Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
http://omicron.ch.tuiasi.ro/EEMJ/
______________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract
A study was conducted for the treatment of canal water using coagulation-flocculation-sedimentation process. Different
coagulants i.e. alum, ferric sulfate and ferric chlorides were used. The effect of pH and mixing condition i.e. rapid mixing energy
and time and slow mixing energy and time on the performance of coagulants were studied. Jar test apparatus was used to conduct
the studies. The results of the study demonstrated that pH and mixing conditions affect the efficiency of the coagulant and there
exist particular conditions for achieving maximum efficiency of a coagulant at an economical cost. Among different coagulants
tested, alum was found to be a suitable coagulant for canal water on the basis of removal of turbidity and cost of treatment. The
optimum dose of alum was found to be 12 mg/L at an optimum rapid mixing energy of 100 sec-1 and mixing time of 1 minute and
slow mixing energy of 35 sec-1 and mixing time of 20 minutes and 30 minutes of sedimentation time. At the optimum dose, alum
removed 99.5% turbidity and 94.4% fecal coliforms. The cost of alum to treat one cubic meter of canal water was 2.55 US$.
Sludge production at optimum dose of alum was 2.4 mL/L.
Key words: canal water, coagulation, flocculation, surface waters, water treatment
Received: February, 2010; Revised: September, 2010; Accepted: October, 2010
1. Introduction
Pakistan possesses both ground and surface
water sources. For public water supplies both ground
and surface water sources are used. According to an
estimate 30% of water supplies in Pakistan are drawn
from different surface water sources (Aziz, 2005).
These include dams, lakes, rivers and canals. A large
number of water supplies in Punjab and Sindh are
based on raw canal water. The normal practice is to
draw the canal water through an intake structure,
settle the water in a sedimentation tank and pass it
through a slow sand filter before being supplied to the
consumers without disinfection. A schematic diagram
of the entire process is shown in Fig. 1.
The turbidity of canal water is usually high
and varies widely in a range of 10-90 NTU (Ahmad,
2009). Chemical coagulation is not employed on most
of the public water supply projects. As such, turbidity
is not reduced to a substantial level in plain
sedimentation, which results in high suspended solids
Chemical composition
Al2(SO4)3 14(H2O)
Fe2(SO4)3 4.5(H2O)
FeCl3 6(H2O)
1564
G (sec-1)
100
230
380
100
230
380
1565
A lum
20
Residual turbidity (NTU)
F erricS ulfate
F erricC hloride
15
10
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Dose (mg/L)
30
25
A lum
20
15
F erricC hloride
F erricS ulfate
10
5
0
4
pH
4.5
Dose of Alum = 15 mg/L
Turbidity of Raw Sample = 14.25 NTU
4.0
3.5
3.20
3.0
2.30
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.45
1.34
0.78
1.0
0.82
0.5
0.0
100/5
G/min.
230/5
G /min.
380/5
100/1
G /min.
G /min.
Experimental Setup
230/1
G /min.
380/1
G /min.
1566
10
3.5
3.0
2.0
1.5
1.08
1.17
35/20
15/20
1.0
0.5
0.0
50/10
35/10
15/10
50/20
G /min.
G /min.
G /min.
G /min.
G /min.
G /min.
4.67
4.0
3.5
2.0
3.0
2.51
2.5
2.0
1.80
1.63
1.8
2.06
2.01
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
100/5
G/min.
230/5
G/min.
380/5
100/1
G/min.
G/min.
Experimental Setup
230/1
G/min.
380/1
G/min.
2.44
Experimental Setup
4.5
1.4
1.31
1.20
1.2
1.07
1.0
0.57
0.6
0.4
50/10
G/min.
15/10
50/20
G/min.
G/min.
Experimental Setup
35/20
G/min.
15/20
G/min.
2.63
2.51
2.5
1.48
1.0
0.5
G/min.
230/5
G/min.
380/5
G/min.
100/1
G/min.
230/1
G/min.
26.37
2.43
1.94
100/5
30.0
380/1
G/min.
Experimental Setup
3.0
0.0
G/min.
3.5
1.5
35/10
3.82
4.0
2.0
0.84
0.81
0.8
0.0
4.5
1.6
0.2
A v . R e s i d u a l T u r b i d i ty (N T U )
3.04
2.94
2.5
4.0
Av. Residual Turbidity (NTU)
25.03
25.0
20.47
20.0
15.0
11.65
10.0
9.73
7.22
5.0
0.0
50/10
35/10
G /min.
G /min.
15/10
G /min.
50/20
G /min.
Experimental Setup
35/20
G /min.
15/20
G /min.
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
0
10
15
Alum Dose (mg/L)
20
25
30
A v . R e s i d u a l T u rb i d ity (N T U )
40.0
Av. Turbidity of Raw Sample = 109.57 NTU
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
2.5
2.4
15.0
2.1
10.0
2.0
5.0
0.0
0
10
15
20
25
30
A v. R e sid u a l T u rb id ity (N T U )
40.0
1.6
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Alum
A v. R e s id u al T u rb id ity (N T U )
35.0
Dos e=12mg/L
30.0
F erric S ulfate
Dos e=20mg/L
F erricC hloride
Dos e=13mg/L
C oag ulant
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
0
10
15
20
Ferric Chloride Dose (mg/L)
25
30
1568
Optimum Dose
(mg/L)
12
20
13
Turbidity Removal
Efficiency (%)
99.5
98.6
97.5
Table 5. Fecal coliform removal efficiency of the coagulants at optimum dose and mixing conditions
Coagulant
Optimum Dose
(mg/L)
Alum
Ferric Sulfate
Ferric Chloride
12
20
13
Fecal Coliform in
Raw Sample
(No/100mL)
1,800,000
1,800,000
380,000
Fecal Coliform
Removed
(No/100mL)
1,700,000
1,755,000
335,000
% age
Removal
94.44
97.50
88.16
4. Conclusions
The above studies conclude that an optimum
mixing energy and time exist for each coagulant that
must be investigated before finalizing the design of a
water treatment plant. On the basis of turbidity
removal and the cost of the coagulant, alum was
found to be the most appropriate coagulant for canal
water treatment. For Alum, optimum rapid and slow
mixing energy and time are 100 sec-1 for 1 minute and
35 sec-1 for 20 minute, respectively. Optimum pH for
alum lies in a range of 6.3 to 7.8. The optimum dose
for alum was found to be 12 mg/L with residual
turbidity of 0.5 NTU producing a sludge of 2.4 mL/L.
Acknowledgements
This study was funded by head grant 22000 of University of
Engineering and Technology, Lahore, Pakistan. The
assistance of Mr. Muhammad Hashmat in laboratory work
is acknowledged.
References
APHA, (1998), American Public Health Associations,
Standard methods for the examination of water and
wastewater, 20th Edition, American Water Works
Association,
Water
Environment
Federation,
Washington DC, USA.
Adin A., Soffer Y., Aim B.R., (1998), Effluent
pretreatment by iron coagulation applying various
dose-pH combinations for optimum particle separation,
Water Science and Technology, 38, 27-34.
Ahmad H., (2009), Clarification studies of surface water of
Lahore, M.Sc Thesis, Institute of Environmental
Engineering and Research, University of Engineering
and Technology, Lahore.
Amirtharajah A., OMelia C.R., (1990), Coagulation
process: destabilization, mixing and flocculation, In:
Water Quality and Treatment, A Handbook of
Community Water Supplies, Pontius F.W. (Ed), 4th
Edition, AWWA, McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, 269365.
1569
1570