Design of Filtration Tank FINAL FINAL FINAL

Demand Study and Design of Filtration Tank 2010
Contents
Chapter 1: Demand Analysis of Sophia Settlement

1.1 BACKGROUND...................................................................................................6
1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS.............................................................................................7
1.3 LIMITATIONS......................................................................................................8
1.4 METHODOLOGY OF DEMAND ANALYSIS............................................................8
1.5 CONSIDERATIONS.............................................................................................9
1.6 LOCATION OF SOPHIA.......................................................................................9
1.7 DATA COLLECTED.............................................................................................9
1.8 ANALYSIS OF DATA.........................................................................................10
1.81 Demand Categories.......................................................................................10
1.82 Demand Growth over time............................................................................11
1.9 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................12
1.10 APPENDICES....................................................................................................13
2.1 ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................17
2.2 AIM..................................................................................................................17
2.3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................17
2.4 INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................18
2.5 LITERATURE REVIEW.......................................................................................19
2.6 LIMITATIONS....................................................................................................20
2.7 METHODOLOGY...............................................................................................20
2.71 Desk Study...............................................................................................20
2.72 Sophia Water Treatment Plant site visit....................................................21
2.73 The design of the filtration tank................................................................21
2.74 Building of a model of the proposed filtration tank...................................21
2.65 Influent and effluent testing.....................................................................21
2.8 DESIGN............................................................................................................22
2.81 Design Objective.............................................................................................22
2.82 Design Constraints..........................................................................................22
2.83 Design Functions.............................................................................................23
1
Group 3
2.84 Design Specifications......................................................................................23

2.85 Design Solutions.............................................................................................24
i. Ion Exchange..................................................................................................24
ii. Carbon Adsorption..........................................................................................25
iii. Micro-porous Basic Filtration...........................................................................27
iv. Ultrafiltration...................................................................................................28
v. Reverse Osmosis.............................................................................................29
vi. Rapid Sand Filter.............................................................................................32
vii. Slow Sand Filter...........................................................................................32
Comparison of the various filtration processes.........................................................34
2.86 Selection of Design Solution...........................................................................35
2.87 Description of Selected Solution.....................................................................38
2.88 Actual Design..................................................................................................45
2.89 MODEL OF THE RAPID SAND FILTER SYSTEM..................................................58
2.90 TESTING OF WATER THROUGH THE SYSTEM...................................................58
i. Results............................................................................................................59
ii. Discussion of Results......................................................................................59
2.91 APPENDICES....................................................................................................60
GLOSSARY................................................................................................................67
REFERENCES............................................................................................................68
REFERENCES
Table of Figures
Chapter One
2
Group 3
Chart 1.1 Percentage water usage that is required by the

categories of use
Chart 1.2 Graph showing Projected Demand increase for a period of 20

yrs
Map 1.1 Aerial Photograph of the Sophia Area
Map 1.2 Cadastral Plan of the Sophia Area
Table 1.1 Number of lots under the classified category
Table 1.2 Population under their category
Table 1.3 Consumption rate and demand
Table 1.4 Additional demand for the various factors that are
considered
Chapter Two
Figure 2.1 Chemical Reaction in the Softening Method of Ion Exchange

Process
Figure 2.2 Mechanism of the Carbon Absorption Process
Figure 2.3 Mechanism of the Micro-Porous Filtration Process
Figure 2.4 Mechanism of the Ultra Filtration Process
Figure 2.5 Mechanism of the Reverse Osmosis Process
Figure 2.6 Comparison of the Filtration Processes listed
Figure 2.7 Characteristics of Gravity Type Filters
Figure 2.8 Nozzle to be Used
Figure 2.9 Chosen Under-drain System
Figure 2.10 Illustration showing the arrangement of the Wash-water

trough
Figure 2.11 Components of the Filtration Tank
(Side View)
3
Group 3
Figure 2.12 Arrangement of component parts of the Filtration Tank

(Transverse View)
Figure 2.13 Cross-section of the Filtration Tank showing the components
Figure 2.14 Plan of Final Design
Figure 2.15 Elevation of Final Design
Figure 2.16 Section of Final Design
Figure 2.17 Improvised Apparatus Used for Testing
Table 2.1 Drinking Water Standards
Table 2.2 Characteristics of Ion Exchange Process

Table 2.3 Characteristics of Carbon Absorption Process
Table 2.4 Characteristics of Micro-porous Filtration Process
Table 2.5 Characteristics of Ultra Filtration Process
Table 2.6 Characteristics of Reverse Osmosis Process
Table 2.7 Characteristics of Slow Sand Filtration Process
Table 2.8 Properties of the sand for the Filter Medium from sieve
analysis
Table 2.9 Results from Lab Tests
4
Group 3
Chapter 1
Demand Analysis
For the Sophia Settlement
5
Group 3
1.1 BACKGROUND
Since May 30, 2002 the Guyana Water Incorporated (GWI) has been
responsible for providing a safe and dependable water supply to its
customers throughout Guyana. Over this period of time GWI has been
gradually developing their potable water facilities to meet the demands
of the increasing population. In several regions across Guyana, they
have installed wells and treatment plants to enhance their water
quality production.
Though GWI effort to provide the population with quality potable

water, has been growing, customers in the Sophia settlement are still
to be provided with a dependable water supply. There are residents in
Sophia that does not have water connection, therefore they are forced
to break into the distribution lines, causing damages to the pipe
systems and wastage in the water supply.
Since the establishment of Sophia in the early 1990s, the population

has increased, which has resulted in high water demands. Sophia is
divided into five sections that are classified as A, B, C, D, E and F
field, with E and F Fields being the most recent addition. The
settlement comprises predominantly of domestic dwellings and in order
6
Group 3
to meet future demands, it is first necessary to predict what those

demands will be over a selected planning horizon.
To achieve a predicted demand of potable water for Sophia, a

demand analysis will be carried out. This evaluation is intended to
cover all current and potential categories for the use of potable water.
The evaluation also review all available data for Sophia, which will
include the consensus, maps, rates of consumption and any other
information that may be beneficial to the analysis.
1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS

The scope of this analysis includes.
1) Reviewing the population and housing consensus.

2) Categorizing the use of potable water under the following;
• Domestic
• Commercial
• Industrial
• Community type structure
1) Determining the projected water demand for a 20 year planning
horizon, considering various factors such as losses, emergencies,
storage and development.
The scope of the analysis will cover the essential criteria’s needed to
determine an accurate population demand. In order to asses all
impacts of the project, the planning period should be at least as long
as the economic life of the facilities. The U.S Internal Revenue
Service publishes estimates of the economic life of buildings,
7
Group 3
equipment etc. Buildings have economic lives on the order of 20 years.

Based on these estimates the planning period of 20 years is
established.
The population and housing consensus from the Bureau of Statistics

will be used to established the number of residents that are currently
in need of potable water supply. The predicted increase in demand
from the established population, to a predicted population increase
over the 20 year period, will be determined by an exponential growth
rate. This relationship will help to better manage the water supply and
increase the plant capacity as the demand increases.
The population will then be divided into categories of usage, with

each category having a consumption rate that is used by GWI. It is
these rates that are used in the demand analysis.
1.3 LIMITATIONS
Limitations for this aspect of the study were minimal.
1.4 METHODOLOGY OF DEMAND ANALYSIS
The method of projecting the demands will follow a defined sequence

of steps. These steps are outlined as follows.
1) Determining the number of lots and the number of residents per

house hold.
2) Categorizing the lots under the various usages.
3) Establishing the consumption rates per each category.
8
Group 3
4) Determining the present population demand.
5) Adjusting the present demand by accounting for losses, storage,

emergencies, agriculture and development.
6) Determining the predicted demand over the 20 year period

based on an exponential growth rate.
7) Establishing the demand that is required for the study area.
1.3 CONSIDERATIONS
In calculating the demand for the Sophia area, the following were taken into
considerations:
 Development of the community not to be instantaneous.
 Increase in demand proportional to development.
1.3 LOCATION OF SOPHIA

Map of Sophia
The map of Sophia is attached to this demand study. It highlights the area
covered by this analysis.
Sophia is located approximately one and half miles east of central

Georgetown with UTM (Universal Traverse Mercator) coordinates 409336E,
726248N.
9
Group 3
See map in Appendices.
1.4 DATA COLLECTED

The following tables show the data that were collected from the various
authorities. They are represented in the following order.
Table 1.1 shows the number of lots under the classified category.
Table 1.2 shows the population under their category.
Table 1.3 shows the consumption rate and demand.
Table 1. 4 shows the additional demand for the various factors that
were considered.
1.5 ANALYSIS OF DATA
1.81 Demand Categories
Chart 1.1: showing the percentage water that is required by the

categories of use.
10
Group 3
1.82 Demand Growth over time
The graph above shows the exponential growth rate of the demand of
the 20 year planning horizon.
1.6 CONCLUSION
Based on all the calculations and assumptions made, the estimated demand
for sections A to F of the Sophia Settlement, Greater Georgetown is 228488
gal/day and can be approximated to 2.3 million gal/day.
11
Group 3
1.7 APPENDICES
12
Group 3
Maps of Sophia
13
Group 3
A
F Field B
C
D
M
ap 1: Aerial Photograph of the Sophia Area
14 Group 3
(Compiled By: Vickram Manoo & Donald Britton)
15 Group 3
Map 2: Cadastral Plan of the Sophia Area

(Provided By: GWI)
16 Group 3
Chapter 2
Design of Filtration Tank for a

Water Treatment Facility
17
Group 3
2.1 ABSTRACT
The filtration process is deemed the second most important stage in the
treatment of water. Moreover, the major type of filter used in Guyana to
treat water is the rapid sand filter due to the economical nature. This
research seeks to assess the efficiency of the present configuration of the
rapid sand filter used at the Sophia Water Treatment Plant and proposes a
more efficient configuration. In doing so the dimensions, inflow, outflow and
the quality of water and the composition of the present filter tank were
assessed. A model of the proposed filter tank was also built.
2.2 AIM
The basic aims of this report are:
• To determine the filtration rate of the rapid sand filter at the Sophia
treatment plant; and,
• To design a filter with a sufficient rate of filtration water to achieve the

projected demand for the Sophia community.
2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Filtration is a physical liquid-solid separation process used to removed
colloidal particles (0.001 -1 µ) and if present, larger particles, by gravitational
or pressure force through a porous medium. A rapid sand filter was designed
to meet the projected demand of 2.3 mgd (million gallons per day) of the
Sophia community, Greater Georgetown. Sand particles with effective size
0.5 mm and coefficient of uniformity 1.6 were used in the model
development and construction of the filter. The dimensions of the filter
(actual and model) were calculated based on similar filters used to supply
similar demands. A test procedure of this filter yielded a flow rate for
filtration which was computed to be 5.33mm/s. By laboratory testing, this
filtration rate is sufficient to supply water of the required quality and rate to
the Sophia community.
18
Group 3
2.2 INTRODUCTION
Water filtration is a physical process for separating suspended and colloidal
impurities from water by passage through a porous medium, usually a bed of
sand or other granular material. Water fills the pores of the medium, and the
impurities are left behind in the openings or upon the medium itself.
Filtration is an important and active process in the natural purification of the
underground waters, and it is an essential unit process utilized under
controlled conditions in water treatment plants throughout the world.
A number of mechanisms are involved in particle removal by filtration. Some

of these mechanisms are physical and others are chemical in nature. The
effects of both the physical and chemical actions occurring in a filter bed of
granular substances must be combined to explain fully the overall removal of
impurities obtained.
Normally, there are two applicable types of filtration processes: slow sand
filtration and rapid sand filtration. However, for the purpose of this project
only rapid sand filtration will be discussed. The pre-treatment filtration
removal mechanisms for rapid sand filtration include, in the order of
importance: aeration, coagulation, flocculation and sedimentation.
In this project, you will be exposed to the design of a filtration system to

meet the current demand that exist in the study area, followed by a model to
demonstrate what will occur should a prototype be built.
19
Group 3
2.3 LITERATURE REVIEW

The earliest recorded attempts to find or generate pure water date back to
as early as 2000 B.C. Early Sanskrit writings outlined methods for purifying
water.
These methods identified that filtering water through crude sand or charcoal
filters (Baker & Taras, 1981) was the accepted technique to produce quality
drinking water. These writings suggest that the major motive in purifying
water was to provide better tasting drinking water. It was assumed that good
tasting water was also clean.
The first record of experimentation in water filtration, after the blight of the
Dark Ages, came from Sir Francis Bacon in 1627 (Baker & Taras, 1981).
Hearing rumours that the salty water of the ocean could be purified and
cleansed for drinking water purposes, he began experimenting in the
desalination of seawater using simple filtration techniques.
The first water treatment plant was erected in 1804 at Paisley, Scotland
(Baker & Taras, 1981). This plant provided filtered water to every household
within the city limits. The Scottish water treatment plant depended upon
slow sand filters designed by Robert Thom, an important scientist of the
Scottish Enlightenment. However, due to increasing demands scientists in
the United States designed a rapid sand filter in the late 19th century (Baker
& Taras, 1981). The rapid sand filter was cleaned by powerful jet streams of
water, greatly increasing the efficiency and capacity of the water filter. It was
therefore capable of supplying large demands based on modifications of its
dimensions (height, width, thickness of sand layer, etc.).
Therefore, filters can generally be classified hydraulically as rapid or slow

filter depending upon the rate of flow per unit surface area. Essentially slow
20
Group 3
filters operate at rates 1 to 10 mgd per acre, and rapid filters at rates 1 to as
much as 8 gpm per square foot. Filters may also be classified based on the
filter media used, such as sand, coal, multi-layered filter, etc.
It is evident that with increasing population, the need for larger quantities of
potable water supply will increase. The rapid sand filtration technique is
therefore employed in most water treatment plants in the developed and the
developing countries largely due to its superior rate of filtration and
consequent discharge as compared to the slow sand filtration method.
2.4 LIMITATIONS
The limitations encountered during the design of the filtration tank were:
i. Filter Medium: The water treatment plant at Sophia imports a

special kind of black sand with a larger effective size than that
available in Guyana. Consequently, sand was sampled from
different locations and the minimum standard for the effective size
was chosen.
ii. Testing: In the testing of the flow rate or velocity of water passing
through the sand medium the following limited the results:
• Nozzles for the under drain were unavailable for use in the
testing,
• A constant head could not be maintained during the exercise.
2.1 METHODOLOGY
The research done was carried out in the following format:
i. Desk top study

ii. Sophia Water Treatment Plant site visit
iii. The design of the filtration tank
iv. Building of a model of the proposed filtration tank
v. Testing
21
Group 3
2.71 Desk Study

During the desk study of the research, literatures upon the design of
filtration tanks were reviewed. The primary source of the former was taken
from the text Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering (Second
Edition) by Robert A. Corbitt. Other pieces of literatures and sources of
information which were used to obtain the necessary information were the
text Mechanics of Fluids (Eight Edition) by Bernard Massey and handouts
obtained from the Guyana Water Authority (GWI) as well as the vast internet
sources.
2.72 Sophia Water Treatment Plant site visit

A visit was conducted at the Guyana Water Authority (GWI) in order to
observe the operation of the water treatment process particularly the
filtration process. Information such as the water demand of the community,
the dimensions (length, width and height) of the filter tank and filter bed
used and the inflow and outflow velocities of water into and out of the tank
respectively were obtained during the visit. Water samples from test valves
before and after the filtration process were also collected and the turbidity
measured to make a comparison between the presently used filtration tank
and the proposed filtration tank which was being designed by the
researchers.
2.73 The design of the filtration tank

In order to design the filtration tank, certain parameters had to be known.
The effective size of the sand, coefficient of uniformity and demand all had
to be determined before the actual design could have been done. Prior to
determining the effective size of the sand, a laboratory sieve analysis was
done to determine the D10 which is the 10 % pass rate on a semi-log graph.
22
Group 3
2.74 Building of a model of the proposed filtration tank

The model was established based on dynamic similarity between what was
designed and what was expected to happen should the structure be built.
Materials used were perspex (for the body of the tank), reef sand (for the
filter bed) and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipes and fittings.
2.65 Influent and effluent testing

Raw water was collected from the Sophia treatment plant, harvested from its
supply well. The water was introduced into a specially made influent-effluent
tester which was made of 1 ½” diameter of 4’ 6”PVC pipe. In the pipe, there
was 30” of reef sand and from the base of the tester there were 8” of 1/4”
diameter holes drilled to allow the effluents to pass through since the bottom
of the tester was blocked (see appendices for illustration). From this
exercise, the actual effluent discharge was calculated. Samples were taken
before and after the passage of water through the tester. These samples
were then taken to the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) to
determine the turbidity and pH.
2.1 DESIGN
2.81 Design Objective

To design a filtration tank that will satisfy the demand estimated for
the Sophia Area.
23
Group 3
2.82 Design Constraints

Several types of constraints were encountered during this design
namely:
• Cost- The design should be economical in terms of:
○ Materials – all materials (components) must be easily sourced
and filter media should be locally sourced.
○ Maintenance – the system must be easy and inexpensive to
maintain.
• Manufacturing – The system must allow ease of construction.
• Safety – The system must be accident free.
• Legal – There must be accommodations for disposal of waste.
• Functional:
○ Must be energy efficient compared to other systems.
○ Must not occupy very large area.
○ Materials used must have structural integrity.
2.81 Design Functions

• To provide a quality filtration process.
• To remove matter such as silt, clay, colloids, micro-organisms like
algae, bacteria and viruses held in suspension.
• To filter water at a rapid rate in order to meet demand.
2.81 Design Specifications

The following criterion must be satisfied in the design for the filtration
tank:
24
Group 3
• Demand: From the demand study discussed in chapter one, the

filtration tank must have the capacity to handle 2.3 million
gallons per day (MGPD)
• Material: All materials used should be of the ASTM standards and
in acceptance with the World Health Organisation (WHO).
• Water Quality: For the filtration process the following table
explains the parameters taken into consideration.
Parameters Standard
Physical Turbidity 5 NTU

Characteristics Colour Clear
Taste and None

odour
pH 6-8
Table 2.1: Showing the Drinking Water Standards
2.81 Design Solutions

The selection of type of filtration process to be used is generally a function of
the raw water quality. As filtration implies, water flows through a material
that removes particles, organisms, and/or contaminants. This flow is
controlled by the force of gravity or the force of pressure. Moreover, design
solutions or options for the filtration process are examined as follows.
25
Group 3
i. Ion Exchange
The ion exchange process percolates water through bead-like spherical resin
materials (ion-exchange resins). The principle behind this process is that the
ions in the water are exchanged for other ions fixed to the beads. The two
most common ion-exchange methods are softening and deionization.
Softening is used primarily as a pre-treatment method to reduce water

hardness prior to reverse osmosis processing. The softeners contain beads
that exchange two sodium ions for every calcium or magnesium ion removed
from the "softened" water.
Figure 2.1: Chemical Reaction in the Softening Method of Ion Exchange Process
(Source: www.allaboutwater.com/filtration)
Deionization beads exchange either hydrogen ions for cations or hydroxyl
ions for anions. The cation exchange resins, made of styrene and
divinylbenzene containing sulfonic acid groups, will exchange a hydrogen ion
for any cations they encounter (e.g., Na+, Ca++, Al+++). Similarly, the
anion exchange resins, made of styrene and containing quaternary
ammonium groups, will exchange a hydroxyl ion for any anions (e.g., Cl-).
The hydrogen ion from the cation exchanger unites with the hydroxyl ion of
the anion exchanger to form pure water.
26
Group 3
Deionization can be an important component of a total water purification

system when used in combination with other methods discussed in this
primer such as reverse osmosis, filtration and carbon adsorption.
Deionization systems effectively remove ions, but they do not effectively
remove most organics or microorganisms. Microorganisms can attach to the
resins, providing a culture media for rapid bacterial growth and subsequent
pyrogen generation.
The advantages and disadvantages of this technology are summarized

below.
Advantages Disadvantages
Removes dissolved inorganicsDoes not effectively remove particles,

effectively. pyrogens or bacteria.
Regenerable (service deionization). DI beds can generate resin particles
Relatively inexpensive initial capitaland culture bacteria.

investment. High operating costs over long-term.
Table 2.2: Showing the Characteristics of Ion Exchange Process
ii. Carbon Adsorption

Carbon absorption is a widely used method of home water filter treatment
because of its ability to improve water by removing disagreeable tastes and
odours, including objectionable chlorine. Activated carbon effectively
removes many chemicals and gases, and in some cases it can be effective
against microorganisms. However, generally it will not affect total dissolved
solids, hardness, or heavy metals. Only a few carbon filter systems have
been certified for the removal of lead, asbestos, cysts, and coliform. There
are two types of carbon filter systems: granular activated carbon, and solid
block carbon. For more effective water purification, these two methods can
be employed along with a reverse osmosis system.
27
Group 3
Activated carbon is created from a variety of carbon-based materials in a

high-temperature process that creates a matrix of millions of microscopic
pores and crevices. One pound of activated carbon provides from 60 to 150
acres of surface area. The pores trap microscopic particles and large organic
molecules, while the activated surface areas cling to, or adsorb, small
organic molecules.
The ability of an activated carbon filter to remove certain microorganisms

and certain organic chemicals, especially pesticides, chlorine by-products
and trichloroethylene, depends upon several factors, such as the type of
carbon and the amount used, the design of the filter and the rate of water
flow, how long the filter has been in use, and the types of impurities the filter
has previously removed.
Figure 2.2: Mechanism of the Carbon Absorption Process

(Source: www.allaboutwater.com/filtration )
The carbon adsorption process is controlled by the diameter of the pores in
the carbon filter and by the diffusion rate of organic molecules through the
pores. The rate of adsorption is a function of the molecular weight and the
molecular size of the organics. Certain granular carbons effectively remove
chloramines. Carbon also removes free chlorine and protects other
28
Group 3
purification media in the system that may be sensitive to an oxidant such as

chlorine.
Carbon is usually used in combination with other treatment processes. The

placement of carbon in relation to other components is an important
consideration in the design of a water purification system.
The advantages and disadvantages of the system is show below:

Removes dissolved organics and Can generate carbon fines.

chlorine effectively.
Long life (high capacity).

Table 2.3: Showing the Characteristics of Carbon Absorption Process
iii. Micro-porous Basic Filtration

There are three types of micro-porous filtration: depth, screen and surface.
Depth filters are matted fibres or materials compressed to form a matrix that
retains particles by random adsorption or entrapment. On the other hand,
screen filters are inherently uniform structures which, like a sieve, retain all
particles larger than the precisely controlled pore size on their surface. While
surface filters are made from multiple layers of media. When fluid passes
through the filter, particles larger than the spaces within the filter matrix are
retained, accumulating primarily on the surface of the filter.
Figure 2.3: Mechanism of the Micro-Porous Filtration Process

29
Group 3
The distinction between filters is important because the three methods serve
very different functions. Depth filters are usually used as prefilters because
they are an economical way to remove 98% of suspended solids and protect
elements downstream from fouling or clogging. Surface filters are used to
remove 99.99% of suspended solids and may be used as either prefilters or
clarifying filters. Micro-porous membrane (screen) filters are placed at the
last possible point in a system to remove the last remaining traces of resin
fragments, carbon fines, colloidal particles and microorganisms.
The advantages and disadvantages of the system is show below:

Absolute filters remove all particlesWill not remove dissolved inorganics,

and microorganisms greater than thechemicals, pyrogens or all colloidals.
pore size. Potentially high expendable costs.
Requires minimal maintenance. Not regenerable.
Table 2.4: Showing the Characteristics of Micro-porous Filtration Process
iv. Ultrafiltration
While a microporous membrane filter removes particles according to pore
size; an ultrafiltration membrane functions as a molecular sieve. It separates
dissolved molecules on the basis of size by passing a solution through an
infinitesimally fine filter.
The ultra filter is a tough, thin, selectively permeable membrane that retains
most macromolecules above a certain size including colloids,
microorganisms and pyrogens. Smaller molecules, such as solvents and
ionized contaminants, are allowed to pass into the filtrate. Thus, ultra filter
provides a retained fraction (retentate) that is rich in large molecules and a
filtrate that contains few, if any, of these molecules.
30
Group 3
Figure 2.4: Mechanism of the Ultra Filtration Process

Ultrafilters have several advantages and disadvantages which are listed

below:
Effectively removes most particles,Will not remove dissolved inorganics.

pyrogens, microorganisms, and
colloids above their rated size.
Produces highest quality water for

least amount of energy.
Regenerable.
Table 2.5: Showing the Characteristics of Ultra Filtration Process
v. Reverse Osmosis
Reverse osmosis is the most economical method of removing 90% to 99% of
all contaminants. The pore structure of reverse osmosis membranes is much
tighter than that of the ultrafiltration membranes. Reverse osmosis
membranes are capable of rejecting practically all particles, bacteria and
organics >300 daltons molecular weight (including pyrogens). In fact,
reverse osmosis technology is used by most leading water bottling plants.
Natural osmosis occurs when solutions with two different concentrations are
separated by a semi-permeable membrane. Osmotic pressure drives water
through the membrane; the water dilutes the more concentrated solution;
and the end result is equilibrium. However, water purification systems utilise
31
Group 3
a hydraulic pressure which is applied to the concentrated solution to

counteract the osmotic pressure. Therefore, pure water is driven from the
concentrated solution and collected downstream of the membrane.
Since reverse osmosis membranes are very restrictive, they yield slow flow
rates; storage tanks are required to produce an adequate volume in a
reasonable amount of time.
Reverse osmosis also involves an ionic exclusion process. Only solvent is

allowed to pass through the semi-permeable reverse osmosis membrane,
while virtually all ions and dissolved molecules are retained (including salts
and sugars). The semi-permeable membrane rejects salts (ions) by a charge
phenomena action: the greater the charge, the greater the rejection.
Therefore, the membrane rejects nearly all (>99%) strongly ionized
polyvalent ions but only 95% of the weakly ionized monovalent ions like
sodium.
Reverse osmosis is highly effective in removing several impurities from

water such as total dissolved solids (TDS), turbidity, asbestos, lead and other
toxic heavy metals, radium, and many dissolved organics. The process will
also remove chlorinated pesticides and most heavier-weight VOCs. Reverse
osmosis and activated carbon filtration are complementary processes.
Reverse osmosis is the most economical and efficient method for purifying
tap water once the system is properly designed for the feed water conditions
and the intended use of the product water. Reverse osmosis is also the
optimum pre-treatment for reagent-grade water polishing systems.
32
Group 3
Figure 2.5: Mechanism of the Reverse Osmosis Process (Source:

www.allaboutwater.com/filtration)
The following are the pros and cons of the reverse osmosis process:
Effectively removes all types ofFlow rates are usually limited to a

contaminants to some extentcertain gallons/day rating.
(particles, pyrogens, microorganisms,
colloids and dissolved inorganics).
Requires minimal maintenance.

Table 2.6: Showing the Characteristics of Reverse Osmosis Process
vi. Rapid Sand Filter

Rapid sand filters use relatively coarse sand and other granular media to
remove particles and impurities that have been trapped in a floc (flocculated
particles formed by chemicals typically salts of aluminium or iron). Water and
33
Group 3
flocs flow through the filter medium under the force of gravity or under a
pumped pressure where the floc is trapped in the sand matrix.
Mixing, flocculation and sedimentation processes are typical treatment

stages that precede filtration. Chemical additives, such as coagulants, are
often used in conjunction with the filtration system. A disinfection system
(typically using chlorine or ozone) is commonly used following filtration.
Rapid sand filtration has very little effect on taste and smell and dissolved
impurities of drinking water, unless activated carbon is included in the filter
medium.
vii. Slow Sand Filter

Slow sand filters are used in water purification for treating raw water to
produce a potable product. They are typically 1 to 2 metres deep, can be
rectangular or cylindrical in cross section and are used primarily to treat
surface water.
Slow sand filters work through the formation of a gelatinous layer (or biofilm)
called the hypogeal layer in the top few millimetres of the fine sand layer.
The hypogeal layer is formed in the first 10-20 days of operation and consists
of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, rotifera and a range of aquatic insect larvae. As
the hypogeal layer ages, more algae tend to develop and larger aquatic
organisms may be present including some bryozoa, snails and Annelid
worms.
The hypogeal is the layer that provides the effective purification in potable
water treatment, the underlying sand providing the support medium for this
biological treatment layer. As water passes through the hypogeal layer,
particles of foreign matter are trapped in the mucilaginous matrix and
dissolved organic material is adsorbed and metabolised by the bacteria,
fungi and protozoa. The water produced from a well-managed slow sand
filter can be of exceptionally good quality with 90-99% bacterial reduction.
34
Group 3
Slow sand filters slowly lose their performance as the hypogeal layer grows
and thereby reduces the rate of flow through the filter. Eventually it is
necessary to refurbish the filter. Two methods are commonly used to do this.
In the first, the top few millimetres of fine sand is scraped off to expose a
new layer of clean sand. Water is then decanted back into the filter and re-
circulated for a few hours to allow a new hypogeal layer to develop. The filter
is then filled to full depth and brought back into service. The second method,
sometimes called wet harrowing, involves lowering the water level to just
above the hypogeal layer, stirring the sand and thereby suspending any
solids held in that layer and then running the water to waste. The filter is
then filled to full depth and brought back into service. Wet harrowing can
allow the filter to be brought back into service more quickly.
As they require little or no Due to the low filtration rate, slow

mechanical power, chemicals or sand filters require extensive land
replaceable parts, and they require area for a large municipal system.
minimal operator training and only
periodic maintenance, they are
often an appropriate technology for
poor and isolated areas.
Slow sand filtration may be not only

the cheapest and simplest but also
the most efficient method of water
treatment.
Table 2.7: Showing the Characteristics of Slow Sand Filtration Process
35
Group 3
Comparison of the various filtration processes
Figure 2.6: Showing a comparison of the Filtration Processes listed

36
Group 3
2.81 Selection of Design Solution
Based on the design constraints mentioned, the design would be limited to

the gravity type sand filter systems. The reasons for eliminating the
pressure and generic type systems are as follows:
i. The availability of raw material as for the pressure type systems is

limited,
ii. The lack of available information to establish the design criterion,
iii. Other systems, like reverse osmosis are very expensive to set up
and require large amounts of energy to function,
iv. High operating costs and expertise is needed for effective
operation.
The justification for the choice of the gravity types are:
i. Filter media (sand) are readily available in Guyana,

ii. Construction is simple and relatively cheap,
iii. Easy and rapid maintenance.
Gravity Type Sand Filters Comparisons
Sand filtration can be either rapid or slow. The difference between the two is
not a simple matter of the speed of filtration, but in the underlying concept
of the treatment process. Slow sand filtration is essentially a biological
process whereas rapid sand filtration is a physical treatment process. The
table that follows gives a general comparison of the slow and rapid sand
filters.
37
Group 3
Table 2.7: Showing the Characteristics of Gravity Type Filters
(Source: www.watertreatments.com/water-filters/rapid-sand-filters)
Choice of Filter
38
Group 3
Slow sand filters have an advantage over rapid sand filters in that they
produce microbiologically "clean" water which should not require disinfection
to inactivate any bacteria, although the addition of a disinfectant to provide
a residual for the distribution system is still advisable. However, because of
their slow flow rate, slow sand filters require large tracts of land if they are to
supply large populations and can be relatively labour intensive to operate
and maintain.
The rapid sand filter differs from the slow sand filter in a variety of ways, the
most important of which are the much greater filtration rate and the ability
to clean automatically using backwashing. Rapid sand filtration is now
commonly used worldwide and is far more popular than slow sand filtration.
The principal factor affecting the decision is the smaller land requirement for
rapid sand filters and lower labour costs. Conversely, rapid sand filters do not
produce water of the same quality as slow sand filters and a far greater
reliance is placed on disinfection to inactivate bacteria. However, once the
proper pre-treatment processes are implemented prior to the filtration, this
filter system will be just as effective.
Therefore, rapid sand filter system is chosen on the basis that the filtration
tank must be able to supply the estimated demand of the Sophia.
39
Group 3
2.81 Description of Selected Solution

Rapid Sand Filter
Filtration by rapid sand filters, as the name suggest, is the separation of

colloidal and other particles from water by passage through a porous
medium at rapid rates of approximately 2 to 8 gpm/ft2. Rapid sand filters do
not use biological filtration but depend primarily on mechanical straining,
sedimentation, impaction, interception, adhesion and physical adsorption.
Filters that must be taken off-line periodically to back wash are classified
operationally as semi-continuous. Filters in which filtration and backwash
operations occur simultaneously are classified as continuous.
Types of Rapid Sand Filter
There are a number of different types of rapid sand filters depending upon
bed depth (e.g., shallow, conventional and deep bed) and the type of filtering
medium used (mono-, dual-, and multi-medium).
A further classification can be made based on the driving force as gravity or

pressure filters. Typically sand is used as the filtering material in single
medium filters. Dual- medium filters usually consist of a layer of anthracite
over a layer of sand. Multi-medium filters typically consist of a layer of
anthracite over a layer of sand overlying a layer of garnet.
The principal filtration methods now used with reference to the rate of flow
through gravity filters may be classified as:
• Constant-rate of filtration with fixed head

• Constant -rate filtration with variable head
• Variable- declining-rate filtration
Constant-rate Filtration with fixed head
40
Group 3
In constant-rate filtration with fixed head, the flow through the filter is
maintained at a constant rate. They are either influent controlled or effluent
controlled. Pumps or weirs are used for influent control whereas an effluent
modulating valve that can be operated manually or mechanically is used for
effluent control.
Constant-rate Filtration with variable head
In constant-rate variable filtration head, the flow through the filter is

maintained at a constant rate. Pumps or weirs are used for influent control.
When the head or effluent turbidity reaches a preset value, the filter is
backwashed.
Declining-rate filtration with fixed or variable head
In declining-rate filtration, the rate of flow through the filter is allowed to

decline as the rate of head loss builds up with time. Declining-rate filtration
systems are either influent controlled or effluent controlled.
In the effluent controlled type of filters, the filter effluent lines are connected
to a common header. A fixed orifice is built into the effluent piping for each
filter so that no filter after washing will take an undue share of the flow. The
filtered water header pressure may be regulated by a throttle valve which
discharges to filtered water reservoir. Costly rate controllers are replaced
with fixed orifices and therefore, would make the units economical
particularly in large water works involving batteries of filters. For equal
duration of filter runs the total output per day from a declining rate filter is
higher than that in the conventional filters. In group of filters operating at an
average rate of 10 m3/m2/hr, the fixed orifice will be so designed that a
recently cleaned filter will begin operation at 15 m3/ m2/hr while the filter
next in line for cleaning will have slowed down to about 5 m 3/m2/hr. Usually
the depths of filter boxes for declining rate filters are more than those for the
41
Group 3
conventional ones. These would permit longer filter runs and consequent
reduced wash water requirements.
The filter beds are operated by scheduled cleaning in such a way that each
of beds will be in different stage of filter cycle producing the required
average flow. When the rate of flow is reduced to the minimum design rate,
the filter is removed from service and backwashed. In an inlet-controlled
filter, the rate of flow is controlled proportional to the rate of filtration with
float control arrangement to the inlet valve. Inlet control reduces the amount
of work which has to be done on the filter to just clean it.
Components of Rapid Sand
The major parts of a gravity rapid sand filter are:
• Filter tank or filter box,
• Filter media,
• Gravel support,
• Under drain system, and
• Wash water troughs
Filter Tank
The filter tank is generally constructed of concrete and is most often

rectangular. Filters in large plants are usually constructed next to each other
in a row, allowing the piping from the clarifier basins to feed the filters from a
central pipe gallery or from the inlet channel. The sizes of the filters vary
according to the quantity to be treated. The number of filters is selected to
minimize the effect of removing the filter from service for washing on
remaining filters. Ideally it should be possible to take three filters out of
service simultaneously (one draining down, one washing and one for
maintenance). A minimum of four filters is desirable, although two to three
filters may be used for small plants.
42
Group 3
Filter bed sizes vary from 25 to 100 m2 with lengths in the range of 4 to 12
m, widths in the range of 2.5 to 8 m and length to breadth ratio of 1.25 to
1.33. The wash water collection channel is located on one side along the
length of the filter. A minimum overall depth of 2.6 m including a free board
of 0.5 m is adopted.
Filter media
The filter media is the important component of the filter which actually
removes the particles from the water being treated. The filter media must
have the following properties: coarse enough to retain large quantities of
floc, sufficient fine particles to prevent passage of suspended solids, deep
enough to allow relatively long filter runs, and graded to permit backwash
cleaning.
Filter media is most commonly sand, though other types of media can be
used, usually in combination with sand. The sand used in rapid sand filters is
coarser than the sand used in slow sand filters. This larger sand has larger
pores which do not fill as quickly with particles removed from the water.
Coarse sand also costs less and is more readily available than the finer sand
used in slow sand filtration. The filter sand used in rapid sand filters is
prepared from stock sand specifically for the purpose. Most rapid sand filters
contain 60 to 75 cm thickness of sand, but some newer filters are deeper.
The sand used as filter media in rapid sand filtration is generally of effective
size of 0.4 to 0.7 mm and uniformity coefficient of 1.3 to 1.7. The standing
water depth over filter varies between 1.0 and 2.0 m.
Graded Gravel
43
Group 3
The filter gravel at the bottom of the filter bed is not part of the filter media
and it is merely providing a support for media above the under drains and
allowing an even distribution of flow of water across the filter bed during
filtering and backwashing. The gravel also prevents the filter sand from
being lost during the operation. The filter gravel is usually graded of size
from 2.5 to 50 mm (largest size being at the bottom) in four to five layers to
total thickness of 45 to 50 cm, depending on the type of under drain system
used. In case the under drainage system with porous bottom or false floor no
gravel base is required. The filter gravel shall be classified by sieves into four
or more size grades, sieves being placed with the coarsest on top and the
finest at the bottom.
Under-drainage System for Rapid Sand Filters
The under-drainage system of the filter is intended to collect the filtered

water and to distribute the wash water during backwashing in such a fashion
that all portions of the bed may perform nearly the same amount of work
and when washed receive nearly the same amount of cleaning. Since the
rate of wash water flow is several times higher than the rate of filtration, the
former is the governing factor in the hydraulic design of filters and under
drainage system, which are cleaned by backwashing.
The under-drainage system can be one of the following types, connected to

main drain:
1. Pipe laterals
2. False floor
3. Porous plates or strainer nozzles
The most common type of under-drain is a central manifold with laterals

either perforated on the bottom or having umbrella type strainers on top.
Other types such as wheeler bottom, a false bottom with strainers spaced at
44
Group 3
regular intervals or a porous plate floor supported on concrete pillars are all
satisfactory when properly designed and constructed.
Wash-water Troughs
Wash-water troughs placed above the filter media collect the backwash
water and carry it to the drain system. Proper placement of these troughs is
very important to ensure that the filter media is not carried into the troughs
during the backwash operation and removed from the filter. The upper edge
of the wash-water trough should be placed sufficiently nearer to the surface
of sand so that a large quantity of dirty water is not left above the filter sand
after completion of washing. At the same time, the top of the wash-water
trough should be placed sufficiently high above the surface of the sand so
that the sand will not be washed into the gutter.
Width of the filter bed must be equally divided by the troughs so that each
trough covers an equal area of the filter. Maximum clear spacing between
the troughs may be 180 cm. The horizontal travel of wash-water to trough
should not be more than 90 cm. All the wash water troughs must be installed
at the same elevation so that they remove the backwashed water evenly
from the filter so that an even head is maintained across the entire filter. The
troughs may be made with the same cross-section throughout its length or it
might be constructed with varying cross-section increasing in size towards
the outlet end. The bottom of the troughs should clear the top of the
expanded sand by 50 mm or more. These wash water troughs are
constructed in concrete, plastic, fiberglass, or other corrosion-resistant
materials. The troughs are designed as free falling weirs.
Backwashing
45
Group 3
Proper backwashing for cleaning the filter is a very important step in the
operation of a filter. If the filter is not backwashed periodically, it will
eventually develop additional operational problems. If a filter is to operate
efficiently during a filter run it must be cleaned regularly at every 24 to 48
hours. Treated water from storage is used for the backwashing. This treated
water is generally taken from elevated storage tanks or pumped in directly
from the clear water drain by passing in the reverse direction from under
drains to the media.
During filtration, the grains of filter media become coated with the floes,
which plug the voids between the filter grains, making the filter difficult to
clean. Backwash should, therefore, be arranged at such a pressure that sand
bed should expand to about 130 to 150% of its undisturbed volume so as to
dislodge the deposited floes from the filter media during the backwash.
Washing causes the sand grains to impinge on one another and thus
dislodging adhering floc and, the rising wash water carries the material and
discharge into the gutters. The backwash flow rate has to be great enough to
expand and agitate the filter media and suspend the floes in the water for
removal. On the other hand an unduly high rate of flow will cause more
expansion than needed, so that the sand grains will be separated further and
scrubbing action will be decreased and the media will be washed from the
filter into the troughs and out of the filter. A normal backwash rate is 600
Lpm/ m2 of filter surface area without any other agitation. The pressure of
the wash water to be applied is about 5 m head of water as measured in
under drains. Backwashing normally takes about 10 minutes, though the
time varies depending on the length of the filter run and the quantity of
material to be removed. Filters should be backwashed until the backwash
water is clean. For high rate back wash, the pressure in the under drainage
system should be 6 to 8 m with wash water requirement being 650 to 850
Lpm/ m2 of filter (40 – 50 m/hr) for a duration of 6 to 10 minutes.
46
Group 3
2.81 Actual Design

i. Variables affecting the Filtration Process
For the rapid sand filter, there are several limiting factors which
should be considered in the design. This involves:
○ The rapid sand filters utilise flow rates of 1 – 2.5 gpm/ft2,
○ Head loss will increase the run length of the process;
however, coarse medium is used to maintain a balance,
○ Inadequate pre-treatment will result in a reduction of the flow
rate
(< 2gpm/ft2),
○ Weak flocculation will cause break through in the filter
medium leading to degradation of water quality at the end of
the filtration process, and
○ Any rate of change during filtration will alter the effects of the
process.
i. Filter Calculations
Each component part of the filtration system requires separate calculations.

Therefore, each aspect is clearly described below.
Filter Tank/ Filter Box
Demand – 2.3 mgd
GWI uses 12” = 0.305 m pipes for inlets; therefore this diameter was used
since it is readily available.
Number of Filters required = 2.7Q , where Q is in mgd

=2.72.3
=1.36 Which we round up to 2
47
Group 3
A basin of depth of 10’ is used, which is a standard for rapids and filters and
adequate for our design
Velocity of Inlet - Q=AV
V=Q/A
Since 2 filters are being used, the demand is divided by 2; therefore each
filter must satisfy a demand of 2.3mgd2=1.15 mgd
But 1 m3 = 264.17 gal
Therefore supply (Q) = 4353.26 m3 per day = 3.02 m3 per min = 0.05 m3 per
sec
A = πR 2 = 0.073m2
V=0.050.073=0.69 m/s
Filtration velocity for rapid sand filter is between 1-5 mm/s
Slower velocity gives a better filtration, therefore use 2 mm/s = 0.002m/s
Demand (Q) = 0.05 m3 per sec
A=Q/V
A=0.050.002=25m2
With a square tank, use a 5.0m x 5.0m tank ≈ 15’ x 15’
Flow Rate through Filter Media
48
Group 3
Testing was also done to find the Velocity at which water flows through 30”
of reef sand, the only limitation to this experiment was that a constant head
was impossible to maintain. Since there was a lack of equipment in the
Laboratory to conduct the test, so the group members improvised and used
a 1.5” diameter pipe, drilled holes in the bottom, placed 6” of gravel inside
to prevent the sand from escaping through the holes and then filled it with
30” of sand. Then, let water flow through (steady head could not be
maintained) and timed it taking the volume for a specific time.
Volume Collected =1 Gallon = 0.0038m3
Time Elapsed =10 min.
Diameter = 1.5” = 0.038m
Area = 0.0012m2
Discharge = 0.1gal/min = 0.00038m3/min
Velocity = 0.00038/0.0012
= 0.32m/min
= 5.33 mm/sec
This design was done considering a velocity of 2mm/sec, to achieve this

velocity, so the inflow will have to be monitored and a constant head is
create throughout the system.
Under-drain System
49
Group 3
The under-drain system we chose was the false floor with strainer nozzles,
which prevent the medium from passing with the filtered water and eliminate
the need for a course medium, therefore only one medium would be
required.
The amount of nozzles to be used varies from 50-90 per square metre.
A 70 per square metre was chosen, each having a diameter of 1.25”
Therefore, number of nozzles required = 25 x 70 = 1750
Figure 2.8 Showing Nozzle to be Used

( Source : http://www.oasen.nl/oasen/Documents/Oasen%20in%20Indonesi%C3%AB/Filtratie%20ontwerp
%20en%20inrichting_eng.pdf)
Figure 2.9 Showing Chosen Under-drain System
50
Group 3
( Source : http://www.oasen.nl/oasen/Documents/Oasen%20in%20Indonesi%C3%AB/Filtratie%20ontwerp
%20en%20inrichting_eng.pdf)
Backwashing
The pressure in the under drainage system should be 6 to 8 m with wash

water requirement being 650 to 850Lpm/ m2 of filter (40 – 50 m/hr) which
would cause a bed expansion between 130% - 150% for a duration of 6 to 10
minutes.
The design for wash water of velocity 40m/hr for duration of 10mins was
considered.
Area of nozzle = 0.0085m2
Total Area of Nozzles = 0.0085x 1750
= 14.875m2
Total Backwash Discharge = 14.875 x 40
= 595m3/hr
Storage Volume Required for Backwash = Backwash Discharge x Backwash

Duration
= (669.375/60) x 10
= 99.17 m3 = 26196.86 Gal
Wash Water Trough
The horizontal travel of wash-water to trough should not be more than 90cm
≈ 6’
51
Group 3
Therefore two (2) wash water troughs would be require; the arrangement of
which is shown below:
Figure 2.10: Illustration showing the arrangement of the Wash-water trough
(Diagram By: Sudarshan Sukha)
Since there are two wash troughs the wash-water will be divided evenly
between. Therefore each takes off a discharge of – 595/2 =275.5m3/hr.
Q=2.49bh3/2
Q - Rate of discharge in m3/sec = 275.5m3/hr = 0.077m3/sec
b - Width of trough = we use 12” = 0.31m
h - Maximum water depth in trough.
0.077=2.49 x 0.31 x h3/2
h = 0.215m = 8.36” ≈ 9”
52
Group 3
Since the bed expansion would be between 130% and 150%, the trough was
placed at the maximum bed expansion which would be a bit over the actual
bed expansion since the design utilises the minimum backflow velocity. This
will prevent the washing away of the filter medium.
Height of trough = 150/100 (30”)
= 45” above the filter media = 1.143m
ii. Filter Media Selection
Guyana has sand readily available. For choosing the filter media; sieve
analysis was done on two types of sand found in Guyana, Silica Sand and
Reef Sand.
Parameters Recommended Sample #
Silica Sand Reef Sand
Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Effective size (mm) 0.45 – 0.7 0.18 0.29 0.5
Coefficient of 1.2 – 1.7 2.78 1.66 1.6

Uniformity
Table 2.8: Showing the Properties of the sand for the Filter Medium from Sieve
Analysis
Based on these results, the reef sand from sample three was selected as the
filter medium. The standard thickness of the media for the rapid sand filter is
30”; thus, this thickness is used in the design.
iii. Final Design Specifications
53
Group 3
The final design specifications are illustrated in the following diagrams.

These diagrams annotate the filtration system arrangement as well as the
dimensions of the component parts.
Wash-water
trough Inlet
Retention
Tank Supply
Outl Tank
et
Back
wash
Wash-water pipe
Outlet
Figure 2.11: Illustration showing the components of the Filtration Tank
(Stimulation Done By: Yonnick Pratt)
54
Group 3
Figure 2.12: Illustration showing the arrangement of component parts of the

Filtration Tank
55
Group 3
Filter
Medium
Under
drain Under drain
Nozzles
Figure 2.13: Cross-section of the Filtration Tank showing the components
56
Group 3
57
Group 3
58
Group 3
2.81 MODEL OF THE RAPID SAND FILTER SYSTEM

A model of the rapid sand filtration tank was built for demonstration
purposes. The scale for the model to prototype was established as 1” = 1ft.
The materials used were ¼ inch Perspex for the walls and floors, and ½ inch
and ¾ inch male and female adaptors and pipes.
Also a model of the filter bed was made to test raw water samples. This was
done by using a 4.5’ length of 1.5” diameter pipe, drilling holes in the bottom
placing gravel at the bottom to prevent the sand from escaping and then
filling it with 30” of reef sand. This apparatus was used to filter water for
testing and also to find the velocity of the water.
2.82 TESTING OF WATER THROUGH THE SYSTEM
Figure 2.17 Showing Base

of Improvised
Testing Apparatus with
Holes
59
Group 3
Figure 2.18 Showing Entire Testing Apparatus
i. Results
The results for the testing are summarised in the table below:
Sample Turbidity (NTU) pH
Unfiltered 14 6.04
Filtered 4 6.42
Table 2.9: Showing the results for the blab tests
ii. Discussion of Results

From the results the change in turbidity from 14 to 4 NTU, makes the water
physically fit for human consumption since the EPA regulation for drinking water has
a limit of 5 NTU. Also the filtration altered the pH of the water sample, it slightly
reduced the acidity of the water.
60
Group 3
2.81 APPENDICES
2.81 Filter Media Selection
Sample 1 (Silica)
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
CIV322 (FILTRATION
Project: TANK DESIGN) Job No.: 1
Sample No.: 1 Location: UOG Lab
Depth of
Description of Sample: White sand (Silica) Sample: Surface
04/19/20
Tested By: Group 3 Date: 10
Soil Sample Size

Wt. of dry sample +
container (g) 3424.20
Wt. of container (g) 500.00
Wt. of dry sample, W1
(g) 2924.20
Sieve Analysis and Grain Distribution

Percenta
ge of
Diameter Weight Sample Percentage
of opening Retained Retained of Sample
Sieve No. (mm) (g) (%) Passing (%)
7 2.000 6.50 0.22 99.78
10 1.680 14.10 0.48 99.30
14 1.200 58.70 2.01 97.29
25 0.600 672.10 22.98 74.30
35 0.420 537.10 18.37 55.94
50 0.300 980.80 33.54 22.40
70 0.210 324.20 11.09 11.31
100 0.150 164.30 5.62 5.69
200 0.075 108.00 3.69 2.00
61
Group 3
Pan - 58.40 2.00 0.00
Sample 1 (Silica)
From graph,
Effective Size, D10 = 0.18mm
Average Size, D50 = 0.42mm
To determine the coefficient of uniformity (Cu)
Cu= D60D10
Where D60 (From Graph) = 0.50mm
Therefore,
Cu= 0.50mm0.18mm=2.78
62
Group 3
Sample 2 (Reef Sand)
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
CIV322 (FILTRAION
Description of Sample: Brown sand (Reef Depth of
sand) Sample: Surface
04/19/20
Soil Sample Size

Wt. of dry sample +
(g) 1764.50

Percenta
ge of
7 2.000 0.00 0.00 100.00
10 1.680 17.70 1.00 99.00
14 1.200 39.70 2.25 96.75
25 0.600 289.10 16.38 80.36
35 0.420 421.10 23.87 56.50
50 0.300 738.80 41.87 14.63
63
Group 3
70 0.210 172.90 9.80 4.83

100 0.150 50.00 2.83 1.99
200 0.075 29.10 1.65 0.35
Pan - 6.10 0.35 0.00
From graph,
Cu= D60D10
Therefore,
Cu= 0.48mm0.29mm=1.66
64
Group 3
GRAIN SIZE ANALYSIS
CIV322 (FILTRAION
Description of Sample: Brown sand (Reef Depth of
sand) Sample: Surface
04/19/20
Soil Sample Size

Wt. of dry sample +
(g) 2859.80

Percenta
ge of
7 2.000 0.00 0.00 100.00
10 1.680 0.00 0.00 100.00
14 1.200 0.00 0.00 100.00
25 0.600 2260.00 79.03 20.97
35 0.420 545.00 19.06 1.92
65
Group 3
50 0.300 35.00 1.22 0.69

70 0.210 5.60 0.20 0.50
100 0.150 5.30 0.19 0.31
200 0.075 6.30 0.22 0.09
Pan - 2.60 0.09 0.00
From graph,
Cu= D60D10
Therefore,
Cu= 0.80mm0.50mm=1.6
66
Group 3
2.82 Conversion Factors
Classificati To convert Into Multiply by Conversely

on multiply by
Length Inches Centimetre 2.540 0.3937
Inches Feet 12 0.0830
Area Sq Metre Sq Feet 10.764 0.0929
Volume Litres Cubic metre 0.001 1000
Litres Gallons 0.222 4.500
67
Group 3
GLOSSARY
Back washing: The purpose of filter back washing is to remove from the bed
all of foreign material collected in the bed during the preceding filter run. It is
the reverse flow of water through the filter tank; which is required to flush
out loose particles from the pore spaces, and agitate the grains of the media
to remove accumulated coatings.
Break through: The penetration of part of the coagulated material into the
bed.
Demand: In the context of water demand; the daily amount of water

consumed by the population for all types of usage.
Exponential Growth: This is exponential representation of the increase in

demand over time.
Floc: An alternative word for floccule. The large particles formed when small
suspended particles aggregate in the flocculation process.
68
Group 3
REFERENCES
National Bureau of Statics. (2010). Population Estimation (Research

Department: no report no.). National Exhibition Site Sophia: Authur not
stated.
Guyana Lands and Survey. (2010). Cadastral Plans (Plans Department: no

report no.). Durban Backlands, Georgetown: Authur not stated.
Ministry of Housing. (2010). Number of Lots (Engineering Department: no

report no.). Brickdam, Georgetown: Authur not stated.
Ministry of Education. (2010). School Population (Population Department: no

report no.). Brickdam, Georgetown: Authur not stated.
Wikipedia, “Rapid Sand Filter” retrieved on April 15th , 2010 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapid_sand_filter
The Water Treatments, “Rapid Sand Filters”, retrieved on April 15th , 2010
from http://www.thewatertreatments.com/water-filters/rapid-sand-filters
Harvey A. Gullicks, “Optimisation of Rapid Sand Gravity Filters”, retrieved on

April 15th , 2010 from,
http://www.mnawwa.org/about/councils/training/research/workshop404/physi
caloptimization.pdf
69
Group 3
All About Water, “Filtration”, retrieved on April 16th , 2010 from:

http://www.allaboutwater.org/filtration.html
Water Supply, “The Rapid Sand Filter”, retrieved on April 16th, 2010 from:
http://www.allaboutwater.org/filtration.html
Oasen, “Filtration and Design Installation”, retrieved on April 16th, 2010 from:
www.oasen,nl-Documents-Oasen%20in%20indonesi%C3AB-Filtratie
%20ontwerp%20en%20inrichting_eng.url
Wikipedia, “Water Purification” retrieved on April 15th , 2010 from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_Purification
Filtration, “Filtration Maths” retrieved on 16th April, 2010 from:

http://water.me.vccs.edu/courses/env110/lesson6_5.htm
Water and Wastewater Engineering, “Typical Rapid Gravity Filter Flow

Operation”, retrieved on April 18th , 2010, from:
http://nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/Webcourse-contents/IIT-
KANPUR/wasteWater/Lecture%2011.htm
70
Group 3

Design of Filtration Tank FINAL FINAL FINAL

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Design of Filtration Tank FINAL FINAL FINAL

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Demand Study and Design of Filtration Tank 2010

Chapter 1: Demand Analysis of Sophia Settlement

2.84 Design Specifications......................................................................................23

Chart 1.1 Percentage water usage that is required by the

Chart 1.2 Graph showing Projected Demand increase for a period of 20

Map 1.1 Aerial Photograph of the Sophia Area

Map 1.2 Cadastral Plan of the Sophia Area

Table 1.1 Number of lots under the classified category

Table 1.2 Population under their category

Table 1.3 Consumption rate and demand

Figure 2.1 Chemical Reaction in the Softening Method of Ion Exchange

Figure 2.2 Mechanism of the Carbon Absorption Process

Figure 2.3 Mechanism of the Micro-Porous Filtration Process

Figure 2.4 Mechanism of the Ultra Filtration Process

Figure 2.5 Mechanism of the Reverse Osmosis Process

Figure 2.6 Comparison of the Filtration Processes listed

Figure 2.7 Characteristics of Gravity Type Filters

Figure 2.8 Nozzle to be Used

Figure 2.9 Chosen Under-drain System

Figure 2.10 Illustration showing the arrangement of the Wash-water

Figure 2.11 Components of the Filtration Tank

Figure 2.12 Arrangement of component parts of the Filtration Tank

Figure 2.13 Cross-section of the Filtration Tank showing the components

Figure 2.14 Plan of Final Design

Figure 2.15 Elevation of Final Design

Figure 2.16 Section of Final Design

Figure 2.17 Improvised Apparatus Used for Testing

Table 2.1 Drinking Water Standards

Table 2.2 Characteristics of Ion Exchange Process

Table 2.4 Characteristics of Micro-porous Filtration Process

Table 2.5 Characteristics of Ultra Filtration Process

Table 2.6 Characteristics of Reverse Osmosis Process

Table 2.7 Characteristics of Slow Sand Filtration Process

Table 2.9 Results from Lab Tests

Though GWI effort to provide the population with quality potable

Since the establishment of Sophia in the early 1990s, the population

to meet future demands, it is first necessary to predict what those

To achieve a predicted demand of potable water for Sophia, a

1.2 SCOPE OF WORKS

1) Reviewing the population and housing consensus.

equipment etc. Buildings have economic lives on the order of 20 years.

The population and housing consensus from the Bureau of Statistics

The population will then be divided into categories of usage, with

1.4 METHODOLOGY OF DEMAND ANALYSIS

The method of projecting the demands will follow a defined sequence

1) Determining the number of lots and the number of residents per

2) Categorizing the lots under the various usages.

3) Establishing the consumption rates per each category.

4) Determining the present population demand.

5) Adjusting the present demand by accounting for losses, storage,

6) Determining the predicted demand over the 20 year period

7) Establishing the demand that is required for the study area.

 Development of the community not to be instantaneous.

 Increase in demand proportional to development.

1.3 LOCATION OF SOPHIA

Sophia is located approximately one and half miles east of central

See map in Appendices.

1.4 DATA COLLECTED

Table 1.2 shows the population under their category.

Table 1.3 shows the consumption rate and demand.

1.5 ANALYSIS OF DATA

1.81 Demand Categories

Chart 1.1: showing the percentage water that is required by the