7 EXISTING SYSTEM The existing sewage treatment plant in Madurai is sequential batch reactor process. It is one of the advanced techniques but the drawback is the sewer piping connection all over the city. The monitoring of these pipelines is also tedious. 1.8 PROPOSED SYSTEM The proposed sewage treatment is a mobile unit hence the piping can be avoided. The untreated raw sewage disposed into the river will be treated at nearby space and the treated water can be left into river Vaigai at any point or to nearby agricultural land.

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 GENERAL The data is collected from the year 2001 to 2012 and it is summarized in this chapter. It includes the study of anaerobic co-digestion, effluent treatment plant, estimation of the construction of the treatment plant and kompogas. The data are collected from various sources such as reference books, journals, and conference papers. 2.2 SUMMARY OF LITERATURE REVIEW Antar Gamble Hall on the paper A comparative study of three biofilter types treating waste water produced in recirculating aquaculture studied the performance of the filters under aquatic condition by testing the water quality by recycling of water resource techniques. It also deals about the conservation of water resource by recycle techniques as natural resources are getting depleted. Nawghare, et al (2001) studied 60 ETP data and reported that the relationship between estimated constructions cost to appropriate capacity parameters for each of the various major units of effluent treatment plant. From the established relationship or cost functions in terms of volume of flow of wastewater, the initial capital investment and Operation & Maintenance costs of effluent treatment plants, or additions to existing Effluent treatment plants could be arrived at on the basis of these analyses.

HannesPartl on the Review of the KOMPOGAS Technology studied the applicability of the KOMPOGAS process to organic waste typically available in Australian metropolitan regions. The KOMPOGAS system is proven anaerobic digestion systems for converting organic waste materials into electricity and compost which is a renewable source of energy. Guoqiang Liu and Tim Canter on the paper Baffled Bioreactor for municipal wastewater treatment analyzed to treat the municipal waste water in pilot scale by baffled bioreactor technology which can be maintained at low cost. The baffle bioreactor technology can be applied in large scale as the sludge generated is comparatively lesser than other activated sludge process. Wei Wu on Anaerobic Co-digestion of Biomass for Methane Production studied about the production biogas from the biodegradable waste (sewage sludge). It can be used for two purposes alternative fuel and sludge disposal. Ho Wen Chen et al [2002] reported the comparative analysis of methods to represent uncertainty in estimating the cost of construction of wastewater treatment plants. The inherent uncertainties when making choice of the centralized treatment plant require more comprehensive evaluation. From the study, it was observed that the moderate economy of scale exists for both industrial and domestic wastewater. It was reported that the small communities do not benefit the economy of scale that are possible with the construction of wastewater management facilities for larger communities.

CHAPTER 3 STUDY AREA 3.1 GENERAL The study area is extended on the north bank of Vaigai River in the Maduraicity. It includes the Thathaneri, Aruldas Puram, Anna Nagar, Mundhiri Thoppu, Vilangudi and Surveyor Colony wards in the Madurai Corporation limit.

3.2 CURRENT STATUS IN THE MADURAICITY

3.2.1 Sewage problems in the city Due to the improper sewage pipe lining there was leak in the pipes and the sewage water entered into low lying areas. It created hygienic problems in and around Madurai.

Fig 3.1 Sewage stagnation 8

Fig 3.2 Sewage problems in channel

3.2.2 Pollution in river vaigai The sewage water, dying water are directly left into river vaigai without treatment hence the river is polluted.

Fig 3.3 Pollution in the river 9

3.2.3 Disposal Of Sewage Into The River Vaigai The untreated raw sewage is left into the river near the sandhapaetai pumping station.

Fig 3.4 Sewage disposal into the river

10

3.2.4 Sewage collection detail for Sakkimangalam sewage treatment plant

Fig 3.5Sewage piping layout for Sakkimangalam

11

3.3 QUANTITY OF SEWAGE IN SOUTH BANK OF VAIGAI RIVER The quantity of sewage disposed in the south bank of river vaigai is given in the table.3.1. Table 3.1: Quantity of sewage in south bank of Vaigai River

DESCRIPTION

QUANTITY

Quantity pumped to Avaniapuram Sewage form 17 MLD

Overflow let into Chottathatti&Panaiyur Channel

25 MLD

TOTAL COLLECTION OF SEWAGE 42 MLD

12

3.4QUANTITY OF SEWAGE IN NORTH BANK OF VAIGAI RIVER The quantity of sewage disposed in the north bank of river vaigai is given in the table.3.2. Table 3.2: Quantity of sewage in north bank of Vaigai River

DESCRIPTION

Quantity

From MunthiriThoppu Drainage Block (including Thathaneri drainage block)

14.00 MLD.

Anna Nagar Drainage Block

3.70 MLD.

K.K. Nagar Drainage Block

1.30 MLD.

Total Sewage Collection

19.00 MLD.

13

3.5 QUANTITY OF SEWAGE PUMPED TO

The quantity of sewage pumped is given in the table.3.3. Table 3.3: Quantity of sewage pumped

DESCRIPTION

Quantity

Sakkimangalam Sewage form

10.00 MLD.

Quantity of Sewage pumped to K.K. Nagar

Anna Nagar &

5.00 MLD.

Quantity of Sewage Over flowing

4.00 MLD.

14

CHAPTER 4 METHODOLOGY 4.1 GENERAL Thedescription of the treatment units and the process are included in this chapter.The three different schemes selected for the treatment of sewage are described in detail. 4.2SCHEME 1 The first scheme of sewage treatment consists of primary treatment, anaerobic lagoon and waste stabilization pond. Primary treatment includes screen chamber, grit channel, flash mixer, flocculator and primary settling tank (primary clarifier). The secondary treatment units are anaerobic lagoon and waste stabilization pond. 4.3SCHEME 2 The second scheme of sewage treatment consists of primary treatment and conventional activated sludge process. Primary treatment includes screen chamber, grit channel, flash mixer, flocculator and primary settling tank (primary clarifier). The Secondary treatment units are activated sludge process and secondary clarifier. 4.4SCHEME 3 The third scheme of sewage treatment consists of primary treatment, upflow anaerobic sludge blanket and waste stabilization pond. Primary treatment includes

15

screen chamber, grit channel, flash mixer, flocculator and primary settling tank (primary clarifier).

Sewage

Screen and Grit Chamber

PC

Anaerobic Lagoon

Waste Stabilization Pond

Treated Sewage

Fig 4.1 Treatment process flow diagram for scheme 1

Sewage

Screen and Grit Chamber

PC

Activated sludge process

SC

Treated Sewage

Fig 4.2Treatment process flow diagram for scheme 2

16

Sewage

Screen and Grit Chamber

PC

UASB

Waste Stabilization Pond

Treated Sewage

Fig 4.3Treatment process flow diagram for scheme 3 4.5DESCRIPTION OF TREATMENT UNITS 4.5.1 Screening The purpose of screening is to remove large solids, such as rags, cans, rocks, branches, leaves, roots, etc., from the flow before the flow moves on to downstream processes. A bar screen traps debris as wastewater influent passes through. Typically, a bar screen consists of a series of parallel, evenly spaced bars or a perforated screen placed in a channel. 4.5.2 Grit Removal The purpose of grit removal is to remove the heavy inorganic solids that could cause excessive mechanical wear. Grit is heavier than inorganic solids and includes, sand, gravel, clay, egg shells, coffee grounds, metal filings, seeds, and other similar materials. All the processes are based on the fact that grit is heavier than the organic solids, which should be kept in suspension for treatment in following processes. Grit removal may be accomplished in grit chambers or by the centrifugal separation

17

of sludge. Processes use gravity and velocity, aeration, or centrifugal force to separate the solids from the wastewater. 4.5.3 Pre aeration In the pre aeration process (diffused or mechanical), wastewater is aerated to achieve and maintain an aerobic state (to freshen septic wastes), strip off hydrogen sulfide (to reduce odors and corrosion), agitate solids (to release trapped gases and improve solids separation and settling), and to reduce BOD. All of this can be accomplished by aerating the wastewater for 10 to 30 min. To reduce BOD, pre aeration must be conducted from 45 to 60 min. 4.5.4 Chemical Addition Chemical addition is made (either via dry chemical metering or solution feed metering) to the waste stream to improve settling, reduce odors, neutralize acids or bases, reduce corrosion, reduce BOD, improve solids and grease removal, reduce loading on the plant, add or remove nutrients, add organisms, and aid subsequent downstream processes. The particular chemical and amount used depends on the desired result. Chemicals must be added at a point where sufficient mixing will occur to obtain maximum benefit. Chemicals typically used in wastewater treatment include chlorine, peroxide, acids and bases, miner salts (ferric chloride, alum, etc.), and bio additives and enzymes. 4.5.5 Primary clarifier The sewage wastewater enters the primary clarifier (sedimentation basins), which remove suspended solids. The primary clarifiers remove about 60 to 70% of the total suspended solids and about 30 to 40% of the biochemical oxygen demand in the incoming sewage. Biochemical Oxygen Demand is a measure of the 18

amount of oxygen needed to bio - chemically degrade the organic matter in the sewage wastewater. Primary treatment does not remove colloidal or dissolved solids. 4.5.6 Anaerobic Lagoon Anaerobic lagoons can remove up to 85% of the BOD5 within ten days. Unfortunately, an anaerobic condition leads to release of methane and hydrogen sulfide. Consequently, anaerobic lagoons are considered significant air polluters and came odour problems. Commonly anaerobic lagoons are 2-5 m deep and receive high organic loads equivalent to 350 g BOD5/m3 d. These high organic loads produce strict anaerobic conditions (no dissolved oxygen) throughout the lagoon. 4.5.7 Waste Stabilization Pond Waste water stabilization pond technology is one of the most important natural methods for wastewater treatment. Waste stabilization ponds are mainly shallow man-made basins comprising a single or several series of facultative or maturation ponds. In the facultative pond most of the BOD5 is removed through the coordinated activity of algae and heterotrophic bacteria. The facultative ponds are designed for BOD removal. The main function of the tertiary treatment in the maturation pond is the removal of pathogens and nutrients (especially nitrogen). Waste stabilization pond technology is the most cost-effective wastewater treatment technology for the removal of pathogenic micro-organisms. Once the construction of the system has been completed it should be checked that all ponds are free of vegetation. This is very important if the waste stabilization pond is not waterproof. The advantages of WSP systems are, simple to construct, simple to operate and maintain, low cost and high efficiency. 19

4.5.8Activated sludge process Activated Sludge is a multi-chamber reactor unit that makes use of aerobic microorganisms to degrade organics in wastewater and to produce a high-quality effluent. To maintain aerobic conditions and to the keep the active biomass suspended, a constant and well-timed supply of oxygen is required. Activated sludge systems normally make use of bar screens and/or comminutors, grit chambers, primary settling tanks, secondary settling tanks, and digesters, which are operated in the same manner as those of trickling filter systems. They differ from the trickling filter systems in that they make use of an aeration tank instead of a trickling filter. Different configurations of the Activated Sludge process can be employed to ensure that the wastewater is mixed and aerated (with either air or pure oxygen) in an aeration tank. The microorganisms oxidize the organic carbon in the wastewater to produce new cells, carbon dioxide and water. Although aerobic bacteria are the most common organisms, aerobic, anaerobic, and/or nitrifying bacteria along with higher organisms can be present. The exact composition depends on the reactor design, environment, and wastewater characteristics. During aeration and mixing, the bacteria form small clusters, or flocs. When the aeration stops, the mixture is transferred to a secondary clarifier where the flocs are allowed to settle out and the effluent moves on for further treatment or discharge. The sludge is then recycled back to the aeration tank, where the process is repeated. Compressed air is continually diffused into the sewage as it flows through the aeration tank. This provides both a source of oxygen for the aerobic bacterial floc that forms in the tank and the turbulence necessary to bring the waste and the bacteria into contact. Aerobic bacteria attack the dissolved and finely divided 20

suspended solids not removed by primary sedimentation. Some of the floc is removed with the sewage that flows out of the aeration tank and carried into the secondary settling tank. Here the floc settles to the bottom of the tank, and is later pumped back into the aeration tank. To achieve specific effluent goals for BOD, nitrogen and phosphorus, different adaptations and modifications have been made to the basic Activated Sludge design. Aerobic conditions, nutrient-specific organisms (especially for phosphorus), recycle design and carbon dosing, among others, have successfully allowed Activated Sludge processes to achieve high treatment efficiencies. 4.5.9 Secondary clarifier There are minor differences between primary and secondary clarifiers. Secondary clarifiers may not have skimming equipment. The sludge removal equipment may also be different in activated sludge processes. Secondary sludges have lower solids concentrations. Trickling filter sludge will be 1.5-2.0% solids and return activated sludge will be about 0.5-0.8% solids. The solids inventory in activated sludge clarifiers can impact SVI and MLSS results and must be taken into account. When sludge sits in the secondary clarifier too long, denitrification can occur. Nitrogen gas will be released, causing the same rising sludge problems that occur in primary clarifiers. 4.5.10 Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB) reactor has been successfully used to treat variety of industrial as well as domestic wastewaters. The UASB reactor can be briefly described as a system in which substrate passes first through an expanded sludge bed containing a high concentration of biomass. The sludge in the reactor may exist in granular or flocculent form, but the granular sludge offers 21

advantages over flocculent sludge. Most of the substrate removal takes place in sludge bed. The remaining portion of the substrate passes through a less dense biomass, called the sludge blanket. The design of the UASB reactor is carried out taking in to consideration the applicable loading rates, such as, hydraulic loading rate considering limitations of superficial liquid upflow velocity and Organic Loading Rate (OLR). 4.6 DESIGN 4.6.1 Scheme 1 Inlet Chamber Flow Retention time Volume of chamber = 0.1 MLD =30s = 100 x 30/ 24 x 60 x 60 = 0.035 m Assume liquid depth Surface area = 1.5m = 0.035/1.5 =0.0233m Size of 1 unit is 0.5m x 0.47m x 1.5m Bar Screen Peak flow = (0.1x 106)/ (10 x 24 x 60 x 60) = 0.02 m/s 22

Assume velocity of flow via opening = 0.9 m/s Depth of flow Area of opening in bar screen = 0.5m = 0.02/0.9 = 0.03 m Clear width of opening via screen = 0.06 m Provide 6 clear spacing each of 10mm No. of bars Width of rectangular bar =7 = 10mm = 0.03/0.5

Total width of screen chamber = 0.15m Length of the chamber Grit Channel Vs = 0.018m/s = 1555.2 m3/ m2/day Q/A = 1027.4 m3 /m/day = 1.5m

Plan area of grit chamber = (Q/(Q/A)) = (106/1027.4*103) = 1 m2

Let Length

= 1.5m 23

Breadth Depth Primary Clarifier Flow rate Surface loading rate Detention time required Area required

= 0.7m = 1m

= 100 m3/day = 30 m3/ m2 /day = 4 hrs. = 100/30 = 3.34 m2

Depth Volume Diameter of the primary clarifier Size 2.1 m diameter & 2 m depth Effluent BOD Anaerobic Lagoon Retention time

= 2m = 6.68 m3 = 2.1 m

= 177mg/l

= 5 days

Volume

= 100 x 5 = 500 m3

Liquid Depth 24

= 4m

Length Breadth Depth Effluent BOD Waste Stabilization Pond No. of Pond Flow Detention time Depth Qa

= 10 m =3m = 3.3 m = 90mg/l

= 2 No = 100 m3/day = 4 days = 3.5m = Li / Xv = 1 / 90 = 1 day

Volume of anaerobic pond

= 1000 / 1 = 1000 m3

Assuming depth of pond is 3.5 m Area Length Breadth = 28.57 m2 = 10m = 12.5 m

25

Effluent

= 0.3 x 90 = 27 mg/l

Facultative Pond Af = 10 Li Q / S = 10 x 27 x 100 350 = 77, 15 m2 Depth f = 1.5m = 2 Af x D 2 Qi x 0.001 Afe Adopt minimum retention period of 4 days Length Breadth = 11m =7m

Cumulative BOD removal is 90% Effluent BOD = 0.1 x 90 = 9mg / l < 20mg / l Thus the effluent is fit to discharge into river.

26

4.6.2 Scheme -2 Conventional Activated Sludge Process Flow BOD inlet Assume BOD removal efficiency F.M Ratio MLSS MLVSS = 100 m3 /day = 177 mg/l = 90% = 0.3 = 3000 mg/l = 0.8 x 3000 = 2400 mg/l Volume = 8.34 x SO x QO x 1000 V. L = 8.34 x 177 x 0.0264x 1000 30 = 1299 ft3 = 36 m3 Hydraulic Retention time = V x 24 Q = 36 x 24/ 100 = 8.64 hours

27

Liquid Depth Area Length Breadth BOD effluent Secondary Clarifier No. of units Flow Surface loading rate Surface area Diameter Assuming Water depth Volume BOD Removal Effluent BOD =1

= 3.5 m = 10.29 m3 = 3.5 m = 2.9 m = 177 mg/l

= 100 m3/day = 25 m3 / m2 /day = 4 m3 = 2.3 m = 2.5 m = 10 m3 = 40% = 10.62 mg /l < 20mg/l

It is safe to dispose the effluent water into river.

28

4.6.3 Scheme 3 Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Flow Influent BOD VSS BOD removal VSS produced in BOD removal = 1000 m3 / day = 177 mg/l = 67 mg/l = 85% = 14.16 mg/l = 8 hrs = 0.5 m/hr = 100 x 8 24 = 33.33 m3 Assume depth Area Length Breadth Effluent BOD = 3m = 11.11 m2 = 4.5 m = 2.5m = 26.44 mg/l

Hydraulic retention time in Average flow Upflow velocity Volume of tank

29

Waste Stabilization Pond No. of Pond Flow Detention time Depth Qa =2 = 100 m3/day = 4 days = 3.5m = Li / Xv = 1 / 90 = 1 day

Volume of anaerobic pond

= 1000 / 1 = 1000 m3

Assuming depth of pond is 3.5 m Area Length Breadth Effluent = 28.57 m2 = 10m = 12.5 m = 0.3 x 90 = 27 mg/l

30

Facultative Pond Af = 10 Li Q / s = 10 x 27 x 100 350 = 77, 15 m2 Depth f = 1.5m = 2 Af x D 2 Qi x 0.001x Afe Adopt min retention period of 4 days Length Breadth Cumulative BOD removal is 90% Effluent BOD = 0.1 x 90 = 9mg/l < 20mg/l Thus the effluent is fit to discharge into river. The sizes for various treatment units are arrived for the three schemes and the same is given in Table.4.1, Table.4.2, and Table.4.3 respectively. = 11m =7m

31

Table 4.1 Sizes of treatment units in scheme 1 S.No Treatment units 1 Inlet chamber No. of Units 1 Design Criteria Size of units for scheme 1

Retention time = 30 sec 0.5 m x 0.5 m x 1.5 m Velocity = 0.9 m/sec Spacing = 10 mm mm 1.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m

Manual Bar Screen

Retention Time = 2 min Retention Time = 4hr Surface loading rate = 40 m3/m2/d

Grit Channel Dosing Tanks

Size of particle removed = 0.15 mm

1 m x 0.7 m x 1 m

0.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m 2 Alum dosage = 400 mg/l 0.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m Lime dosage = 200 mg/l

Alum 2 Lime

Flash Mixer

Retention time = 2 min Retention time = 4hrs

1 m x 1 m x 0.5 m

Primary Clarifier

Surface loading rate =40 m3/m2/day 40 m3/m2/day

2.1 m dia 2 m deep

32

Design loading = 300 g BOD/m3/day 8 Anaerobic Lagoon 1 Retention time = 5 days, Depth = 5 m

10 m x 3 m x 3.3 m

WSP

Retention time = 4 days in 10 m x 2.85 m x 3.5 each pond m Depth = 1.5 m 30 m x m x 1.7 m

Table 4.2: Sizes of treatment units in scheme 2

S.No Treatment units

No. of Units

Design Criteria

Size of units for scheme 2

Inlet chamber

Retention time = 30 sec

0.5 m x 0.5 m x 1.5 m

Manual Bar 2 Screen 1

Velocity = 0.9 m/sec Spacing = 10 mm

1.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m

Grit Channel

Size of particle removed 1 = 0.15 mm

1 m x 0.7 m x 1 m

33

Dosing Tanks

Alum 4 Lime

Alum dosage = 400 mg/l

0.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m

Lime dosage = 200 mg/l

0.7 m x 0.7 m x 0.5 m

Flash Mixer

Retention time = 2 min 1 m x 1 m x 0.5 m

Retention time = 4hrs 7 Primary Clarifier 2 Surface loading rate =40 m3/m2/day 40 m3/m2/day

2.1 m dia 2 m deep

Aeration tank

F/M ratio = 0.3 MLSS = 3000 mg

3.5 m x 2.9 m x 3.5 m

Retention time = 4hrs 9 Secondary clarifier 2 Surface loading rate =25 m3/m2/day 2.3 m dia 2.5 m deep

34

Table 4.3: Sizes of treatment units in scheme 3 No. of Units

S.No

Treatment units

Design Criteria

Size of units for scheme 3

Inlet chamber

Retention time = 30 sec

0.5 m x 0.5 m x 1.5 m

Manual Bar Screen

Velocity = 0.9 m/sec 1 Spacing = 10 mm

1.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m

Size of particle 3 Grit Channel 1 removed = 0.15 mm

1 m x 0.7 m x 1 m

Dosing Tanks Alum dosage = 400 2 mg/l

Alum 4

0.5 m x 0.5 m x 0.5 m

Lime

Lime dosage = 200 mg/l

0.7 m x 0.7 m x 0.5 m

35

Flash Mixer

Retention time = 2 min 1 m x 1 m x 0.5 m

Primary Clarifier

Retention time = 4hrs Surface loading rate =40 m3/m2/day HRT = 8 hrs

2.1 m dia 2 m deep

UASB

Upflow velocity = 0.5 m/hr

4.5 m x2.5 m x 3 m

Retention time = 4 WSP 2 days Depth = 1.5 m

10 m x 2.85 m x 3.5 m 30 m x m x 1.7 m

36

CHAPTER 5 COST ANALYSIS 5.1 GENERAL The size of individual units is finalized from the design of the treatment units. The treatment plants are fabricated in fiber reinforced plastic. All the waterretaining structures are given epoxy coating. As the sewage treatment units are mobilized they are designed as water tight units. The cost analysis for all the three schemes is arrived by considering only the civil cost. 5.2 COST OF SCHEME 1 The civil cost of the treatment units in scheme 1are arrived as mentioned in Table 5.1. It includes the cost of inlet chamber, dosing tank and all treatment units of scheme 1. Table 5.2: Cost of treatment units in scheme 1 S.NO TREATMENT UNITS QUANTITY IN m AMOUNT PER m IN Rs COST OF THE UNIT IN Rs

Inlet Chamber

3.5

1850

6475.00

Screening chamber

7.5

1850

13875.00

37

Grit channel

8.1

1850

14985.00

Alum dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

Lime dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

Primary Clarifier

16.65

1850

30802.50

Anaerobic Lagoon

145.8

1850

269730.00

Waste Stabilization Pond

118.45

1850

218300.00

138.2

1850

255670.00

Sludge collection chamber

28

1850

51800.00

Total cost = Rs. 6, 24,187.00 38

5.3 COST OF SCHEME 2 The civil cost of the individual treatment units in scheme 2 are calculated as mentioned in Table 5.2. It includes the cost of inlet chamber, dosing tank and all treatment units of scheme 2. Table 5.2: Cost of treatment units in scheme 2 S.NO TREATMENT UNITS QUANTITY IN m AMOUNT PER m IN Rs COST OF THE UNIT IN Rs

Inlet Chamber

3.5

1850

6475.00

Screening chamber

7.5

1850

13875.00

Grit channel

8.1

1850

14985.00

Alum dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

Lime dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

39

Primary Clarifier

16.65

1850

30802.50

Activated Sludge chamber

65.61

1850

121378.50

Secondary Clarifier

20.32

1850

37592.00

Sludge collection chamber

28

1850

51800.00

Total cost = Rs. 2, 82,457.00

40

5.4 COST OF SCHEME 3 The civil cost of the treatment units in scheme 3 are arrived as mentioned in Table 5.3. It includes the cost of inlet chamber, dosing tank and all treatment units of scheme 3. Table 5.2: Cost of treatment units in scheme 3 S.NO TREATMENT UNITS QUANTITY IN m AMOUNT PER m IN Rs COST OF THE UNIT IN Rs

Inlet Chamber

3.5

1850

6475.00

Screening chamber

7.5

1850

13875.00

Grit channel

8.1

1850

14985.00

Alum dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

Lime dosing tank

1.5

1850

2775.00

41

Primary Clarifier

16.65

1850

30802.50

Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket

64.5

1850

119325.00

Waste stabilization pond

118.45

1850

218300.00

138.2

1850

255670.00

Sludge collection chamber

28

1850

51800.00

Total cost = Rs. 7, 16,782.00

42

CHAPTER 6 WORKING MODEL 6.1 GENERAL The working Model has been prepared based on the results arrived. The sewage water is collected and treated with the model in each stage with proper retention time. 6.2 TREATMENT UNITS 6.1.1 Screening

Fig 6.1 Screening tank

43

6.1.2 Grit channel

Fig 6.2 Grit channel 6.1.3 Primary clarifier

Fig 6.3 Primary clarifier

44

6.1.4 Activated sludge process

Fig 6.4 Aeration tank

6.1.5 Secondary clarifier

Fig 6.5 Secondary clarifier 45

CHAPRTER 7 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS 7.1 GENERAL The sewage water collected is treated in the working model. The raw sewage water and the treated water are tested in the laboratory. The results obtained are included in this chapter. 7.2 REPORT OF RAW SEWAGE WATER The raw sewage collected is tested and the results are as Table 7.1. Table 7.1: Result of raw sewage water 1. Physical parameters Appearance Colour (pt,co-scale) Odour Turbidity NT Units Total dissolved,solids mg/l 2. Chemical parameters pH Total alkalinity, as CaCo3 Total Hardness as CaCo3 Nitrate as NO3 Chloride as Cl Floride as F Sulphate as SO4 Phosphate as PO4 Tidys test 4 hrs as O2 46 yellowish Sewage smell 80 591 8.10 360 244 10 324 0.6 14 12 2.2

B.O.D C.O.D

100 250

7.3 REPORT OF TREATED WATER The treated sewage water collected is tested and the results are as Table 7.2. Table 7.2: Result of treated water 1.Physical parameters Appearance Colour (pt,co-scale) Odour Turbidity NT Units Total dissolved,solids mg/l 2. Chemical parameters pH Total alkalinity, as CaCo3 Total Hardness as CaCo3 Nitrate as NO3 Chloride as Cl Floride as F Sulphate as SO4 Phosphate as PO4 Tidys test 4 hrs as O2 B.O.D C.O.D 7.4 DISCUSSIONS From the report obtained, the BOD of the treated water is reduced. But there is a increase in turbidity as the cow dung is added as turbidity. To reduce the turbidity either the retention time can be increased or lime powder can be added so that the solids get settled. 47

Slightly turbid Sewage smell 40 864 8.6 352 276 9 84 0.6 12 5 0.9 60 150

It is found that capital cost per MLD and operating cost per month per MLD is lowest for Scheme 1. But it has the following disadvantages 1. Requiring more land area. 2. Release of odorous gases like hydrogen sulphide. 3. Release of methane (green house gas) leading to global warming, ozone depletion etc. 4. Reduction in efficiency of lagoon due to accumulation of sludge in the lagoon. The initial cost of scheme 3 is higher and also it is not feasible due to waste stabilization pond. The conventional activated sludge process in scheme 2 is next option with lower capital cost. It is also most preferred as it is compact .

7.4 COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SCHEMES The comparative study of the three schemes are tabulated in the table 7.1 Table 7.1 Comparative study of the schemes PARTICULARS SCHEME 1 SCHEME 2 SCHEME 3

Space consumption

more

Less

Comparatively than scheme 1

higher

Civil cost

more

Less

Comparatively than scheme 2

more

48

Sludge generation

less

More

less

Power consumption

less

More

Lesser

Pollution

Heavy pollution

Comparatively less

Pollution is high

49

CHAPTER8 CONCLUSIONS 8.1 CONCLUSIONS The following conclusions are derived from the analysis made The scheme 2 can be adopted as the size is suitable for the mobile sewage treatment plant. The operation timing is low compared to the other schemes hence it is practically feasible. The process adopted in this scheme does not cause pollution while treatment is going on. The sludge generated in this process is more so that it can be commercially used. By implementing the project effectively the pollution of the Vaigai Rivercan be reduced about 90%. This makes the city pollution free.

50

CHAPTER 9 FUTURE STUDIES

9.1 TECHNOLOGY TO BE IMPLEMENTED ADAO process can be implemented for the mobile sewage treatment process. This technology is preferable as the process requires minimum space and maintenance cost is also comparatively low. The usage of this technology increases the efficiency of the mobile sewage treatment process.

9.2 FUTURE ENCHANCEMENT The mechanical and electrical cost analysis can be considered for more accurate cost analysis. The project can be established in institutions with varying capacities. The amount of sludge generated can be calculated and used effectively to maintain a sustainable environment.

51

REFERENCES

1. Tucker, Young, Jackson, Tull Inc Basis of Cost Estimates September 2003. 2. Wei Wu Anaerobic co-digestion of biomass for methane production. 3. Barnstable county wastewater cost task force comparison of costs for wastewater management systems April 2010 4. Environmental Engineering Volume 1 by Garg S W. 5. Wastewater Engineering: Treatment and ReuseMetcalf & Eddy, Inc., George Tchobanoglous, Franklin Burton, H. David Stensel. 6. http://www.cedengineering.com 7. http://www.maduraidirectory.com 8. http://nptel.iitm.ac.in 9. http://www.efm.leeds.ac.uk/CIVE/Sewerage/articles/medall/medall.html

52